Cover StoryOpinionPerspectiveProfile

Something Good Is Happening at the NOA

7 Mins read

Mallam Lanre Issa-Onilu, Director General, National Orientation Agency

By Taiwo Adisa

What is today known as the National Orientation Agency (NOA) is an offspring of the Mass Mobilisation for Self-Reliance, Social Justice and Economic Recovery (MAMSER) which was premiered by Professor Jerry Gana and his team under the military regime of General Ibrahim Babangida in 1987. The body was introduced by the military regime to promote value orientation, self-reliance, and social justice, as well as educate citizens about the political process and encourage participation in elections and the myriads of debates it was consistently engaging the public with. At that time, some of the objectives of MAMSER includes re-orienting Nigerians; campaign against waste and vanity in lifestyle; promotion of public values; campaign to eschew social vices like corruption, dishonesty, and electoral malpractices; campaign to foster national development, as well as encouraging participation in the political process and promoting locally made goods.

Within a short time, MAMSER plugged itself in public consciousness to the extent that the young and the old had its anthems on their lips. On radio and television, captivating jingles, playlets and drama of all kinds were used to explain government actions, inactions and policies. It was a mass movement. I had pictures of the MAMSER heroics in my head when I was deployed to serve in the Federal Ministry of Information and National Orientation by the National Youth Service Corps.

Though I was assigned a beat as a Government House Correspondent and filed stories daily to the Lagos headquarters of the ministry at the time; while also getting published in the weekly and monthly publications, I didn’t feel the vibes that MAMSER created through the service year.

Thus, over the years, after Prof. Jerry Gana’s exploits, the NOA, which took over the direct functions of MAMSER had lost its orientation and was constantly presenting the picture of a ‘dead’ and forgotten government parastatal. Even though its parent ministry has also not been doing well over the years, it was, however, easier to forget about the NOA, because the Information Ministry at least presents itself in our faces occasionally.

But as much as time heals, it equally destroys. The biblical book, Ecclesiastes says there is time for everything under the sun. A poet who wrote Time, a work we treated in 100 level Poetry class shows Time as the destroyer of everything including the teeth of the lion with which it crushed bones! Since Time can destroy and heal, it thus can engender the good and the bad. For the NOA, as presently constituted, under the leadership of Alhaji Lanre Isssa-Onilu, maybe we can say that the drought period is over, and that Nigerians are beginning to reap some dividends from the mobilisation agency. As a result of my early stint with the parent ministry, I would say I usually take interest in activities of the agency. And year after year, it’s been one unpalatable story or the other. Perhaps that makes it easily noticeable when a change has occurred.

As soon as the current management took over, one can see the signs of the good things to come. Aside the launch of The Explainer, as an in-house magazine to provide in-depth analysis and contents on diverse aspects of government, the agency also made it clear to all that its core mandate would revolve around specific efforts including informing the citizens, educating that and inspiring the Nigerian people into building a great nation. NOA had immediately launched out as one agency with sharp focus on service delivery.

And I can see that The Explainer had in several editions taken on the task of breaking down key policies and programmes. One of such is the expansive space it took to explain the benefits of the Tax Reform Bills, which is already being passed into law by the National Assembly. It has equally taken time out to explain the challenges associated with power supply in this era, something I would say, should have been complemented by positive energy from the Ministry of Power. Everyone knows that power is problematic, but no one needed to be told repeatedly that Nigeria’s power problem is more than 60 years old as you often hear from the key drivers of policy in the Power Ministry, of course, that would amount to throwing the hands in the air, which cannot qualify as hallmark of leadership.

One noticeable thing in the operation of the current NOA is the adoption of digital tools to enhance civic engagement. Insiders in the agency would confirm that the drivers of its policy initiatives had realised the importance of technology in reaching the youthful and tech-savvy population. The body therefore launched the Mobiliser App in March 2024.

The app that is available on both Android and iOS platforms, serves as a hub for accessing information about government policies, programmes and initiatives as well as to provide feedback on government activities. Citizens are being encouraged to partake in the governance process through the “Say Something” tool, where issues can be reported anonymously to not only provide feedback but to bridge the communication gap between the government and the populace.

