By ‘Kunle ADEBAJO.

TOPE Fasua, founder and 2019 presidential candidate of the Abundant Nigeria Renewal Party (ANRP), has reacted to a fact-check published by The ICIR, referring to it as “nasty reporting” and “nonsense”, and asking that the report be rewritten.

At the first presidential debate held on Tuesday by the Centre for Democracy and Development, with the focus centred on security, Fasua had complained that budgetary expenditures on education, health and agriculture are inadequate.

“So as we are speaking about security,” he added, “remember what is called food security. We have food poverty in Nigeria. 90 million people are food poor in this country, in a country of abundance; and that is why we came with Abundant Nigeria Renewal Party.”

In the fact-check published on Thursday, The ICIR noted that this claim is “grossly exaggerated and contradicts figures from reliable sources”. This is because, according to the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), as of 2016, 13 million Nigerians suffered from hunger.

Likewise, the 2018 State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World prepared by the same agency of the United Nations states that the prevalence of undernourishment (the traditional FAO indicator used to monitor hunger at the global and regional level) in Nigeria is 11.5 per cent (21.5 million people) and the prevalence of severe food insecurity is 24.8 per cent (46.1 million people).

The ANRP presidential candidate, however, expressed his displeasure with the report on the centre’s Facebook page, and argued that his statistics is correct.

“What kind of nasty reporting are you guys doing at ICIR?” Fasua asked. “If you want to play James Bond, better get your fact right.”

“According to worldpoverty.io, we have 89m people EXTREMELY POOR. What is extremely poor if not food poor? Dudes, get your act right if you want to go to town rubbishing people. I will take this up with the man I met who I believes [sic.] heads ICIR. Already I want you to rewrite the nonsense written about what I said here. Thanks.”

But is food poverty equal to extreme poverty?

In backing up his claim about food poverty, the presidential hopeful, who is a graduate of Economics and the CEO of Global Analytics Consulting Ltd, presented a figure about extreme poverty and suggested it is the same as food poverty. But is there any truth to this assumption?

On one hand, the UN declaration at World Summit on Social Development in Copenhagen in 1995 (p. 38) defines absolute poverty (or extreme, abject poverty) as “a condition characterized by severe deprivation of basic human needs, including food, safe drinking water, sanitation facilities, health, shelter, education and information. It depends not only on income but also on access to services.”

Former World Bank president Robert McNamara similarly described extreme poverty as “a condition so limited by malnutrition, illiteracy, disease, squalid surroundings, high infant mortality, and low life expectancy as to be beneath any reasonable definition of human decency.”

The World Bank Group and United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF) have today placed a monetary benchmark on extreme poverty, one which is said to be more suitable to third world countries. According to this definition, extremely poor persons are those who “live on less than $1.90 per day”.

On the other hand, food poverty, also called household food insecurity, according to UNICEF, “is the inability to afford, or to have access to, food to make up a healthy diet. It is about the quality of food as well as quantity.” In other words, indices on food poverty are not about income (alone) or quality of health or access to education, but access to adequate and balanced diet.

A 2017 report by the Centre for Economics and Business Research (CEBR), a leading independent consultancy in the United Kingdom, defines “households that have to spend more than 10% of their income on food as being in food poverty.” Buttressing the point that food poverty is not just about how many dollars is earned by a part of the population, this report also concludes that while UK households are spending more on food now compared to five years ago, they are “eating much less”.

Elizabeth Dowler, Emeritus Professor of Food and Social Policy at the University of Warwick, goes further to define food poverty as “the inability to consume an adequate quality or sufficient quantity of food in socially acceptable ways, or the uncertainty that one will be able to do so.”

It is thus evident that extreme poverty is not the same as food poverty, as it encompasses a wide range of factors including food insecurity and malnutrition. This is corroborated by the Manchester Poverty Action Food Poverty Report which says that food poverty “has to be seen as one aspect of general poverty levels”.

Further reinforcing the point is a 2009 study published by the Philippine Institute for Development Studies, which distinguished the concept of “absolute poverty line” from “food poverty line”.

