OKONJO-IWEALA AND THE WORLD BANK: TIME TO DIVORCE

On the 15th of September, 2011; I posted a piece on my blog titled “Okonjo-Iweala: A Patriot Blinded by the West.” This piece was also published by some off and online media. I had attempted to highlight three major points. In the first place, I had wanted to drum home the point that Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, minister of finance and coordinating minister of the economy has the passion and courage of a true patriot. The second point I wanted to establish was the fact that Okonjo-Iweala was an involuntary “apostle” of western democracies. Thirdly, I was of the opinion that western democracies can only use but never trust “apostles” like Okonjo-Iweala. The outcome of the election to select a replacement for the outgoing World Bank chief, Robert Zoellick has vindicated me. The withdrawal of Colombia’s former finance minister, Jose Antonio Ocampo from the World Bank presidential race was enough for Okonjo-Iweala to see the spirit of United States celebrating with bottles of champagne on the streets of Washington DC. Sentiment apart, Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala had a superior credential to occupy the World Bank presidency.

Typical of every vibrant and complex society, some applauded my candid opinion and others poured heaps of condemnation on my head. One fair point to note however is the fact that the criticisms that followed my piece had no capacity to change what was wrong to right. What was then wrong, if one must ask? It was wrong for Okonjo-Iweala to look at Africa with western eyes. While it is true that advancement in science and technology has compressed the world into a global village, we cannot stand on this truism to deny the fact that population, culture, and religion plays critical role in shaping the local economy of every society. Perhaps, owing to the fact that she was an “insider”, Okonjo-Iweala often times acted in manners that suggested she was too informed to accept contrary opinions- especially the ones dressed in the robes of criticism.

Not only was the foundation of her campaign very shallow and stained with racial sentiments, she was undoubtedly a victim of her own characteristic arrogance. Right from the first day she came to work for the Nigerian government during the Obasanjo administration, Okonjo-Iweala has refused to accept the bitter fact that in economics, issues are isolated and treated on their individual merits. Only lazy people who do not believe in themselves will rely on the ideas of others without paying attention to associated evidences and facts. It would also not be fair for any person charged with managing the economy of a nation to rely only on old ideologies or viewpoints of political parties to design fiscal policies. What else can one expect from a World Bank apostle?

Not aware of the hidden agenda of her western mentors, Okonjo-Iweala was deliberately deceived into looking at Nigeria’s economic problems with “western eyes”. It was for this simple reason that she could not accept a fundamental truth spoken by even uneducated women in village markets: every society on the face of the earth has its peculiarities. Sadly, this was the very point her sole opponent and eventual winner of the World Bank presidential election on Monday 16th April, 2012; Jim Yong Kim used to sink her boat. Kim later revealed to the BBC that he would consider the cultural and social peculiarities of various regions to ensure that the Bank’s schemes achieved the desired results.

As part of efforts to successfully use both the IMF and World Bank to secure pole positions in global finance and economy, western democracies intentionally creates the false impression that population, poverty level, culture, and religion does not matter in designing fiscal policies. It was based on this false opinion that Okonjo-Iweala spearheaded the subsidy removal battle against the Nigerian masses. This was what I wrote on my blog: “It must be noted that every society has its own peculiarities. As a result of this, what has worked in country A may not necessarily work in country B. Africans wearing “western eyes” will never realize this fact even though it is profusely clear. For instance, the governor of Nigeria’s Central, Lamido Sanusi and Minister of Finance, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala are all bitterly agitating for the removal of fuel subsidy simply because same has worked elsewhere in America and Europe. Since they are wearing “western eyes”, they have failed to realize that: (a) Unemployment figures are very low in America and Europe (b) An average American or European worker earn as much as $130 or N19,500 per day. With this kind of salary, Nigerians can afford to buy fuel even at N150 per liter.”

If after failing to win the confidence of her mentors, Okonjo-Iweala does not learn anything, repent, and jettison her World Bank “mentality”; President Goodluck Jonathan should waste no time to offload her. Industrialized western democracies have through her, succeeded in turning most Nigerian masses against the president owing to some non-aligning fiscal policies she introduced. We must not forget the fact that one of the veiled aims of the IMF and World Bank is to prescribe fiscal policies that will pitch the masses against governments of developing countries. This is to create crisis and give little or no room for political leaders to build their national economies and secure economic independence. Western nations are afraid that Africa securing economic independence will mean lesser exports and dwindling foreign exchange revenue.

