- Another thing is moving away from the hitherto popular but stunningly destructive rhetoric that backed the removal of subsidy to a socially savvy and economically rewarding stance that supports the return of subsidy on petrol may further endear him more to the many impoverished and long-suffering Nigerians.
The subsidy on premium motor spirit (PMS), better known as petrol, is a topical and polemical issue that has continued to spark debate even long after the current administration removed it. The matter is one of the issues that featured prominently in public discourse in the build-up to the 2023 general election, as Nigerians wanted to know what the position of the three leading presidential candidates is on the issue of subsidy removal.
The three presidential candidates — Bola Tinubu of the All Progressives Congress (APC), who eventually won the election, Atiku Abubakar of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and Peter Obi of the Labour Party — all said they would remove subsidy on petrol, which they all claimed was a drain on the national purse. However, the three differ on how they would implement the removal and what they would do to cushion the effect of the removal of subsidy on the people.
While many Nigerians supported the removal of subsidy, some, owing to a long history of distrust towards those in power, opposed the move, stating that subsidised petrol is the only thing that Nigerians benefit from the government and its removal would mean taking away the only all-encompassing welfare package and economic safety net for Nigerians. The supporters of subsidy removal were in the majority so they easily drowned out the voice of those who vehemently opposed and warned against the move.
On May 29th 2023, the day of his swearing-in, President Bola Tinubu announced the removal of subsidies during his first public speech. The effect was instant and devastating. The announcement triggered an instant inflation and cost of living crisis that Nigerians continue to grapple with. Food prices hit the roof, transport fares ballooned, and the cost of basic household commodities and consumer items skyrocketed. Nigerians find themselves struggling to make ends meet and pay bills. Their economic woes were further compounded by the unification of the exchange rates which saw the value of the naira against the dollar plummet.
Two years down the line they have not recovered and will likely not recover from the brutal and earth-shattering economic impact of these two policies. In the last two years, the issue of subsidy removal has been relegated to the lower division of public discourse and national conversations. But it became a topic of public interest again in recent days following a statement by the former Anambra State governor Peter Obi, claiming he would have also removed subsidies on petrol and Unified the exchange rate if he had won the presidential election.
During a recent interview with Arise TV, Obi said he would have also implemented the two policies, but he would have done it differently, not haphazardly like he said Tinubu did. Obi didn’t particularly state how he would have done away with the petrol subsidy in a way that is different from how Tinubu did it. Obi’s response tossed him between a rock and a hard place. The proponents of subsidy removal and the presidency were quick to point out his hypocrisy and castigated him for criticising the Tinubu-led administration for doing the same thing he would have also done if he were the president. Those who kicked against subsidy removal from the onset and who felt they had been vindicated owing to the corruption, wastage and profligacy the Tinubu government is now synonymous with are unconvinced by his response.
Two years after the removal subsidy and seeing the economic havoc it has wreaked and the fiscal and monetary devastation it has engendered for the struggling and impoverished citizens, one would have thought Obi would have changed his position on the matter and take a new stance; move away from the rehashing of the tired neoliberal economic trope and embrace a position that fit the reality of Nigerians. One would have expected Obi to hammer on the adverse effect of subsidy removal on the economy and how, aving realised the monumental negative effects, he would restore it.
One of the reasons given for the removal of subsidies on petrol by the government and those who supported the decision is that the subsidy is not getting to Nigerians who actually needed it and that the subsidy regime was plagued by corruption and illegality as corrupt and unscrupulous players in the oil and gas sector, especially importers of refined oil, manipulated receipt of imported refined crude oil to fleece the government of money they didn’t work for. One would have expected Obi to announce that he would tackle the corruption that characterised the subsidy regime and launch a robust and comprehensive cleaning up of the subsidy programme so that corrupt government officials and private entities would be rooted out of the system and Nigerians who truly needed the subsidy will get it.
It may be difficult for Obi to do a volte-face and change his position on subsidy removal, but as the reality of the government’s decision sinks in and Nigerians who supported the move begin to cast doubt on the sincerity and honesty of the Tinubu-led administration, his stance on the issue may become less popular among even the staunchest of his supporters. Another thing is moving away from the hitherto popular but stunningly destructive rhetoric that backed removal of subsidy to a socially savvy and economically rewarding stance that support the return of subsidy on petrol may further endear him more to the many impoverished and long-suffering Nigerians.
Discussion about this post