“By definition, the (absolute) poverty line is  the income needed to satisfy the minimum basic needs of food and non-food,” it states. “The  food component of the poverty line, referred to as the food poverty line (FPL), is augmented by an allowance for non-food needs to yield the (total) poverty line.”

It adds: “The FPL may be thought of as the amount needed for food to sustain normal  physical activity and good health, while the non-food component of the poverty line  consists of the cost of essential non-food requirements such as clothing, shelter,  primary schooling, basic health care, and the like.”

The connection between “hunger” and “food insecurity” is drawn by the World Hunger Education Service (WHES), which said the former is related to both food insecurity and malnutrition, adding that “the focus for global hunger is undernutrition”.

Discrepancy in figures, nonetheless

Under the assumption that Fasua implied food poverty and extreme poverty are one and the same, his figures, The ICIR observes, are still inaccurate.

While at the presidential debate he said 90 million Nigerians are “food poor”, in his later comment on the social media, he reduced this figure to 89 million. However, the figure provided by the authority cited by the presidential candidate, the World Poverty Clock, is: 88, 315,793.

In essence, there is a difference of 1.7 million Nigerians between the figure cited by Fasua and  the one cited by the authority he referenced in his Facebook post — still justifying The ICIR‘s original verdict that the statistics quoted by the ANRP flagbearer is exaggerated, and contradicts figures from reliable sources.

By ‘Kunle ADEBAJO.

TOP members of the All Progressives Congress (APC), People’s Democratic Party (PDP), and Abundant Nigeria Renewal Party (ANRP) met in Sheraton Hotel, Abuja, on Tuesday to each convince Nigerians their parties possessed the best ideas in bringing lasting peace to the country.

However, not all their claims and arguments, as The ICIR later discovered in a follow-up fact-check, are founded on flawless facts. All three speakers — Lanre Issa-Onilu, APC national publicity secretary, Osita Chidoka, former Aviation Minister representing the PDP, and Tope Fasua, ANRP presidential candidate — committed one factual error or the other.

The event was the first of the Nigerian Political Parties Discussion Series for parties fielding presidential candidates. In this report, The ICIR places the claims of the various parties side by side with available evidence and gives verdicts on their factuality.

APC: Neighbouring countries did not work with previous govt.

Claim: When he started off, Issa-Onilu, who represented the ruling APC, said “the issue of security is one which I always say we shouldn’t play politics with”. But it appears that is exactly what he did when he claimed that the trustworthiness of the Buhari administration, which the PDP-led government lacked, is what has won the country support from neighbouring African countries such as Niger and Cameroon.

He said: “I want to discuss the fact that this government is responsive. This government is taking far-reaching action because if the past government had looked for ways of tackling this issues in a way that will make this peace to be more durable, we will not be where we are today… But this time around, we could see that the most important thing in security is your reputation as a country and the credibility of the government in power … because we cannot tackle security alone without the other countries around you being fully involved.

“So the involvement of Chad, Niger, Cameroon and other countries that are cooperating with us has to do with the credibility of the government. The successes we have recorded are made possible because we have the credibility for suh countries to work with us. We know they didn’t work with the past government because there was no such credibility.”

Checks by The ICIR, however, revealed that it is incorrect to say neighbouring African countries did not collaborate with the previous administration to fight terrorism as there are numerous records showing otherwise.

In July 2014, following attacks outside local borders by the terrorist sect, defence ministers of Nigeria, Cameroon, Chad and Niger met in Niamey and pledged to expedite the creation of a 2,800-strong regional force to tackle.

Months earlier, in March, Nigeria entered into an agreement with France, the Republic of Benin, Cameroon, Chad, and Niger “to increase the level of coordination and exchange of intelligence as well as hold regular meetings of experts with a view to containing the menace.”

And beginning in 2015, before Buhari’s inauguration, the coalition of West African troops launched an offensive against the insurgents, with soldiers from Niger and Chad crossing into Northeastern Nigeria for the operation.

Verdict: The claim is false.

