A peep into NYSC’s new policy

It is no longer news that the compulsory one-year National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) scheme for Nigerian graduates has been made a lot more flexible. This flexibility is such that affords prospective corps members the opportunity to select any three states of their choice where they would serve the nation.

This implies that no one would be posted to any other state outside the three states. While the new policy was applauded by many stakeholders across the nation, particularly the prospective corps members, on the other hand, it certainly did not go down well with some individuals who vehemently opposed the policy.

Those in support of the new policy believe strongly that the it comes with the chance or advantage to serve wherever a prospective corps member chooses to serve and as such, no one would be posted or deployed to crisis zone, where some religion extremists take pleasure in shedding blood, as against his or her own will.

On the other hand, those kicking against the policy hold the opinion that the primary aim of the scheme had already been defeated. This stand point to some extent is absolutely true as some graduates are currently serving their fatherland at their parents’ backyard.

In all fairness, both parties have valid points or reasons on which to base their argument, however, this little piece seek to weigh the validity of the points adduced by both parties, obviously on the scale of cost and effect. I strongly believe that if the purpose of undertaking a policy is defeated, there is absolutely point going on with it since it won’t make any sense anymore. In case you are already asking whether what I am saying is that the NYSC scheme be scrapped, I have not said that, and probably I will not likely say that in the near future.

You might be tempted to ask again what then am I saying? More importantly, my argument is that will it be wise or reasonable for a person to continue in a programme when the reason why he or she engages in it in the first instance is already defeated. Now, let us look at it through the lens of those in support of the new policy.

It is true that nothing matters anymore when one dies. This, therefore, places a non-negotiable premium on the security and safety of citizens. It is no longer new to hear that corps members were attacked or massacred in crisis zones, but one cannot help but ask whether the benefit of the aims of the NYSC scheme outweighs the precious lives of the corps members being taken at will be the insurgents. The question now is whether we should stick to achieving the aims at expense of losing promising youth to aimless killings? I personally do not think it worth such sacrifice.

No sane parents or families want to lose their wards to some callous beings particularly after investing hugely on such a child. Parents will gladly have their children serve the nation in their own living rooms than risk losing them all in a bid to achieve the aim of a national scheme.

Conclusively, whether this new policy has come to stay or it is a temporary security measure, it remains to be seen, but my take on this is that “until the Federal Government is able to fix the security challenges that has in the last few years held the country in the jugular we should all set aside the talk about achieving the aims of a national scheme at the expense of the youth.

Without being immodest, let us ask those who schooled or undertook their NYSC at Borno, Yobe or Adamawa State some 10 to 15 years ago, whether they would have wished to do same if deployed to the states now. Well, your guess is as good as mine.

Culled from: New Telegraph