By Ralph Sesay
Lawmakers in Sierra Leone, belonging to the National Grand Coalition and the main opposition All People’s Congress, are quite pessimistic over the official start of the Free Education flagship program of President Bio.
The MPs, who were on the second day of the debate on the Presidential address at the Well of Parliament on Tuesday, noted that the country’s educational system has got several issues to contend with, and were apprehensive these would not be addressed on time ahead of September, 2018 which the President has pronounced as the start period of the scheme.
Hon. Foday Kamara, of Constituency 057 at Kambia District, noted that they, at the National Grand Coalition, are willing to support the President, adding that his speech in Parliament has been welcomed by the NGC.
The NGC MP noted that they, as a party, have certain misgivings about some areas in the President’s speech such as the creation of the Treasury Single Account and the timing for the resumption of the Free Education program in September, 2018.
“Even though we are ready to dance with the SLPP and the President, but we do not want to do it blindly and want clarifications around certain issues,” the NGC MP noted
On the Treasury Single Account, he said that they are worried over the fact that certain institutions delivering very critical services to the state may likely be affected by the bureaucracy and bottlenecks that may surround the release of funds to their institutions.
Foday Kamara also underscored the point that, before now, the past APC government was operating Free Education at the primary level and also for girls at the Junior Secondary School level, while noting that it did not work well due to improper implementation.
He disclosed that the President has not presented a blueprint to the lawmakers on the details of the scheme, which, according to him,includes free tuition and learning materials, etc. He was also worried that the speech did not state where funds for the scheme would come from, while frowning at foreign or donor support for the scheme, which, according to him, would increase the debt burden in the country.
Mr. Kamara suggested that the President should have rolled out the Free Education in phases so that, as a country, we would fully handle the emerging issues facing the sector. Until these issues are resolved we remain quite apprehensive about the success of the Scheme.
Hon. Dr. Roland Kargbo of the main Opposition APC, while making his contribution, described the President’s speech as ambitious, comprehensive and very critical of the past regime.
Mr. Kargbo noted that, as a norm, the President has not acknowledged anything good in terms of development in any of the sectors and pointed out that, normally, in coming Presidents would highlight some solid foundations inherited that they would improve on even though he was quick to point out that the President would not be commended for what he inherited but on what he would achieve during his tenure as President.
Mr. Roland Kargbo, a former executive in a non-governmental humanitarian organization, who was working in the north, disclosed that the sector is plagued with series of problems, ranging from inadequate supply of learning materials, approving huge number of teachers and schools left behind by the past administration, amongst others.
He gave a background on what necessitated the reverse from the 6-3-3-4 to 6-3-4-4- which process, according to him, was largely inclusive and necessitated by the abysmal performance of kids in public examinations in 2014.
The lawmaker told Parliament that the process was fully consultative and had got the full participation of all the professionals and players in the sector. The conclusion, amongst others, was the addition of one more year to Senior School.
But in the present situation , he went on, the President just woke up one morning and declared a return to the 6-3-3-4 and resumption of free education in September. This, he concluded, would not likely succeed.
It could be recalled that the President’s speech has provoked various views from both sides of the political divide, but what is very clear to debaters is that they have all agreed that the speech has largely brought out the challenges facing the various sectors in the country and also providing plausible solutions towards addressing them.
The question in the lips of many critics is that the President would need a highly committed team to translate into reality what many now call intentions in black and white.