The APC national publicity secretary also said, in the last three years, “there has been massive improvement in the conduct of the police, in terms of them applying the best … that you expect for this kind of environment due to the job they are doing”. The 2016 World Internal Security and Police Index, which ranked Nigeria 127th out of 127 countries, however, gives a lie to this claim.

According to the report, “Nigeria was the worst performing country on the WISPI, with a score of 0.255. Nigeria scored poorly across all four domains [i.e. capacity, process, legitimacy, outcomes], and had the worst score of any country in the Index on the process and outcomes domains. All of its domain scores were in the bottom ten countries.”

PDP: There is no centralised police force as large as Nigeria’s in the world

Claim: Speaking in support of the PDP presidential candidate’s state and community policing policy, Chidoka said Nigeria is the only country in the world that operates a police force having up to 370,000 operatives, which is controlled by only one tier of government.

He said: “Let me correct an impression. The Nigeria Police of 370,000 men is a big organisation. It is a humongous organisation. There is no police force in the world with 370,000 being controlled centrally from one location. I dare anybody to show me that police force.

“What we need to talk about here is fundamentally how do we structure the police to deliver public safety… that is why efforts are being made to ensure that we do not confuse public safety with just having a police force that is sitting in Abuja. We have to face reality, and the reality is that there is no organisation like the Nigeria Police Force anywhere in the world.”

According to the International Criminal Police Organisation (INTERPOL), the Nigeria Police Force has a strength of over 350,000 men and women; and a recent statement by the Inspector General of Police Ibrahim Idris suggests the population is within the range of 320,000.

This means the force is lesser than that of Indian force of 1.93 million, the Chinese force of over 1.6 million (based on a 2007 count), as well as those of the United States, Russia, Indonesia, Mexico, Brazil, Turkey and Pakistan.

According to a 2012 Police Decentralisation Index, the police systems in Russia, which has four tiers of government, operates a centralised force controlled by the top tier. Indonesia and Turkey also operate similarly centralised forces, while Mexico and Brazil have decentralised police organisations.

Verdict: The claim is false.

Chidoka, who is also a former Corps Marshall of the Federal Road Safety Corps (FRSC), equally said during his stint at the corps, they introduced a system of capturing all drivers’ licenses and vehicle number plates in the country “so that when you stop a car on the road, you just type in the number”.

“If you go to nvis.org.ng now, you will type in the car number and you will get the details of that vehicle. The whole idea is that we will invest in technology,” he added.

The ICIR checked the agency’s Number Plate Verification portal to confirm to what extent this claim is true. It was discovered that the information available to the public, after inputing a vehicle’s registration number, is scanty. The portal only states if the number is valid and then vaguely adds the type of car it was assigned to; for instance: “Number Plate is valid and assigned to CAMRY.”

In contradistinction, however, the Lagos State Vehicle Number Plate Verification Portal, launched in 2017, not only displays the model of the vehicle if the number provided is valid, it also states the colour of the car, the chassis number, the vehicle status (whether duly registered by the Motor Vehicle Administration Agency), the issue date, as well as the expiry date.

ANRP: 90 million Nigerians are food poor etc.

Claim: In advancing his candidacy, Fasua, ANRP founder and presidential candidate, said 90 million Nigerians are “food poor”.

According to him: “It is not only the budget for security that is low. The budget for even food, for agriculture, for education, for health in Nigeria is low. So as we are speaking about security, remember what is called food security. We have food poverty in Nigeria. 90 million people are food poor in this country, in a country of abundance; and that is why we came with Abundant Nigeria Renewal Party.”

The ICIR has, however, not been able to find corroborating evidence for this figure. According to the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), as of 2016, 13 million Nigerians suffered from hunger.

Also, according to the 2018 State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World prepared by FAO, as at 2017, the prevalence of undernourishment (the traditional FAO indicator used to monitor hunger at the global and regional level) in the total population is 11.5 per cent (21.5 million people) and the prevalence of severe food insecurity is 24.8 per cent (46.1 million people) — none as high as the figure cited by the ANRP candidate.

On the high side is a figure given in 2015 by Idiat Amusu, head of department, Food/Agriculture Technology at the Yaba College of Technology, Lagos. According to her estimates, “about 60 million Nigerians go to bed hungry”.