Though stakeholders in the organisation would contend that the tool equally encourages transparency and accountability in government, but it is obvious that other arms of government must take decisive actions in transparency to enhance the little drops from the NOA in that regard. The agency had also launched the Mobiliser App, which is the AI-powered platform called CLHEEAN. This is an acronym for Crime, Lawlessness, Health, Education, Environment, Abuse, and Nationalism. It was launched in July 2024 with the promise that it would function as a virtual assistant to provide real-time information on government initiatives, civic responsibilities, and national values. It was designed to interactively engage citizens in a way that would foster fostering deeper understanding of governmental programmes and ensure the participation of citizens in national development.

This is an idea that goes deep into theoretical basis of citizenship and democratic ideals. Democratic-Participant theories have indicated that open access of citizen-body to governance through the media is an undeniable quality of democratic governance. That presupposes that the more access the citizens are guaranteed, the better it becomes to avoid the democracy paradox-the Achilles heels of democratic governance across the world.

Because democracy promises more but often delivers little, the people are usually left in a quandy as to whether they have made the right choice by sticking to democracy. This, the type of open access being encouraged by the digital tools of the NOA would serve a good purpose if sustained for a long while.

Some of the other areas the NOA has been strong in recent years include the revitalisation of national identity and values, the campaign against Gender-based violence and partnerships in legislative advocacy. In recent months, the agency has been involved somewhat vigorously in campaigns to revitalise national identity and values. As contained in some of its publications, the NOA had, to this effect launched the 7 for 7 framework, which is aimed at enhancing the reciprocal commitments between the government and its citizens.

The programme promises government commitments to guarantee Equality, Democracy, Entrepreneurship, Peace & Security, Inclusivity, Freedom & Justice, and Meritocracy, while it expects the citizens to reciprocate by upholding values including Discipline, Duty of Care, Tolerance, Leadership, Accountability, Environmental Awareness, and Resilience. This is surely a campaign that demands extensive coverage and planning as seeks to engender attitude change in the citizens. While campaigns like this are not guaranteed a hypodermic-niddle effect, consistency of implementation can, however, ensure a huge success mileage.

Besides that, one can also see the introduction of the Citizens Value Brigade to replace the moribund War Against Indiscipline (WAI) Brigade. The WAI Brigade initiative was introduced as a contemporary copycat of the policy of General Muhammadu Buhari/Tunde Idiagbon’s iron-fisted rule of the mid-1980s, with the objective of instilling discipline, moral rectitude and alignment with democratic ideals. The current initiative is, however, meant to operate in schools and communities, to promote ethical behaviour and civic responsibility. In this regard, the agency has designated September 16 as the National Symbols Day, with the aim of promoting nationwide awareness and respect for national symbols including the flag, national anthem, and the pledge. Added that that initiative is the integrating of citizenship education into the nation’s academic curricula. One of the agency’s publications noted that this initiative is key to shaping the shaping future leaders, and that the agency plans to ensure that Citizenship Studies is introduced as a compulsory subject across all educational levels.

“This subject will focus on values, ethics, and the history of Nigeria, aiming to inculcate a strong sense of national identity and civic responsibility among students, the document indicated, adding that the NOA is already collaborating with the National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) to integrate value orientation into the mandatory one-year service programme. Apart from promoting programmes such as the digital learning programmes, the NOA has equally been strong on political education-focused initiatives, anti-corruption campaigns in collaboration with the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), as well as health awareness campaigns to popularise immunisations as well as digital birth registration campaign.

One of the agency’s strong points of the agency in recent months is the campaign against gender-based violence, a global campaign which Nigeria has recently keyed into. One is impressed that the NOA has intensified its gender-focused initiatives, with the aim of reducing to its barest minimum, issues of Gender-Based Violence (GBV) in the communities. An adjunct of this initiative is the push to promote women participation in governance, and elimination of harmful traditional practices. The agency said in one publication that: “These efforts reflect NOA’s commitment to fostering a more inclusive and equitable society.” It has been observing the annual 16 Days of Activism Against Gender-Based Violence and launched a nationwide campaign whereby traditional and religious leaders are engaged to address the dangers of GBV and emphasise the importance of community involvement in creating a violence-free society.

