In a situation where state governments in the country complain of paucity of funds to execute critical people-oriented projects, it remains confounding that many of the states fail, for whatever reasons, to access more than N250 billion under the Universal Basic Education Commission (UBEC) scheme. There is an obvious need for the federal government to review the extant law governing the scheme so as to make the governors more accountable.
Although the Executive Secretary of Universal Basic Education Commission (UBEC), Aisha Garba, had at a training course on financial management for staff of the federal agency, recently lamented that “over N250 billion [is] still being retained as unutilised in the coffers of the 36 SUBEBs and FCT-UBEB as at today”, the Ministry of Education cited an improvement as of mid-2025.
According to the Federal Ministry of Education, 27 states and the Federal Capital Territory have accessed N78.6 billion in Universal Basic Education (UBE) matching grants by mid-2025, representing a 65 per cent surge compared to January. The Federal Government noted that the improved performance followed the implementation of the UBEC 2025–2030 Strategic Blueprint, which introduced a revised matching grant formula that prioritises equity, quality, accountability, and state-specific service delivery in basic education funding.
The FG added that the rise in accessed funds was attributed to high-level advocacy efforts jointly carried out by the Federal Ministry of Education and the Universal Basic Education Commission (UBEC). These efforts, it said, included direct engagement with state governors and data-driven feedback that prompted more states to pay their counterpart funds.
The unutilised funds were pooled from several local and foreign donor institutions to support the UBEC nine-year compulsory and free education of Nigerian children at primary and junior secondary school (JSS) levels. In the clear words of the executive secretary, there is a need for states to take advantage of the funds to improve the quality of education, infrastructure, and teacher training, stressing that efficient management of these funds is crucial to achieving the goals of the UBE programme. She is right.
The UBE replaces the Universal Primary Education as a ‘reform programme’ aimed to widen access to and ensure uniformity and quality of basic education across the country. To this end, the enabling law states that “the Federal Government’s intervention under this Act shall only be an assistance to the States and Local Governments…for the purposes of uniform and qualitative basic education throughout Nigeria.”
Furthermore, state authorities, parents, and ‘stakeholders in education’ are under an unequivocal obligation to ensure that children of school age attend and complete primary school education and junior secondary school education. This is a straight and unbroken nine years of schooling (at no cost to parents) that makes a huge difference in the life, prospect, and fate of a child. Indeed, the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle is quoted to say that the educated is as superior to the uneducated as the living is to the dead.
It boggles the mind of any reasonable, education-friendly person why states that, generally complain ad nauseam of paucity of funds to meet their constitutional obligations, yet refuse to take their share to do the needful as provided in the Compulsory, Free, Universal Basic Education Act 2004 (UBE) Act, 2004.
The extant constitution stipulates in Section 14(2) (b) that ‘the security and welfare of people shall be the primary purpose of government’. This is to say that having assured by every means at its disposal the safety of lives and property within its jurisdiction, the government at every level must devote itself to ensuring the welfare of its people. Welfare, in this context, will indubitably include the education of the people to enable them to be useful and productive members of society. The foundation of the ‘education pyramid’ lies in the early years at the primary and secondary school levels. This informs the commendable wisdom to enact the UBEC law. But a law is only as effective as its implementation by either cooperative or recalcitrant officials. Alas, in this case, a faithful implementation of UBEC provisions suffers an unpardonable dereliction by the government at the state level.
It is difficult not to think that some people in high public office are either ‘education-averse’ generally or unwilling to educate children other than their own. The evidence is overwhelming that Nigerian policymakers and executors seek the best education for their own offspring, often in foreign lands.
State governments complain to the high heavens about the high level of poverty, but ignore an important weapon to fight poverty. Also, the UBE programme is a powerful means to solve the much-talked-about problem of out-of-school children. Whatever the reason that states refuse to, in these specific respects, fulfill their primary purpose, only the governments concerned can, and should explain to their people.
It is no exaggeration that for decades, governments in Nigeria have not accorded the education sector the priority it deserves. One evidence of this is the rather paltry budgetary allocation to the sector by federal and state governments. Whereas UNESCO recommends between 15 and 20 per cent of the government’s yearly budget and preferably, between 4 and 6 per cent of national GDP be allocated to the education sector, Nigeria, except in rare instances, spends far less on this, arguably the second most crucial sector (after health). The future of society is said to lie in the education of its youth. Therefore, governments owe it as an absolute duty to educate the children; it is a key aspect of the welfare of the citizens. It is regrettable to say that a hostile attitude to public education seems rife in Nigeria’s high places.
The funds for the UBE programme come from various sources as provided for in Section 11 of the Constitution. These include, on the one hand, Federal Government block grant of not less than 2 per cent of its Consolidated Revenue Fund, funds or contributions in the form of federal guaranteed credits, and local and international donor grants. On the other hand, Section 11(2) requires a state to contribute “not less than 50 per cent of the total cost of projects as its commitment in the execution of the project” to qualify for the Federal Government block grant, which now lies in the accounts of respective State UBECs.
One possible reason the states hesitate to take advantage of the UBEC fund lies, presumably, in Section 11(2) of the law. But no one can argue against the reasonableness of the proviso that states must demonstrate transparency and commitment by, in a manner of speaking, putting their money where their mouth is.
Section 2(4) of the UBEC Act states punishment for parents who fail to put their children or wards in school to benefit from this compulsory and free education. “A parent who contravenes section 2 (2) of this Act commits an offence and is liable- (a) on first conviction, to be reprimanded; (b) on second conviction, to a fine of N2,000 or imprisonment for a term of 1 month or to both; and (c) on subsequent conviction, to a fine of N5,000 or imprisonment for a term of two months or to both.”
To safeguard the future of Nigerian children and the Nigerian State, states that fail in this most important constitutional obligation should face condign sanction sufficiently effective to deter them from further dereliction. To this effect, the UBEC Act, 2004 must be amended to empower the UBEC, and even any well-meaning person or group, to commence appropriate legal action against derelict states. Beyond lamentation, the Commission should waste no time in taking appropriate steps to this end. The education of Nigerians is too important to be left in the hands of political officeholders alone.