Is it not sad that Okonjo-Iweala suggested the removal of fuel subsidy as a sure way of fighting corruption in the nation’s oil sector? Is this how other countries fight corruption? Subsidy in itself is not a bad idea. Nations introduce subsidy to protect its citizens. As you read this, the EU subsidizes agriculture and fisheries and yet advice Nigerian government to withdraw fuel subsidy. This is not just ironic but suspicious. The fiscal policy of fuel subsidy removal is directly in conflict with the World Bank’s commitment to fighting poverty in developing countries. We are aware that the partial removal of fuel subsidy in January has expectedly jumped the prices of goods and services thereby weakening the purchasing power of a greater percentage of Nigerians. The direct consequence is increase in poverty level. Those that used N20,000 to meet the needs of their families now require about N40,000 or more to do same because the cost of transport, rent, food, education, and health care services have climbed up the ladder.

I have always maintained that just as there are many ways to kill a rat, there are also many ways to remove fuel subsidy. It is quite sad that Okonjo-Iweala preferred the option that will serve the parochial interest of her western mentors. We are no longer fools.

JONATHAN: DEPLOYING WISDOM TO DISARM THE ENEMIES WITHIN

To many, President Goodluck Jonathan is simply seen as a very lucky man. But beyond this popular opinion, he is more of a firm believer in the potency of natural wisdom or common sense. This is the secret behind his rapid and steady rise from grace to higher grace. For many who don’t know him; Goodluck Jonathan can be easily mistaken for someone who does not have the head to carry the burden that Nigeria has painfully become. Right from his days as deputy governor in Bayelsa State, he has never believed in the vain and negative attitude of “I know it all.” For this reason, he devotes ample time to listen to a wide range of opinions. Jonathan is also known for trusting in the abilities of his aides. Unfortunately, this has in no small measure dented his vision as most of his lieutenants have abused the deep confidence reposed in them. It accounts for why some government officials pursue agendas clearly outside the vision of the president.

Much of the problems created or existing in the nation’s polity are the premeditated handiwork of members of the president’s working team. It is a sad fact that most people in government are there for the wrong reasons. Very few persons enter government to serve the interests of the larger society. In such a feral situation, political leaders will need more than the normal to succeed. For a few of us that saw it well in advance, we warned the president about the dangers of working with a legion of “enemies of the nation.” As complex as Nigeria is, there is no way “enemies” will not infiltrate the presidency. What every head of government needs to do in order to defeat these “enemies” or cabal is to be proactive. The major aim of the cabal is to hijack the presidency and dictate the turn of events in the country to their favour. It is however pertinent to note that while every administration grows its own cabal, there are key institutions that feed the “cabaltocracy.” They are the NNPC, CBN, and Customs Service. Of late, the Nation Assembly too has joined. The running of these critical sectors of the nation is mostly shrouded in secrecy. Any attempt to open their doors to public scrutiny is usually rebuffed. All amounts of resources are deployed to shield the activities of members of the cabaltocracy. Where it is believed that a particular person may not “play ball’, unorthodox means are employed to perpetuate their culture of crime.

In the case of Goodluck Jonathan, the signs were too clear to the leadership of the cabaltocracy that they cannot trust his presidency. This was mostly responsible for the strong resistance to his ascension to the presidency even in an acting capacity. When with the “doctrine of necessity” their world seems to be collapsing, the cabal decided to employ some other means to either colonize or destroy the GEJ presidency. It was obvious that they could not colonize Aso Rock because right from inception, Goodluck Jonathan had promised to stand with the masses. What many were afraid of is whether the president would be able to stop the cabal from destroying his administration, bearing in mind the number of enemies within.

