12/09/2026
WHEN GOVERNMENT ANNOUNCEMENTS DO NOT TRANSLATE INTO RESULTS: KASU AS A CASE STUDY
Governance should not be measured merely by what a government approves, announces or posts on social media. The real test is what happens after the announcement. Are the promises implemented? Do they solve the problem for which they were made? Do the people experience measurable improvement? Or are we simply moving from one announcement to another while the underlying problems remain?
The situation surrounding Kaduna State University offers a disturbing case study. Lecturers have, at different times, raised concerns over unpaid entitlements and other conditions affecting their work. At one point, there were interventions and assurances that the issues would be addressed. Another agitation reportedly led to the government releasing ₦300 million in an attempt to prevent further industrial action. Yet, despite these interventions, the university has again found itself under an indefinite strike. More recently, the government reportedly approved the payment of salaries, with implementation expected to commence in October. But if the fundamental demands of the workers remain unresolved and the strike continues, then the question becomes simple: what exactly has been achieved by the approval?
This is where the distinction between approval and implementation becomes important. Government can approve billions of naira, establish committees, make promises and issue statements, but governance is ultimately judged by outcomes. If workers remain aggrieved, students remain affected, academic activities remain disrupted and the institution continues to struggle with inadequate funding and facilities, then something is clearly missing between policy and ex*****on.
There is also an important contradiction that deserves public discussion. The government came into office and reduced tuition fees at the university, a decision that understandably attracted public applause because it appeared to make education more affordable. But reducing fees without simultaneously developing a sustainable funding mechanism for the institution raises a serious question of policy design. If the cost of education is reduced for students, who bears the resulting financial burden, and how adequately has government planned to meet it?
Affordable education is desirable. But affordable education without adequate funding, functional infrastructure, motivated academics and sustainable institutional financing can eventually become an attractive policy on paper with damaging consequences in practice. A state university cannot be sustained by applause, political communication or temporary financial interventions. It requires deliberate and predictable investment.
This also brings us to a broader question about the capacity and direction of governance. A government should not only ask, “What will make people applaud us today?” It must also ask, “What will make this institution function properly five years from now?” That is the difference between short term political visibility and long term governance.
The same principle applies to borrowing and public finance. The fact that a government inherited debts and is servicing them is important context, but refusing to borrow at all is not automatically evidence of sound economic management. Borrowing is not inherently irresponsible. The critical questions are: What are you borrowing for? How much are you borrowing? Under what terms? What will the investment produce? And can the resulting obligation be sustainably serviced? A government that refuses every form of borrowing while essential infrastructure and human capital needs remain unmet may not necessarily be demonstrating prudence; it may also be demonstrating an inability or unwillingness to deploy available financing options strategically.
This is why the conversation should go beyond whether a government has borrowed or not. We should be asking what has been achieved with the resources available to the state, what has been prioritised, what has been neglected, and whether the outcomes justify the choices being made.
Perhaps the greatest concern is the possibility that government is becoming more interested in social media visibility than institutional performance. A government can win applause for reducing school fees, announcing approvals or releasing intervention funds. But when lecturers still embark on strikes, students remain at home and the institution continues to complain about funding and infrastructure, the applause eventually becomes irrelevant.
Kaduna needs governance that is technically driven, economically intelligent and results oriented. It needs people appointed because they have the competence to solve problems, not merely because they are loyal, politically convenient or personally connected. The governor must be willing to surround himself with people who can tell him the uncomfortable truth, not only those who will celebrate every decision.
Leadership requires the courage to look inward, review policies, admit where implementation has failed and make corrections. It requires radical thinking in appointments, rationality in decision making and discipline in resource allocation.
The People’s Constituency therefore calls the Kaduna State Government to look beyond announcements and social media applause. Let government demonstrate, institution by institution, policy by policy and project by project, what has actually been achieved.
Because at the end of every administration, history will not remember how many approvals were announced. It will remember what those approvals changed in the lives of the people.
The People's Constituency
Jubal Freeman Dabo