Maryam Uwais Slams Lawan, Gbajabiamila Over SIP Claims

The special adviser to the president on social investment programme (SIP), Maryam Uwais on Wednesday  cane down hard on the senate president Ahmad Lean and the speaker of the House of Representatives, Feni Gbajabiamila over their claims palliative to vulnerable Nigerians.

Lawan and Gbajabiamila had on Tuesday berated the Federal government’s over the method adopted by the SIP to implement the palliative measures to Nigerians as a result of the two weeks lockdown  declared by President Muhammad Buhari.

 Gbajabiamilawondered what parameters the government was using to implement the programme, the senate president said: “I think we have not been able to reach far out there to get them properly captured.”

But while responding to the scathing criticisms from both leaders of the National Assembly, Mrs Uwais said some of their claims were false.

She said, “That as part of the conditions for poor and vulnerable beneficiaries to be engaged, they are made to apply online, through the internet and they require a BVN for payment. UNTRUE,” she said.

“The utilization of the BVN for N-Power beneficiary payment is also as a means of identity (since the NIN number can be generated from the BVN) and to facilitate the tracking of payments and further ensure accountability.

“The identities of the cash transfer beneficiaries are protected by law (the FOI Act), as the consent of recipients of social grants is a prerequisite, before disclosure. They can, however, be found and verified through the LGA community facilitators (CTFs) who have been trained to support them by weekly visits to the wards.

“The names, wards, LGAs, States and phone numbers of the CTFs can be found at, as the data collation continues to grow around the country.

“The Leadership of the Senate also stated that the NSIP information was not accessible to the National Assembly. UNTRUE.

“The monthly reports of 3,000 N-Power monitors, spread across the 774 LGAs, are available to both Poverty Alleviation Committees of the NASS. It should also be noted that the accounting and procurement aspects of the NSIPs were handled by the Ministry of Budget and National Planning on behalf of the NSIO, and not the OVP.

“It was further asserted, apparently, that because the beneficiaries are not known personally to the NASS members, the National Social Register is a ‘scam’ and needs to be reformed through a process that is ‘more inclusive’ of the NASS. REGRETTABLE & DANGEROUS.”

“Having handed over the NSIPs in October 2019, I assume no responsibility for the operations thereafter as the Ministry is well positioned to handle the NSIPs and take decisions thereupon,” she added.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the publisher, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical reviews and certain other noncommercial uses permitted by copyright law. For permission requests, write to the publisher, addressed “Attention: Permissions Coordinator,” at

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.