Unknown to many, including the president; the sudden removal of fuel subsidy on January 1st was part of a subtle design to throw him out of office. Members of the cabal- in and outside government saw an opportunity in the fuel subsidy impasse to perfect their plans. There is no doubt about the fact that fuel subsidy was putting a big hole in the nation’s purse. Just as there are many ways to kill a rat, there were also several ways to withdraw fuel subsidy. Expectedly, the “enemies within the presidency” went for the option that will drastically weaken the purchasing power of the already 70% poor that are living below poverty line. The aim was simply to pitch the masses against government and expect the birth of an Arab Spring in Nigeria. To prove how true this opinion is, the anti-subsidy apostles never saw any need to deploy palliatives before the removal of subsidy. It would be recalled that some insignificant palliatives were only announced after labour and CSO had gone on the streets to call for the reversal of the fiscal policy. Why didn’t Okonjo-Iweala and Sanusi offer to take salary cuts before asking Nigerians to make sacrifice? Thank God, the president did not follow them blindly.
In line with his usual self, President Goodluck Jonathan deployed wisdom to disarm the many “enemies within” by standing with the masses. He emphatically reasoned like a political leader- not like a technocrat. Left with Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, the minister of finance and economy and Sanusi Lamido, the governor of the CBN; the Goodluck Jonathan’s administration would have been part of history by now. These highly respected technocrats are simply doing the bidding of the World Bank and IMF- not that of Aso Rock. As part of a subtle agenda to protect the economies of key western nations, the World Bank and IMF usually prescribe fiscal policies that will hit hard on the poor and fuel anti-government sentiments among the masses in developing countries.

A close watch of the oil industry in most OPEC countries suggests that the best way to remove fuel subsidy is make local refineries functional. Okonjo-Iweala and Sanusi are not keen about this. Unfortunately, these anti-subsidy apostles have invested so much resource to argue that there are no credible Nigerians to run our economy successfully. They will be quick to cite the state of our four refineries to back their unpatriotic argument. This is a big shame. How can a country that cannot manage her refineries convince the international community that their investments would be safe? Let us stop deceiving ourselves. Unknown to many, the anti-subsidy apostle are actually the true enemies of the Nigerian masses. They are friends of the mostly corrupt fuel importers who have stolen billions of Naira from our common wealth in the name of fuel subsidy. That was why they could not dare call for a probe of the subsidy funds. They also downplayed the important need to refurbish our refineries so that they (importers) can continue to import fuel and make unregulated profit on top of the bent backs of 70% of poor Nigerians that cannot rely on their income to provide food, shelter, education, transport, and health care for their families. Let us note that the finance minister and CBN governor have been making so much noise about corruption but done nothing practical to fight it. Rather, it is the National Assembly that has taken the bull by the horn to expose the rot in the system.

It is the prayer of millions of Nigerian masses that President Goodluck Jonathan continues to use wisdom to fight his enemies within. This is the only way they can be protected from the ravaging and unpatriotic activities of the cabaltocracy within and outside government.

How Technocrats Destroy Political Leaders

Owing largely to the abysmal failure of democratic political culture to rapidly improve the welfare of man and society especially in Africa, many have come to hate or distrust politicians with passion. A larger part of the African society now frame politicians as unreliable. Citizens now see politicians as a bunch of unpatriotic, selfish, greedy, and corrupt people. It is mainly for this reason that political leaders who are desirous of writing their names in gold invite tested technocrats to help manage critical sectors of state machinery. Unfortunately however, these technocrats have most times ended up performing far worse than politicians do. One general excuse they usually give for their appalling failure is lack of free hands to operate.

To be fair to political leaders that do not give these co-opted technocrats blank cheques to operate; most of them go into government without the slightest understanding of the workings and foundational essence of democratic governance. They forget that political leadership is far different from the conventional leadership culture. While the later is largely influenced by Naira and Kobo (urge to make profit), political leadership seeks to meet the diverse needs of the governed. Sometimes, this fundamental goal of democratic governance is achieved with state accounts in the red. It is in recognition of this fact that the concept of Foreign Reserves and Sovereign Wealth Fund became popular in many advanced democracies. The idea was to ensure that commercial concerns do not in any way deny citizens the good things of life. After all, democracy is all about the people.
It is not enough to flaunt tittles and labels as most of our professionals do. For a country like Nigeria where a greater percentage of her citizens are living below poverty line, common sense should tell us that our economic experts and fiscal policy formulators will need to be very creative to be able to design practicable fiscal templates that can effectively fight poverty. Somehow, the colourful debate that followed the federal government's decision to stop paying subsidy on imported petrol has brought to the fore one very sad fact: Our nation's economic experts and fiscal policy formulators are overpaid. This is because their output is far below what is expected of them. Apart from their being apathetic, they are clearly drained of practicable ideas to stimulate rapid socio-economic growth. What they do is to sit in front of internet-ready computers and copy the fiscal policies of developed countries. In doing this, they fail to realize that a lot variables such as population, technology, culture, literacy level, unemployment rate, and even religion influences the design and mode of deployment of fiscal policies. The truth is that a fiscal policy that is successful in Europe may not necessarily do well in Africa owing to several factors as enumerated above. Every country is therefore expected to study her peculiar situation and circumstances before designing appropriate fiscal policies to match.

