Are We Worth Proposals? (Part 2)

By Alal K’Alal

Ours is a society of wonders; some things that happen in our lives are laughable, good and bad. Moi University is not exceptional. The politics of today in Main campus, as Obilo noted earlier about democratic space, has shifted from the intellects to toddlers. The 28th SGC has more toddlers than ‘mature animals’ who never cease to amaze from the way they deliver their duties to the way some of them conduct themselves. I’m told most of them are confused even after they attended an induction ceremony at the coast.

Last week, a story ran of a director who had allegedly been assaulted by some students next to the students’ center on Thursday night for failure to pay them their ‘wages’. The students are said to have cleaned hostel J and H on Saturday 25thbut had not received money from the Health director, Jemima Tietie.

According to one of the students who were involved in the deal, Peter Agoro, the director had received 85,500/- from the MUSO kitty for having done a one-day shoddy clean-up in the two hostels. The director then shared the money amongst two groups. One group of students received 50,000/- while Tietie pocketed 35,500/-.

The question students continue to ask is whether it was necessary for the Dean of students to approve such a huge amount for some myopic hungry members of Jo-Ath at the expense of needy students. The money that to date has brought a lot of tension in Main campus was earned with much sttruggle by our parents. Yes, the money came from 171 students who, perhaps, made their families sleep hungry so that they could not miss their examinations.

Are there no casual workers who were mandated to undertake the job? Evidently, very many casual cleaners attend to their duties daily and perfectly without failure. They are paid monthly salaries by the University; unfortunately, they are not paid 85,500/= for a day’s work. The administration cannot afford to pay them 15,000/= per month. The approval of the proposal has not only revealed the extent to which comrades’ subscription fee is embezzled but also the need to detach subscription fee from the tuition fee.

According to Agoro, part of the proposal stated that it was supposed to be ‘voluntary’ and targeted two hundred students to participate. How voluntary was a job whose expenditure was 85,500/=? How could the Health director award three students (names still withheld for the next publication) fifty thousand? Any sane man would agree with me that students are forced to subscribe so that directors find money to award their sycophants.

There is no doubt that if sanity were to be regained in the Health docket of this University, Jemima Tietie should be impeached on grounds of gross incompetence and mismanagement of funds. Moreover, the students who were involved should be barred from writing any other proposals forthwith. The money that the students squandered should also be returned to the Kitty for other better projects.

In the future, a committee should be formed to oversee the whole process and act as watch dogs in order to allow for transparency. It is needless to force students to pay five hundred if, for example, the kitty can only provide fifty thousand when a student dies and pay fifty thousand to students who voluntarily cleaned two hostels for less than two hours.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s