Gradually, one can see that the NOA of today is gradually making the needed change happen. But in a society like ours, where almost every sector is challenged, the good steps of one agency would only get the expected ovation, when it is complimented by the sister and brother bodies.

   

About author
Time Nigeria is a modern and general interest Magazine with its Headquarters in Abuja. The Magazine has a remarkable difference in editorial philosophy and goals, it adheres strictly to the ethics of Journalism by using the finest ethos of the profession to promote peace among citizens; identifying and harnessing the nation’s vast resources; celebrating achievements of government agencies, individuals, groups and corporate organizations and above all, repositioning Nigeria for the needed growth and development. Time Nigeria gives emphasis to places and issues that have not been given adequate attention by others. The Magazine is national in outlook and is currently being read and patronized both in print and on our vibrant and active online platform (www.timenigeria.com).
Articles
Related posts
All The NewsCover StoryNewsPolitics

Musa Tsoken Congratulates Kalu on Daily Times’ Lawmaker of the Year Award

1 Mins read
The National Coordinator of the Asiwaju Again Renewed Hope Support Initiative 2027 and National President of the APC Initiative for Good Governance…
Abuja FileDevelopmentEconomyEnergyFinanceInside LagosOpinionPerspective

The Missing Middle of Infrastructure Finance: Why Capital Still Fails to Become Infrastructure