The decision by the federal government to withdraw fuel subsidy is one of the fiscal policies erroneously copied from some developed countries. We must however not forget the fact that in those countries, the purchasing powers of citizens are strong enough to take care of their basic needs such as shelter, food, transport, health care, education, and socials. It is also necessary to point out that in the countries where our anti-subsidy apostles are drawing inspiration from, poverty level is clearly within the limits of a single digit. More than that, unemployment figures are tolerable and their public infrastructures are in excellent condition.
One question that readily comes to mind is: how much percentage of Nigerian workers are able to take care of the basic needs of their families from their legitimate income? Going by the statement of the governor of Nigeria’s Central Bank, Lamido Sanusi; only about 30% of Nigerians can take care of the basic needs of their families. What then happens to the remaining 70%? Your guess is as good as mine.
Like I have, and will continue to insist, President Goodluck Jonathan means well for Nigeria. Unfortunately, just as George Bush was stampeded by faulty intelligence report to invade Iraq in 2003; overzealous anti-subsidy apostles have cleverly misled President Jonathan to support the removal of fuel subsidy in 2012. I am very confident that my position will be vindicated in the very near future. All over the world, political leaders that are known to be very keen in making a difference were more prone to making errors of judgment. The situation is worse with leaders that are mostly surrounded by people who believe a coin has only one side. Of course, President Jonathan has many of them around him. The earlier he realizes this, the better for him and the Nigerian masses.

Apart from the conspicuous fact that Nigeria's present socio-economic framework is too weak to accommodate the pressure of fuel subsidy removal, my opinion is further strengthened by the shallow logic put forward by the two major anti-subsidy apostles: Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, the minister of finance and economy and Lamido Sanusi, governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria. This duo will be quick to remind Nigerians that there is no fuel subsidy in Britain, United States, Germany, Spain Holland, and France. They have however deliberately refused to appreciate the fact that Nigerian workers do not earn as much as their contemporaries do in those named countries. Without doubt, Nigerians will accept to buy a liter of fuel for even N150 if public infrastructures are in excellent conditions and the salaries of public service workers are proportionate with what their contemporaries earn in Europe and America.

In fact, the most worrying aspect of the arguments in support of the removal of fuel subsidy has to do with how it will help curb cross-boarder smuggling of petroleum products and the curbing of corruption in NNPC. It is sad that both Okonjo-Iweala and Sanusi are convinced about the existence of corruption at the nation’s boarder posts and oil sector but not interested in going after those eating fat from it. The best they could do in fighting those stealing our common heritage is to punish the poor masses by increasing the price of petrol through the removal of fuel subsidy. Why are they afraid of the so-called "cabal" and not the masses? The masses are still largely ignorant. All of these must bother President Jonathan. This is because should anything funny happen today, both Okonjo-Iweala and Lamido Sanusi will be on the next flight to the headquarters of World Bank or IMF for immediate engagement. We should not forget our past too quickly.

While speaking at the 5th Annual Microfinance Conference and Entrepreneurship Award in Abuja, the governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria, Lamido Sanusi informed the whole world that a staggering 70% of the Nigerian population is living below poverty line. It was therefore shocking when one heard the same Sanusi turn around to argue that 70% of poor Nigerians who are already living below poverty line could withstand a further weakening of their purchasing power when fuel subsidy is removed. Who is not aware that the removal of fuel subsidy will translate to an increase in the pump prices of petroleum products? In the same vein, the prices of goods and services that has direct or indirect link with petrol will jump. I do not know of any good or service in Nigeria that has no link with petrol.

To make the Nigerians look stupid, the anti-subsidy apostles have been arguing that the poor do not benefit from the fuel subsidy regime. My not having a car does not mean I will trek to the farm, office, market, hospital, school, or church. We all know that transporters fix their fares based on how much they buy petrol. I therefore consider it as an insult for anyone to argue that it is those who own jeeps and SUVs that enjoy the benefit of fuel subsidy. The rich actually enjoys more of the subsidy but the truth must not be sacrificed on the platter of insensitivity. They only want to play to the gallery by attempting to paint the picture that government is against Nigerians living above their income. Let me remind the anti-subsidy apostles that millions of hairdressers, bar owners, restaurateurs, taxi drivers, internet café owners, ferry operators, bakers, and technicians etc spread across the country all benefit from the fuel subsidy regime in their own little way.

