Afolabi Aribigbola

T he sixteenth and current President of Nigeria, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu during his inauguration ceremony on May 29, 2023, announced unequivocally that subsidy has gone. Since  the unilateral decision of the President to remove petroleum subsidy, it  has instigated a chain of reaction causing instability and economic crisis in all sectors of the national economic milieu of the country. The government then in rationalizing or justifying the sudden subsidy removal asserted that it is necessary to free up funds for infrastructural development social welfare and economic diversification in the country.

Unfortunately, almost nine months after the country has not witnessed much of infrastructural development since the subsidy removal especially at the state level where many Chief Executives have been collecting more revenue from the federation account with little or nothing commensurate to show for the hug funds accruing to them with which most of them have been deployed to playing politics to entrench themselves in the corridor of power perpetually. The fuel subsidy removal has been a contentious and complex issue with different perspectives

tended to divide the people.

Whilst many Nigerians supported the idea including the three major presidential candidates in the hotly contested 2023 general elections, other without social disposition and hindsight into past government promise failure were against because the poor which the government promise will benefit will in actual fact suffer the more from economic crisis that will follow. The immediate aftermath of the announcement of fuel subsidy removal was sporadic hike in pump price of petroleum products in the country. It has equally instigated unprecedented increases in all goods and services in the county beyond the reach of poor majority of the people of the country.

Indeed, it has caused inflation and economic crisis of unprecedented magnitude and dimension never experienced in the history of the country. Of course, before the unceremonious unilateral removal of fuel subsidy in the country, I have advanced cogent argument against the World Bank and IMF instigated decision because it will worsen the economic situation of ordinary Nigerians that have no priviledge and easy access to loot the commonwealth of the nation and who have not been enjoying any support from the government unlike the few affluent people that benefit immensely from the nations resources from one form of support to the other.

I counselled against the removal because of the subsidy for the simple reason that one has realized that it has overwhelming influence on virtually all activities and sectors of the country’s economy. And any change will have far reaching consequences as it is happening at the moment. Also, I have submitted that if subsidy must be removed at all, genuine and sincere efforts must have been made to cushion its negative effects on the poor masses. As things unfold in recent months, this has not been heeded and hence the widespread protests across the country to draw government attention to their plight.

The reality now in the country is that the harsh economic situation prevalent in the last nine months supported propositions that fuel subsidy removal will cause more havoc, instability and inflict more pains on the people as well as the nation. Unfortunately, the removal without sufficient planning has actually impacted negatively on the economy of the country and the welfare and living conditions of her citizens. Therefore, the recent information by the World Bank and the Chief Executive Officer and Managing Director of Pinnacle Oil and Gas Limited, Mr. Robert Dickerman contending that the Federal Government is still paying subsidy for petroleum product make it incumbent for forthright and discerning Nigerians to again revisit the desirability or otherwise of subsidy removal in the country. Prior to the removal of the subsidy, the government claimed that they were spending staggering amount to subsidise the product that are going into private hands, they argued that it provided a veritable platform for corruption to thrive as many people collect subsidies for what they did not supply and therefore the subsidy must be removed to eliminate sharp practices that benefit only the wealthy or priviledged people profiting from the exercise.

They further argued that government is losing huge resources that would have been available for provision of infrastructural facilities such as quality education and health care not available in most parts of the society. Ordinarily their arguments appear plausible if they are sincere and ready to confront the beneficiaries of subsidies headlong. The reality is that the cabal profiting from subsidy regime were too powerful to deal with and thus continue the practice of paying subsidy. The federal government unilateral removal of the subsidy without adequate preparation have resulted in serious far-reaching consequences that begin with escalation in its pump price and resultant spiraling inflation in the national space economy. It does appear that subsidising the product in the past is not entirely a misnomer. That has been assisting is stabilizing and helping the economy of the country to function and move forward.

 Therefore, the need to revisit the debate so as to prevent further punishment of the citizens particularly the poor. Punishing Nigerians because millions of people are suffering directly and often indirectly from subsidy removal. In other words, the country should look beyond just removal of subsidy. The focus should have been on total elimination of the activities of the cabal or group feeding fat on subsidy fraudulently. Some have suggested that to eliminate or reduce drastically the nefarious activities of the so called petroleum merchant causing pains on the people, capital punishment should be introduce to deal with saboteurs of the economy of the country as the practice in some Asians countries. For the stability and progress of the country at this critical period, fuel subsidy should continue because the prevailing economic crisis with the accompanying sufferings and the understanding that society in all parts of the globe adopt one form of subsidy or the other to assist their citizenry as well as propel their economy. This is more essential because of the fall in the value of the naira that is constantly raising pump price of petroleum in the country.

The fuel subsidy removal needs to be reviewed and reintroduced to assuage the present problems in the country. Already as we have been told, the government now stand staggering one trillion monthly to subsidise the product but found it difficult to inform the public that they have regretted their action. Again, the crisis in the industry is a product of the country’s inability to repair her refineries and low productivity putting undue pressure on the foreign exchange of the country and the government official devaluation of the national currency. To stabilize the economy and reduce the suffering of Nigerians, there is the need to subsidise petroleum products until the country can refine its fuel, stabilize the value naira against other international currencies and increase productivity of goods and services in the country rather than depending on imported products as the current practices. Otherwise continuing with the removal of fuel subsidy regime will continue the punishment and suffering of Nigerians as it is at present. Government must address the issue of fuel import urgently by fixing all the refineries in the country that are not producing at the moment. That is where the solution lies anything short of this is an escapist tendencies and tacit attempt to continue inflicting hardships on already impoverished Nigerians.