Verdict: The claim is grossly exaggerated and contradicts figures from reliable sources.

Also, speaking within the context of jobs and youth employment, Fasua seemed to suggest that over 80 per cent of young Nigerians are without jobs.

“A lot of internal security has to do with youth unemployment and youth poverty,” he said. “When young people under 18 years old are not under any kind of direction and no one cares for them. More than 80 per cent of them in this country are kind of ruderless. So, what happens is that if the country does not put jobs in the hands of our youth, the devil is going to put jobs in their hands.”

Again, if rightly construed, this figure also contradicts available data from the National Bureau of Statistics. According to the Bureau’s Labour Force Statistics’ Unemployment and Underemployment Report of 2017 (first to third quarter), “combined unemployment and underemployment rate for the entire youth labour force (15-35 years) was 52.65% or 22.64 million (10.96 million unemployed and another 11.68 million underemployed), compared to 45.65% in Q3 2016, 47.41% in Q4 2016 and 49.70% in Q3 2017.”

Verdict: The claim is vague and misleading, but also exaggerated if it was intended to refer to youth unemployment rates in the country.

By Damilola OJETUNDE.

LAURETTA Onochie, a media aide to Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari has claimed that PDP presidential candidate Atiku Abubakar, distributed cash and food at his Sokoto rally held on Monday, December 3.

Also, one Facebook user, named Zara Gift Onyinye who described herself as former Manager at On Time Groundlink Limited, a subsidiary of Exotic Car Hire & Tourism posted the same picture and tagged it “This is how it happened in Sokoto today…Shameless to say the least”. The post has since garnered over 2,000 shares at the time of this report. Onochie and Onyinye are active on social media and known for spreading misinformation, The ICIR check has revealed.

Using Google Reversed Image Search, we found that the photograph circulated by Ms. Onochie first appeared online in February 2017 when a Lagos-based Charity foundation, released photos from an outreach.

The same image was re-used to publicise Ruth Eze, a Nollywood actor’s orphanage visit, two days later in February 2017.

We, therefore, submit that the image does not support the claim that the PDP presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, induced voters with cash or gift at the kick-off of his presidential campaign in Sokoto.

President Muhammadu Buhari has again listed as one of his achievements the N2.5 billion Northern Ishan Regional Water Supply project in Edo State, a project that is yet to be completed.

The project was  No.3 on the list of eight projects captured in the Next Level Campaign Manual of the president for the 2019 election.

Earlier, while marking his third anniversary in office on May 29, the president also list the uncompleted water project as his achievement in office.

The ICIR reported in July 2018 that the project was not completed despite the claim by the Presidency in the Fact Sheet published two months before the ICIR report.

It’s not only the current administration that has claimed credit for this uncompleted project. President Buhari’s predecessor, Goodluck Jonathan’s administration also listed the project as completed.

In reality, however, Northern Ishan Regional Water Supply project remains uncompleted till date.

The project is still hampered by issues of reticulation, delayed construction of road to the river and compensation to land owners.

Genesis of Northern Ishan Regional Water Supply

Northern Ishan Water Supply Project was awarded in 2005 by former President Olusegun Obasanjo to provide water to Ugboha, Uromi and environs.  It was awarded to Chinese construction company, CGC, at the sum of N2.2billion, but the figure was jerked up to N2.4billion in 2009.

Work stopped at the site, four years after work commenced on the project.

In 2014, Friday Itulah, a member of House of Representatives representing Esan South-East/Esan North-East Federal Constituency moved a motion for the completion of the project.

Itulah, also a former Speaker of Edo State House of Assembly said insufficient water reticulation in the community hosting the water in-take plant led the Federal Ministry of Water Resources to appropriate in 2012 the sum of NI70 million which he said was not released for the project.

The sum, Itulah told the House then was to be released through Owena River Basin Development Authority to DADIM Integrated Concepts Limited for the reticulation.

According to him, another N130 million was to be released for outstanding payment, compensation and revitalisation of equipment by the Ministry to the main contractor- CGC, which he said was also not released.