With an increase in the pump price of petrol, the prices of goods and services will jump. This will force more Nigerians into poverty as their purchasing power will be weakened. Families that for instance survived on N10,000 monthly will need between N20,000 and N25,000 for same purpose. Those that are already deep inside the mud of poverty will in this circumstance have no better options than to either starve to death or take to crime or prostitution in order to survive. While governments in advanced countries are busy designing policies that will strengthen the purchasing power of their citizens, the direct opposite is the case in Nigeria.

No one is arguing the fact that money saved from the removal of fuel subsidy can be ploughed into creating new jobs. It will however turn out to be a case of one who cares more about quantity and not quality. Of what good is it for government to produce a poor and wretched working class? I am referring to a working class that cannot rely on their legitimate earnings to take care of the basic needs of their families. This is one reason why corruption is gaining ground in Nigeria. Apart from the unemployed, even the working class citizens are so poor that everybody wants to raise extra money to meet the basic demands of life. Corrupt practices are the usually the best bets.

Furthermore, let me remind the anti-subsidy apostles that the new roads, health care facilities, schools, and rail lines that will be built with proceeds saved from the removal of fuel subsidy will not offer free services. Frankly, these projects will make very little or no sense if the citizens are too poor to pay for the services they offer. I am challenging the governor of the Central Bank, Lamido Sanusi to tell Nigerians what it means to live below poverty line. He and his co-travelers believe a coin has only one side. That is the only reason why they can afford to reason the way they do. After all, they do not fuel their official jeeps and generators from their salaries.

Sanusi had last week warned the masses that Nigeria will collapse in two years if fuel subsidy was not removed. To me, this is the greatest lie of the century. The lie was only aimed at instilling fear and stampeding unsuspecting masses to surrender their conscience to a bunch of unfeeling technocrats that have cleverly misled the presidency to accept to remove fuel subsidy. Their real intention is to blindfold and rob poor Nigerian masses to pay a few rich ones like them in the corridors of power. I am convinced that they will not clamour for the removal of fuel subsidy if their salaries were between N18,000 and N50,000 monthly. 70% of Nigerians earn just this much. My only consolation is that the masses are no longer as ignorant as they were ten years ago. President Jonathan must not allow any person, no matter his or her pedigree to put a hedge between him and the electorates.

Without doubt, President remains the most widely accepted Nigerian head of government since independence. For the first time, Nigerians ignored religious, tribal, and party sentiments to vote for a man the electorates believe has answers to the problems of the country. Unfortunately, he has allowed some persons to poison the trust and confidence the masses had for him.

While the west, through the World Bank and the IMF will make us believe that subsidy regime is unhealthy, critical sectors of American and European economies are subsidized to protect their citizens. As you read this piece, the EU is subsidizing agriculture and fisheries. Other developed countries subsidize housing, health care, education, or transport. It is left for each country to choose critical areas to intervene. These interventions, in the form of subsidy are aimed at protecting the purchasing power of citizens.

History will hold the anti-subsidy apostles responsible if Nigerian masses are forced to go out on the streets to protest government’s insensitivity. With the little I know about Okonjo-Iweala and Sanusi; it will be difficult for them to swallow their pride. This is because they have invested the whole of their pride and ego in the subsidy campaign. The truth is that, Nigeria is bigger than every individual. I therefore urge them to make the noble choice by retracing their steps and join minds with the masses.

In the first place, we do not have any good reason to import fuel. The federal government, like is in other OPEC countries should ensure that our refineries are operating at maximum capacities. With this, the pump price of petroleum products will drop. At N65 per liter, there are already credible insinuations that Nigeria’s petrol is overpriced. Among all the OPEC countries, it is said that the pump price of petrol is highest in Nigeria. This has left a huge question mark on the mangers of our oil industry. While insiders will not want the president to give a thought to all of this information, he must not stop asking salient questions such as: why are our refineries not working at optimum capacities? Why is petrol cheaper in other OPEC countries? He can get genuine answers from his lieutenants. There is therefore the urgent need for him to assemble stakeholders from the private sector to proffer solutions to the lingering crisis bedeviling the nation’s oil sector.
In order not to see fuel subsidy removal as a do-or-die thing, government should look for alternative means of raising money to service its budget. It can do this by reducing the number, salaries and allowances of government officials and their over-bloated aides. In addition to strengthening the anti-corruption agencies, a Wealth Verification (WV) legislation should be put in place to compel citizen to disclose their sources of wealth. Whoever that wants to build or buy any property worth N5m and above should first be compelled by legislation to file documents with the anti-graft agencies detailing the sources of the fund. This will make the job of the anti-graft agencies easier.