6 Mins read
  By Chidi Nwafor  In October 2023, a Gulf sovereign wealth fund quietly closed a $2 billion allocation to global infrastructure, earmarked in part for emerging-market energy and transport assets. The announcement drew the usual applause: another sign, commentators said, that institutional capital was finally waking up to the infrastructure opportunity in the Global South. Eighteen months later, less than a tenth of that allocation had actually left the fund’s balance sheet. Not because the mandate had changed. Not because the fund had lost appetite. According to two people familiar with the portfolio, the constraint was simpler and more uncomfortable: there were not enough investable projects to put the money into. This is not a story about a reluctant investor. It is a story about capital that wants to move, cannot find enough places willing and able to receive it in a form it can underwrite, and quietly waits instead. Multiply that fund by the hundreds of pension schemes, sovereign wealth vehicles, commercial banks and infrastructure funds now carrying dedicated allocations for emerging-market infrastructure, and a pattern emerges that rarely makes it into a headline: the world is not short of capital for infrastructure. It has capital in historic abundance, sitting adjacent to a historic infrastructure gap, unable to cross the distance between the two. The Comfortable Explanation  The explanation on offer at every major infrastructure summit is a familiar one. Global infrastructure investment needs run into the tens of trillions of dollars over the coming decade; committed capital falls well short; therefore, the problem is one of insufficient funding, and the solution is more of it: more pledges, more blended-finance facilities, more climate funds, more multilateral capital increases. It is a comfortable explanation because it assigns responsibility clearly to governments who under-fund, institutions who under-commit, and it offers a clean remedy: raise more. It is also, on close inspection, not what the evidence shows. Pension funds globally hold trillions in assets under management with explicit infrastructure allocations that remain structurally underweight, not because trustees have rejected the asset class but because deal flow meeting their risk and governance thresholds has not materialised at the pace their mandates assume. Sovereign wealth funds report the same pattern. Commercial banks with dedicated project finance desks describe pipelines that look full at the term-sheet stage and thin dramatically by financial close. Development finance institutions, whose entire purpose is to absorb risk that commercial capital will not, routinely report that their binding constraint is not capital adequacy but the volume of bankable transactions their teams can originate and structure in a given year. None of this fits the scarcity narrative. All of it fits a different one. Availability Is Not Deployability  Capital availability and capital deployability are not the same condition, and the conflation of the two is doing real damage to how the world thinks about the infrastructure gap. Availability asks whether money exists somewhere with a mandate that could, in principle, be pointed at infrastructure. Deployability asks something much narrower and much harder: whether a specific project, at a specific moment, has been engineered, structured, documented and de-risked to the point where an investment committee can approve it without exception. The first condition is met, overwhelmingly, across nearly every category of capital that matters to infrastructure. The second is met by only a small fraction of the projects competing for it. The result is a market that looks, from the outside, like a financing gap, and functions, from the inside, like a conversion problem: an abundance of capital on one side, an abundance of infrastructure need on the other, and an underbuilt set of mechanisms in between capable of turning one into the other at any meaningful scale. Where the Conversion Breaks  The break does not happen at the ends of the process. It happens in the middle, in the unglamorous sequence of work that turns a plausible concept into an instrument a fiduciary can sign. A promising transmission project needs a feasibility study rigorous enough to survive institutional scrutiny rather than optimistic enough to attract early interest. It needs offtake arrangements that hold up under real counterparty and currency risk, not the counterparty risk assumed in a base case. It needs environmental and social documentation calibrated to the standards of the institutions being asked to fund it, not the standards of the jurisdiction hosting it. It needs a legal and commercial structure that allocates risk in ways a commercial lender, not only a development financier, will accept. It needs a sponsor capable of executing what has been proposed, not merely capable of proposing it. Each of these is ordinary project finance discipline. None of it is exotic, and in mature infrastructure markets it happens as a matter of course, absorbed into systems built over decades: specialist advisers, standard-form contracts, established procurement norms, deep pools of transaction expertise. What is missing in the markets where the infrastructure gap is largest is not the standard itself but the machinery that meets it. Projects arrive at investment committees with ambition intact and preparation incomplete, and that gap is treated, again and again, as an individual project’s failure rather than what it actually is: a structural absence in the systems responsible for producing investable transactions at scale. The Missing Middle  This is the Missing Middle of Infrastructure Finance: the institutional architecture that sits between capital that wants to move and infrastructure that needs building, and whose incompleteness explains far more of the global infrastructure gap than any shortfall in committed funds. It consists of project preparation facilities able to fund feasibility and structuring work before commercial viability has been proven. Transaction advisers capable of building deals that satisfy development mandates and commercial return thresholds at once, rather than treating the two as separate constituencies to be managed sequentially. Risk-sharing and guarantee instruments that convert political, regulatory and currency risk into something a commercial balance sheet can underwrite. Aggregation platforms that bundle smaller, individually sub-scale projects into portfolios large enough to justify institutional transaction costs. Standardised documentation that reduces the bespoke legal cost of every new deal. And coordination across ministries, regulators and financiers robust enough that a technically sound project does not die in bureaucratic sequencing after the money has already been found. None of these are new ideas in isolation. What is missing is their assembly into a coherent system, deliberately funded and institutionally accountable, rather than scattered across donor-funded pilots that end when the grant does. The African Dimension  Africa makes this dynamic unusually visible, and consequently offers an unusually clear opportunity to correct it. The continent’s infrastructure financing need, by any measure, is vast. Less understood is that the shortfall is disproportionately one of preparation rather than capital. Nigerian gas-to-power, off-grid solar and mini-grid developers have each demonstrated that individual projects can clear the bankability bar; what has not emerged is systemic pipeline scale, a steady stream of comparably prepared projects large enough to absorb the capital already circling the sector. The pattern repeats, with local variation, from grid infrastructure in East Africa to transport corridors in West Africa. Interested capital is rarely the scarce input. Investment-ready projects are. The Global Comparison  Mature markets solved this problem gradually and mostly invisibly, through decades of institution-building that predates the current infrastructure conversation: specialist project finance units inside banks, standardised PPP frameworks, established regulatory playbooks, deep benches of transaction lawyers and engineers who move between deals rather than between one-off assignments. Emerging and frontier markets are not being asked to meet a lower standard. They are being asked to meet the same standard without having built the same machinery, and then being told, when deals fail to close, that the problem is insufficient funding….
Cover StoryNewsSports

Union Bank, AIICO Multishield, Checkers Custard, Others Back 5th Cycling Lagos

2 Mins read
Union Bank of Nigeria Plc, AIICO Multishield, Checkers Custard and other corporate organisations have thrown their weight behind the 5th Cycling Lagos,…
Stay on the loop!

Subscribe to our latest news.

Leave a Reply

WP2Social Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com