In all, a total of N300 million delayed the completion of the project in 2014 and Itulah suggested for its inclusion in the 2015 fiscal year Appropriation Act.

In essence, what delayed the completion and commissioning of the project were outstanding payment, compensation and revatilisation of equipment by the Ministry to the main contractor- CGC.

But in 2018, four years after he moved the motion for the completion of the project, it has remained uncompleted −the water reticulation is still not done.

Essentially, reticulation of water at the host community of the project—Ugboha was a major bone of contention. Out of the 70 tap heads contained in the bill of quantity for the community, only half of it was provided. The six tap heads that are the closest to the dam at Egwuare Ugboha are not even working.

The Ugboha Progress Union (UPU), an interest group that was fronting for the payment of compensation to owners of land taken over by the government for the construction of water supply project and water reticulation said the government failed to pay the sum of N3,808 million calculated as compensation.

Twice listed for commissioning but not completed

In 2011 and 2012 under former President Goodluck Jonathan, the Northern Ishan Water Supply Project  was listed  as completed and ready for commissioning − but attempts by that administration  to commission it was rebuffed by the people of the community on the issue of water reticulation and compensation for damaged farm and properties.

Former Minister of Water Resources, Sarah Ochepke, under Jonathan in her mid -term report (2011-2013) listed the water supply project among others as completed and ready for completion.

In the report, Ochekpe said the water project gulped N2.497 billion had created 120 jobs and would serve 150,000 people.

Also, Obadiah Ando, her predecessor, in his Roadmap for Water Sector, 2011 listed the project as completed and ready for commissioning.

Former Vice President Namadi Sambo in 2012 was expected to commission the project, but a protest by the host community over the insufficient water reticulation and compensation to landowners and farmers, whose properties and economic trees were affected, led to the postponement of commissioning.

An uncompleted project, yet commissioned

To take credit for the work not done, the water project was commissioned despite protest by the host community that it was not completed, the residents said.

In November 2017, Suleiman Adamu, Minister of Water Resources listed Northern Ishan Water Supply project among eight projects to be commissioned in early 2018.

The project, he said, was one of the 116 abandoned or uncompleted projects the Buhari administration inherited.

He said his Ministry conducted a technical audit and prioritized the hitherto uncompleted or abandoned 116 major projects inherited.

And despite unresolved issues on water reticulation, bad road to the dam, unpaid compensation, the Minister of Information and Culture, Lai Mohammed, on May 23, 2018 in the company of Minister of Water Resources, Adamu, and other officials of Federal Ministry of Water Resources and those from Edo State Government headed for Ugboha to commission the project −but it was a mission impossible − they were  chased away by angry mob at the community who set up fire and barricaded Ugboha main junction in protest against the shoddy job done.

The angry mob, majorly youths from Ugboha made the commissioning impossible even with the presence of heavily armed security operatives that accompanied the Ministers and their entourage.

But the commissioning was done at the Edo State Government House, Benin City on the same day.  At the Government House, the Minister handed over the documents of the project to Governor of Edo State Godwin Obaseki, as a completed and commissioned project.

Adamu was quoted as saying that the government was satisfied with the quality of the job done.

“We have finished our intervention programme and we are here today to hand over the project to the Edo State Government led by Governor Godwin Obaseki,”Adamu said while handing over the project documents to the Governor.

The Commissioner for Energy and Water Resources, Yekini Idiaye, confirmed to The ICIR that the project was not completed.

Also during a meeting in June, a month after the ‘symbolic commissioning’ of the project in Benin City, during a meeting between the state government and leaders of Ugboha community, the Commissioner said steps were being taken to address the grievance of the people of Ugboha with regard to the reticulation of the water project in Ugboha, as deadline for completion has been set for December 2018.

By ‘Kunle ADEBAJO.

IN an attempt to draw attention to the achievements of the federal government in diversifying the nation’s economy, Vice President Yemi Osinbajo has reeled out figures about the Anchor Borrowers Programme (ABP) which conflict with all other available sources, The ICIR discovers.