While in the developed countries, the rich make major contributions to the development of national economy, same cannot be said of Nigeria. All of the nation's transformation agendas have been built on the frail backs of poor Nigerian masses. The time has come for the rich among us to contribute to the transformational agenda of the present administration. From henceforth, a 5% annual national development tax should be placed on every luxury car, water craft, or mansion costing N5m and above. Local and foreign air tickets and accommodation in 3/5 star hotels should also attract a 5% national development tax. Through this way, the wealthy among us can be specifically targeted to contribute to national development. I have no doubt that Nigeria will save more than N1.3 trillion annually if the above suggestions are embraced. Poor and unemployed Nigerian should be spared further hardship that will arise from the planned fuel subsidy removal. Those in government must learn how to appreciate the feelings of the masses.
In advising the president, co-opted technocrats must bear in mind all that were promised the electorates during the campaign season. In case they do not know, the president promised to stand with the masses-not the rich, Okonjo-Iweala, Lamido Sanusi, World Bank, or IMF. This is one simple way most technocrats destroy political leaders. We must not stand by and allow them destroy President Jonathan! If we do, we would end up hurting ourselves.

FUEL SUBSIDY IMPASSE: WHY THE PRESIDENT MUST SACK OKONJO-IWEALA NOW

It has been very clear right from the onset that the federal government’s fiscal plan of withdrawing fuel subsidy next year is not the idea of President Goodluck Jonathan. Nevertheless, he will have to bear whatever consequences that may arise from it. This is the major reason why the president must ignore the minority clan of well-heeled elites and stand with the Nigerian masses like he promised during the campaign season. To do this, President Jonathan would have to quickly separate reality from cheap logic as being postulated by some of his lieutenants in the corridors of power. Like the president himself observed shortly before the nomination of his cabinet, different people are in government for diverse reasons. While some are for service, others for personal gains. There are still some who seek power just to protect the interests or agendas of third party organizations. Of greater worry are those who stay in government to deliberately give counsels that will pitch the people against government. Quite frankly, the suggestion that government removes fuel subsidy as contained in the Medium Term Expenditure Framework for 2012 is one of them.

This writer does not dismiss the fact that there are gains to be made from the removal of fuel subsidy. Nevertheless, it is quite cheerless to note that the nation’s fiscal policy formulators and team of economic advisers have declined to accept the naked fact that a coin does not have only one side. This has caused them not to acknowledge that Nigeria’s socio-economic framework is still too fragile to bear the additional burdens that will come with the removal of fuel subsidy. The burden will come in the form of a weakened purchasing power of the middle and low income classes of workers because the prices of transportation, house rent, foodstuff, education, and health care services among others will respond to the jump in the price of fuel. Sadly, some persons either in government or heeled enough to buy fuel even at N200 a liter have been shouting on roof tops that the federal government removed subsidy on diesel in 2009 and Nigeria did not collapse. On the strength of this, they argue that nothing damaging would happen even if the same thing is done to petrol. Apart from displaying crass misunderstanding of the fundamentals of political governance, the problem with this opinion is that its promoters have deliberately refused to appreciate the major causes of poverty, disease, and crime in Nigeria over the last decade.

It is a fact that the increase in the pump price of diesel in 2009 jumped the cost of transportation. It naturally displaced economic permutations because most manufacturers and entrepreneurs rely mainly on diesel-powered generators and trucks to move their goods from factories to their distribution outlets. As expected, the additional cost brought about by the sharp increase in the cost of transportation was effortlessly tied on the neck of consumers. The prices of finished goods and services quickly climbed up the ladder. Almost immediately, most Nigerians were unable to meet the basic needs of their families owing to the weakening of their purchasing power. For instance, families that survived on N10,000 monthly now needed between N15,000 and N20,000 because the price of almost every product or services that had something to do with diesel had jumped in response to prevailing market forces. The above picture is also an appropriate response to the argument by government that the money saved from the withdrawal of fuel subsidy would be invested in infrastructural development.

