Nigeria: Subsidy As Banana Peel

 By Sunny Ikhioya

The hardship and angry reactions engendered by the petrol subsidy removal have clearly shown why past leaders of of this country treated it with a long spoon. It is a make or mar decision: you either leave it as it is or you face the consequences. President Bola Tinubu has decided to tackle it head on and face the consequences. Will he succeed? Time will tell. 

It is one thing to be bold, it is another thing to ascribe wisdom to boldness; the circumstances and conditions must be ripe for it. Like they say in criminology, it is better to allow a criminal to go scot-free, than to pass sentence on an innocent man that you are not sure of his guilt. Wouldn’t it be better for the poor citizens to enjoy their subsidy, even if a few individuals are fleecing our common patrimony.

What is wrong with subsidy? Are the people not entitled to some form of subsidy? Why is the case of Nigeria different? Must we pander to the dictates of foreign interests to remove subsidy to the detriment of our multi-dimensionally poor brothers and sisters? With the choking effect of the subsidy removal, how can the poor Nigerian breathe? Is our problem really subsidy or rather, the inefficiency of government? With what we are witnessing in Adamawa State, is this not going to be a banana peel for a government that is struggling to find legitimacy? Subsidies are provided to businesses and individuals by governments all over the world.

According to the records: “Each year, the US federal government subsidises a wide range of economic activities for the benefit of its people. They come in the form of cash grants or loans given to particular industries to promote growth or impact business and consumer behaviour. Between 2013 and 2022, the average spending on farm subsidies was about $17.6 billion a year on the average. In 2028,  Trump administration increased federal spending for the fossil fuel industry and created tax cut to effectively eliminate taxes for coal and oil producers.’’ 

This is outside the welfare benefits and health packages given to the less privileged citizens of the country.  In the UK presently, they are heavily subsidising housing, health,  automobile and tech industries. These measures are taken to help companies reduce their cost of doing business. If all of these subsidy measures are good for a country’s economic development, why is the case of Nigeria different?

The European Union, EU, provides funding for a range of projects and programmes but it applies strict rules, for tight control over how funds are used and to ensure that the money is spent in a transparent, accountable manner. Meaning: the problem is not in our subsidy regime, but in the way that it is being managed and that is why concerned citizens are dissatisfied with the manner the subsidy was removed. It clearly lacked rigour and critical thinking on the consequences of such action. 

The people are grumbling and labour has given notice of its intention to go on protest. Everywhere you go, it is complaints galore and government do not seem to know the right actions to take to keep these agitations at bay. Government officials are masters of propaganda; they know how to use words to appease the people and they have succeeded thus far, but how long will the sweet words last? How long will the people bear the pain?

If the protests escalate, will the Tinubu regime be able to withstand the pressure? He has said that we shouldn’t pity him, because he willingly and deliberately campaigned to be President, therefore, he must provide solutions to our problems. Nobody is expecting him to perform any magic in two months, but the signals from him must be encouraging to the people; the way you start a race most times determines how you will end it. If you start with a lack of concern and feeling for the common man, it will most likely continue until the end of the regime. 

Your policies cannot be feeding the tastes of the elites alone to the detriment of others. You have asked the people to bear and make sacrifices, but the body language of those in government is pointing in the opposite direction.  People are trekking, starving and can hardly breathe, you are asking then to bear more, imposing taxes on them, while government officials live in opulence.

For a government that is still struggling to find its feet, this is a steep rock to climb; for the people to breathe, there must be a concensus amongst our elites, with the desired aim of bringing the people out of poverty. They must put aside their capricious and voracious appetites for waste, corruption and other drain pipes to our economy. They must all agree that the cost of governance must come down. 

Both the executive and the legislative arms of government must sit down and sort this thing out. The impression of most people is that our leaders are not setting the right example for sacrifice and this can lead to very unpleasant consequences for the government. For example, labour has given notice, other civil rights organisations will soon  join them. It is a very simple thing to do: set the right tone through your behaviours, reduce appetite for foreign made goods by patronising Nigerian made; cut costs in National Assembly spendings and reduce their multiple personal aids. The people will see for themselves and will not need any prodding to follow suit.

Someone recently observed thus: “Nigeria can survive a subsidy regime but it cannot survive a bloated subsidy regime “. That is where I stand. You cannot throw away the baby together with the bath water; when you squeeze the common man out of existence, what will you be doing with the savings that you have put together. Whatever it is that will ameliorate the sufferings of the people, that we should do. I have mentioned earlier of the need for our elites/leadership to agree among themselves, on the sacrifices to make that will bring the people out of their sufferings. 

An example is what the Trade Union Congress, TUC, President, Mr Festus Osifoh, is clamouring for. According to Festus: “The elected leaders would need to show example in view of the harsh economic conditions the country is facing presently….Such example would be better seen in the way of reduction in cost of governance and by having the members of the executive, legislature pruning the huge budget expended on their welfare….workers would like to see President Bola Tinubu give a directive that none of his ministers appoint more than two aids.” This is the example that we are talking about. 

Osifoh further said: “Cutting the cost of governance was of paramount importance because government cannot continue to ask workers and the battered masses to continuously tighten their belts. We have exceeded the belt holes, while those in government have continually increased their largesse. They must live by example; the Executive, Legislative and Judiciary arms of government must lead from the front and Nigerians will follow them from behind.”

If Tinubu wants to succeed as President of Nigeria, he must listen to the cries of the people and the solution to this does not depend on the expertise of any foreign body, as it is, the government is taking recommendations from people who do not know how the shoe pinches. Our refineries and local industries must work, the right atmosphere must be created for our professionals to exhibit their crafts. 

It is my humble feeling that, like the steel companies, our refineries have been programmed not to work effectively, because, all spareparts and equipments are sourced abroad, and various technical languages have been used to frustrate our progress.  We must brave it and look inward for solutions or else, we will continue to struggle. It is left for President Bola Tinubu to listen the cries of the people, do not hurt the people to satisfy selfish foreign interests. 

*Ikhioya is a commentator on public issues