Follow Us on Google
By Olakunle Olafioye
Ahead of his first 100 days in office, Nigerians have expressed mixed reactions over the performance of the President Bola Ahmed Tinubu-led administration.
President Tinubu was sworn in on May 29, following the expiration of the two-term tenure of the immediate past President Muhammadu Buhari.
During his inaugural speech, Tinubu had jolted Nigerians when he announced the removal of subsidy on Premium Motor Spirit (PMS), popularly known as petrol in the country, resulting in almost 200 per cent increase in the price of the product.
Consequently, the concomitant increase in transport fare and the attendant inflation in the country have led to most Nigerians groaning over the unbearable economic situation.
Assessing the situation, a petroleum engineer and politician, Martin Onovo, described the decision by the president to announce the removal of fuel subsidy as the most reckless decision.
Chief Onovo stated that since economic growth is determined by productivity, there is no way Nigeria can grow its economy under the current situation.
Onovo who was the presidential candidate of National Conscience Party (NCP) in 2015 said: “Subsidy removal was not only reckless, it is also senseless. When you consider the fact that the Buhari government removed the subsidy in 2016 and it failed woefully, then you will see how senseless it is to do so now. Who advised Tinubu to remove the subsidy? He took the decision on the day he was sworn in. Which national economic management team advised him to do so? He did not have any at that time.
“The United States is rated as having the largest economy in the world because it has the largest GDP. While would you, in order to grow an economy, take a step that will undermine GDP? Subsidy removal has no gain. During the Obasanjo military regime in 1976 when he increased fuel price he said it was meant for infrastructural development. “Again in 2016, when Buhari removed fuel subsidy he said it was for infrastructural development. Which infrastructure did Buhari develop after removing subsidy? There is no way you will grow an economy by undermining your GDP. Economic growth is by productivity.
“China grew its economy by productivity. Globally, economic growth is measured by GDP. We must understand the critical role of fuel in the economy. Fuel is energy. The US alone consumes 25 per cent of the world’s energy. So, why won’t the US have the largest GDP? It is because energy is the capacity to produce. Ordinary welder needs power. If the Disco doesn’t supply him electricity he will use his generating set. Outside energy, the second most fundamental thing is transportation because of the need for the distribution of goods and the movement of personnel. Fuel is critical to this, but that is what Tinubu decided to tamper with.”
The former presidential candidate pointed out that the decision to remove the fuel subsidy plunged the citizens of the country into the current hardship, saying that it is tantamount to punishing the Nigerian masses for the sins of the political class.
He submitted that the only solution to the problem is to fix the refineries in the country.
His words: “Why is Nigeria importing refined products? It is because the refineries are not functioning. The refineries have been grounded because of corruption. Before 1989, our refineries were working at world’s class level and they were manned by Nigerians. But the corrupt people moved in and kicked out the competent hands managing our refineries and replaced them with sycophants and inexperienced people. And now the place has been run down. So, why should the Nigerian people be made to pay for the failure of the political class? This is what I meant when I said the decision is senseless and reckless. The way forward is to fix the refineries.”
There are, however, those who consider the government’s decision to remove fuel subsidy as a step in the right direction. One of them is Prof Tayo Bello, dean, Faculty of Law, Adeleke University, Ede, Osun State.
Bello pointed out that the fuel subsidy regime must be done away with if Nigeria must make any meaningful progress.
He was quick to identify the over N1 trillion the government claimed to have saved two months after fuel subsidy was removed, as one of the major gains of the policy,
According to him, “President Tinubu has taken few steps, which personally, I consider to be in order. First is the removal of subsidy. This is very commendable. I have always maintained that subsidy must go if we are going to make any progress. Since the subsidy was removed, the government has succeeded in saving a lot of money which would have gone into payment of subsidy. This is possible because fuel smuggling out of the country has been curtailed.”
As a way of justifying its decision to remove fuel subsidy, the government had claimed it had been able to save over N1 trillion two months after fuel subsidy was removed.
This, Bello considered a laudable benefit of subsidy removal.
