A Call on Delta State Government To Rejig Empowerment Programmes Due To Inherent Sabotage
By Wilson Macaulay
Without any doubt, the administration of
His Excellency, RT Hon Elder Sheriff Oborevwori has demonstrated commendable commitment toward youth empowerment, job creation, entrepreneurship development, and economic stimulation in Delta State. Across the state, several intervention programmes under the M.O.R.E Agenda have created opportunities for thousands of Deltans through grants, skills acquisition, SME support schemes, agricultural programmes, and employment initiatives.
- Advertisement -
Indeed, many beneficiaries can boldly testify that they have benefited directly or indirectly from government interventions. The governor deserves commendation for prioritising human capital development at a time when economic realities across Nigeria have become increasingly difficult for ordinary citizens. His administration’s efforts in reducing unemployment, supporting MSMEs, improving access to grants, and stimulating grassroots economic activities are visible in many sectors.
However, while the intention of government remains noble and laudable, there is an urgent need for the Delta State Government to critically reassess, restructure, and sanitise the operational framework through which empowerment jï are implemented. The reason is simple: inherent sabotage within the selection and distribution system is gradually undermining the credibility, effectiveness, and long-term sustainability of these empowerment initiatives.
One of the greatest tragedies confronting empowerment programmes in Delta State today is the recurring recycling of beneficiaries. In many instances, the same circle of politically connected individuals continuously appears on empowerment lists, while genuinely needy and hardworking citizens remain excluded year after year.
This disturbing trend has created widespread public frustration and growing skepticism among ordinary Deltans who believe the programmes are increasingly becoming political patronage schemes rather than genuine poverty alleviation mechanisms.
Across communities, many people openly complain that empowerment materials hardly get to the truly vulnerable.
Equipment like Sewing machines, welding machines, grinding machines, tricycles, motorcycles, starter packs, and agricultural inputs are often allocated based on political affiliations, loyalty networks, and recommendations from local political leaders rather than actual needs assessment. Consequently, many recipients who do not genuinely require these tools end up selling them almost immediately after collection.
This explains why one frequently hears statements such as: “They got motorcycles and sold them.” “They got sewing machines and sold them.” “They got welding equipment and sold them.” “They got starter packs and converted them into cash.”
The painful implication is that the intended objectives of empowerment are defeated almost instantly.
True empowerment should create sustainable livelihoods, economic independence, productivity, and dignity. But when empowerment tools become commodities for quick resale, the programme loses both meaning and impact. It becomes an expensive public relations exercise rather than a transformational economic policy.
The hard truth is that many beneficiaries never had genuine interest in the trades or businesses for which they were empowered in the first place. Some were merely mobilised to fill political quotas. Others were selected to satisfy patronage interests. Many simply participated because they knew there would be cash or materials to collect and sell afterward.
This is where government must act decisively.
There is an urgent need for a comprehensive audit and restructuring of beneficiary selection mechanisms. The government must move away from over dependence on politically compiled lists and adopt more transparent, data-driven, community-based, and independently verifiable selection systems.
From the prism of the ruled, Empowerment programmes should not remain trapped within political structures alone.
Rather than allowing politicians and local power brokers to dominate nomination processes, government should partner directly with credible professional associations, trade unions, artisan groups, community development unions, cooperatives, market associations, youth organisations, and registered farmers’ associations that can identify individuals who are genuinely active in specific trades and sectors.
For instance, if government intends to empower welders, let recognised welding associations provide verified lists of practicing welders. If farmers are to benefit, agricultural extension officers and credible cooperative societies should authenticate active farmers through field verification. If tailoring equipment is to be distributed, fashion and tailoring associations should confirm applicants already involved in the profession.
This practical approach would drastically reduce the infiltration of “political beneficiaries” who merely seek to monetise empowerment schemes.
Furthermore, there is need for post-empowerment monitoring and evaluation mechanisms. Empowerment should not end at ceremonial distribution grounds where photographs are taken and media headlines generated.
Government agencies must establish monitoring teams that periodically track beneficiaries to determine whether tools and grants are being properly utilised.
Beneficiaries should sign accountability agreements. There should be periodic inspections, mentorship programmes, business tracking systems, and measurable performance indicators. Individuals found to have sold empowerment tools within a short period without valid reasons should be disqualified from future interventions.
Transparency must also become central to the process.
The Delta public deserves to see verifiable evidence of successful empowerment outcomes. Citizens want to see real artisans growing their businesses. They want to see trained farmers cultivating large hectares of land. They want to see young entrepreneurs expanding operations and employing others. They want to see transformation stories backed by visible realities rather than theoretical statistics and newspaper profiling alone.
Government should therefore consider publishing comprehensive beneficiary databases categorized by local governments, professions, and project types while also showcasing long-term success stories through independent impact assessments.
There is also need for stronger grassroots sensitization. Many genuinely skilled but disadvantaged citizens in rural communities are often unaware of empowerment opportunities because information dissemination is weak or hijacked by political middlemen. Digitised application systems combined with physical verification exercises can help reduce manipulation.
One disturbing example repeatedly cited by critics was the situation during an agricultural training programme at Songhai Farm, Amukpe. According to reports from participants themselves, a large percentage of the so-called beneficiaries allegedly consisted of “political farmers” who had little or no practical farming background. Some openly admitted they were only interested in collecting stipends and reselling empowerment materials afterward.
If such allegations continue unchecked across multiple programmes, the state risks wasting billions of naira without achieving meaningful economic transformation.
Government must therefore dig deeper.
The present administration has already shown commendable commitment toward development. What is now required is refinement, institutional discipline, and strategic restructuring capable of blocking internal sabotage and leakages.
The governor’s vision itself is not the problem. The major challenge lies within the operational channels through which the programmes are executed.
Empowerment must move from political symbolism to measurable economic productivity.
Delta State possesses enormous human capital potential. There are thousands of unemployed graduates, skilled artisans, local innovators, struggling traders, genuine farmers, and hardworking young entrepreneurs desperately seeking opportunities to survive and contribute meaningfully to society. These are the people government interventions must intentionally target.
If empowerment programmes are properly sanitised, transparently administered, and professionally monitored, Delta State could become a national model for sustainable grassroots economic transformation.
The state government must therefore rise courageously to confront the entrenched culture of recycled beneficiaries, political patronage, and systemic manipulation threatening the integrity of empowerment initiatives.
History will remember not merely the quantity of empowerment distributed, but the quality of lives transformed.
The ultimate goal should not simply be the announcement of large figures or impressive statistics. The real success of empowerment lies in creating independent citizens who can stand economically on their own, support families, employ others, and contribute meaningfully to the development of society.
That is the empowerment Delta people truly desire.
Wilson Macaulay is a Journalist, Author,
Public Affairs Analyst and good governance advocate:
Contact @08030886420 Whatsapp
(DEMOCRACY NEWSLINE NEWSPAPER, MAY 26TH 2026)