One of the most celebrated achievements of the federal government under the leadership of President Muhammadu Buhari are those related to agriculture. The president made sure to emphasise them during his meeting, in April, with British Prime Minister Theresa May. He said it during his Democracy Day speech in May, and has mentioned it on several other occasions.

He has, in fact, accused Nigerian news organisations of under-reporting these achievements, especially as they relate to the local production of rice and the significant drop in imports.

Occupying the centre stage in this narrative is the Anchor Borrowers Programme, to which the bulk of the successes recorded has been attributed. However, as with a number of other top projects executed by the federal government, the ABP has been soiled by secrecy and a lack of transparency — especially in the population and identities of beneficiaries.

Speaking at the 24th Nigerian Economic Summit on October 22, Osinbajo appeared to have exaggerated statistics concerning the ABP, which is coordinated by the Central Bank of Nigeria’s Development Finance Department (DFD).

“Through the Anchor Borrowers’ Programme,” he said, “credit is given directly to smallholder farmers, and the Anchor Borrowers programme is our agricultural programme for financing smallholder farms.

“And the CBN and 13 participating banks have so far had given credit totalling to N120.6 billion, and this has been given to 720,000 smallholder farmers, who [are] cultivating 12 commodities so far including; Rice, wheat, cotton, Soya beans, Cassava, poultry and groundnut across the 36 States and FCT.”

The Vice President’s figures, however, cannot be traced to any other source, even as they conflict with those which have been provided by the Buhari Media Organisation (BMO) and corroborated in the administration’s scorecard.

According to the BMO, self-described as “a not-for-profit organisation that seeks to amplify the good work … of the Pres. Buhari administration”, the Anchor Borrowers Programme has made available “N82 billion in funding to 350,000 farmers of rice, wheat, maize, cotton, cassava, poultry, soy beans and groundnut; who have cultivated about 400,000 hectares of land”.

The same figures are contained and elaborated in the recently unveiled scorecard and manifesto of President Buhari tagged ‘The Next Level’. About 80 per cent of the N82 billion funding has gone into rice production, the document states, “further driving the nation’s target of attaining self-sufficiency in rice production”.

Lauretta Onochie, Buhari’s social media aide made a similar claim in October when she highlighted sixty-four (64) achievements of the federal government, in reaction to allegations of non-performance.

Likewise, Anne Ihugba, the Head of Corporate Communications at the Nigeria Incentive-Based Risk Sharing System for Agricultural Lending (NIRSAL) has said, through the agency which supervises mapping of farmers and disbursement, the ABP is creating over 250,000 direct jobs for farmers and up to 1.25m indirect jobs.

According to reports, NIRSAL’s entire database of farmers nationwide, from where beneficiaries of the borrowers’ program are drawn, has captured details of only over 400,000. This, as well, is a far cry from Osinbajo’s claim that 720,000 smallholder farmers have benefited from the programme.

Blemished by secrecy, shortcomings

The Anchor Borrowers Programme was established by the CBN in fulfilment of its developmental functions. President Buhari launched it in November 2015, with the objective of creating “economic linkage between smallholder farmers and reputable large-scale processors with a view to increasing agricultural output and significantly improving capacity utilization of processors.”

Funding for the project is sourced mainly from the N220 billion Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Fund (MSMEDF) of the CBN, which was launched earlier in 2013.

Despite various calls, details of the claimed beneficiaries of the programme have not been made available by the CBN for independent verification, thus raising doubts about the fund’s credibility.

Investigations have revealed that various other shortcomings are hampering the project’s implementation such as the distribution of expired seedlings, late distribution of fertilisers, delay in fund disbursement, non-compliance from financial institutions, diversion of money into private and unqualified hands, as well as grossly inadequate coverage in various states.

Meanwhile, NIRSAL confirmed in a phone conversation with The ICIR that it is the only body in charge of disbursing funds to farmers under the scheme. An e-mail further sent, upon request, to the Head of Corporate Communications requesting for the latest figure of how many farmers have benefitted so far under the social welfare credit programme, has however not been attended to following an acknowledgement on October 25.

A call placed to CBN’s helpline for the Commercial Agricultural Credit Scheme for the purpose of seeking similar clarifications was however not answered.