But Onovo contending the claim said that it would be difficult to save money in the aftermath of the policy.
He pointed out that whatever the government might have claimed to have saved since the decision was announced had been subsumed by the high inflation rate, one of the fallouts of the subsidy removal.
“The government cannot save any money from subsidy removal because of micro-economic instability. For example, when the price of cement goes up the government will have to buy cement for its projects. It dissipates whatever the government claims to have saved. Inflation diminishes the value of the money you may claim to have saved. It is a silly thing to do because it has drawn the country back so many years. It has caused mass unemployment. All the universal indices for measuring economic growth – GDP, inflation, unemployment, poverty index – have been drawn back,” Onovo argued.
Bello also thumbed up the Tinubu-led administration for its policy on the harmonization of the rates at the official and parallel markets.
Although he pointed out that the policy is not without its initial challenges, he maintained that Nigerians stand to benefit immensely from the policy in the long run.
“The harmonisation of the rates at the official market and parallel market is another major development. Although people are saying that the policy has led to scarcity of dollars and increase in the rate of the naira to dollar. There is no doubt that inflation has risen to about 24 per cent and standard of living falling, prices of food skyrocketing, there is no way such bold economic policies will be taken without its initial pains and groaning, but eventually things will improve.
“Nigerians will have to endure the initial pains which these policies have thrown up before they can enjoy the gains. To survive, Nigerians must embrace what I call FAP – Family Adjustment Programme and PAP – Personal Adjustment Programme. These require that people adjust based on their income. People need to cut down their expenses.
“Buhari was servicing debts with 98 per cent of our revenue. But for the first time in a long while, federal allocation rose, this was possible because of the decision to remove the subsidy. We are experiencing this pain now, but in the long run we shall enjoy it,” Bello enthused.
Security of lives and property is another area Nigerians are expecting miracle from the new administration.
But since coming to power, the Tinubu-led government has seen itself grabbling with one of the major challenges that have continued to threaten the peace and unity of the country to its very existence.
But in spite of this challenge, security experts are of the opinion that it is too premature to assess the readiness and the seriousness of the new administration in battling insecurity in the country.
A frontline security expert, Jackson Lekan-Ojo, though he lauded the choice of Service Chiefs appointed by the president, he was quick to point out that the emergence of the new Security Chiefs will not magically change the situation. According to him, “the problem on the ground is so enormous. From all indications, the Service Chiefs are really working to ensure insecurity is addressed, but the damage on ground is quite enormous. So, we should not expect the Service Chiefs to perform magic within the period they have been in office more than we have seen now. I believe that with the support of all Nigerians, they will perform to our expectations.
“But then we must not forget that the more the economic hardship in the country, the more the possibility of seeing more people going into crime. If the hardship persists and it is only the poor that are being forced to sacrifice while the rich continue to live in affluence, definitely there will be little or nothing the Service Chiefs will be able to do.”
In the same vein, another security expert, Rotimi Aromolaran, opined that it is too early to assess this administration in the area of security despite the prevailing security challenges in parts of the country.
He noted, however, that some of the moves made so far by the new Security Chiefs have been able to ignite hope of better performance from the new service heads.
His words: “I believe it is too early to give a comprehensive analysis about the security situation. As relatively peaceful as it appears, the herders are still wreaking havoc in some states. Criminals are still removing and stealing railway tracks, pockets of kidnapping are still happening all over the nation and the prevalence of cultism and other related crimes are yet to abate. While kudos should be given to the security operatives for stemming the tide, they still have a lot of work to do in bringing permanent peace to the nation.
“We would have to wait for a little bit to be able to properly assess the security situation in the country objectively. But having said that the Service Chiefs have shown inspiring capacity by visiting their commands and trying to motivate their men and officers to achieve the desired results. I think all that is needed now is the heart and the willingness to make good judgments.”
Aromolaran urged the nation’s security agencies to synergise and be more proactive in their operations.
He also called for more investment in technology and tasked the government on improved welfare package for the nation’s security operatives as well as calling for more effective policing of the nation’s borders.