It is important to point out here that no responsible government will afford to consciously weaken the purchasing power of the citizens in order to develop her infrastructure. Removing fuel subsidy to raise money to develop critical national infrastructure can be likened to a father that sacrificed his son to make money.

Poverty is growing in many developing countries, including Nigeria because attention is not given to the purchasing power of the citizens. Poverty is judged by the level of weakness of the purchasing power of citizens. Unfortunately, our fiscal policy formulators and economic advisers believe job creation is the only way to reduce poverty. There would still be poverty even now that national minimum wage is N18,000 per month. This is because, even N50,000 would not be enough to meet the basic needs of an average Nigerian family of five: father, mother, and three children. These basic needs include feeding, shelter, transportation, education, health care, and socials. It would therefore be suicidal for any government to ignore reality and continue to blindly pursue western crafted fiscal policies. It would be shocking for many to learn that in 2010, the European Union spent a whooping €57 billion on agricultural development programme. Of this amount, €39 billion was spent on direct subsidies. A total of 40% of EU’s budget goes to Agricultural and fisheries subsidies. Who is fooling who? The World Bank and IMF are fooling Africans. If advanced democracies do not subsidize fuel, they would subsidize agriculture, housing, transport, or health care. It is left for every government to identify the critical sector to intervene. Frankly, it would be wide of the mark for Nigeria to remove fuel subsidy because Britain or the United did so. Unfortunately, our fiscal policy formulators and economic experts are mere copy-cats. Perhaps, this was the reason why the late afro-beat icon, Fela Anikulapo Kuti asked Africans to follow western polices with caution.

As much as the development of critical national infrastructure is important, deliberate fiscal policies must also be developed side-by-side to strengthen the purchasing power of the citizens. In addition to the creation of new jobs, the removal of fuel subsidy will enable government build more roads, schools, and hospitals etc. We must however accept the fact that citizens will still pay for services rendered in the new hospitals and schools that will be built with money saved from the withdrawal of fuel subsidy. The transporters that will use the new roads and rail lines will not keep fares down because they were built with money saved from the removal of fuel subsidy. With the weakening of the purchasing power of citizens, poverty will not allow the masses to enjoy the benefits of the new infrastructure government intends to develop.

It is not healthy for a people to forget their history too quickly. The West is not happy that Africa ran away with political independence so soon. Colonization was mainly the exploitation of human and material resources of weak nations to protect the economies of world powers. Owing largely to worldwide censure of obnoxious political cultures, Western democracies have now found it convenient to hide behind the veil of World Bank and IMF to deny developing countries economic independence. Political independence without economic independence is as bad as colonialism. It is whispered in international circles that Africa’s economic independence will spell doom for the economies of Europe and America. This is one strong reason why African political leaders must be careful with whatever that comes out of the World Bank and IMF. It must however be noted that most Africans do not even know that they are being used to destroy the economies of their own countries. One of such person is Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, the Coordinating minister of the Economy and minister of Finance. In one of my earlier articles on fuel subsidy removal, I had described Okonjo-Iweala as “a patriot blinded by the West.” She is indeed a patriot but an involuntary victim of Western manipulations. I came to this conclusion after a very careful consideration of a wide range of issues bothering on the fundamental essence of political governance.

Good governance is the road that leads to economic growth and political stability. A prominent feature of good governance is mass participation. Because of exigencies, it will not be convenient for citizens to vote on every government policy. The masses are therefore left with no better option than to invest their confidence in elected and appointed officials. Ordinarily, these officials are supposed to protect the wider interests of the society. This has never been the case. Most elected and appointed officials simply ignore the feelings of the people and follow their shallow and narrow minds. This is responsible for why several government policies are anti-people. The planned removal of fuel subsidy is one of such policies. It would do the Nigerian masses more harm than good. The elites do not have much to lose.

One thing has become clear following the debate that has trailed the decision of the federal government to remove fuel subsidy next year. There is no enough money to sustain the nation’s socio-economic framework. Unfortunately, the well-motivated fiscal policy formulators and hoard of economic experts have run dry of ideas to help raise the needed funds to keep the nation afloat. This problem is caused by their refusal to accept the open fact that a coin does not have only one side. They always see and reason based on the side of the coin they are facing. Little wonder why only a few wealthy Nigerians who can afford to buy a liter of fuel even at N200 are supporting calls for the removal of fuel subsidy. I am very convinced that they would all sing a different song if they earn N100,000 a month. By their mien, those calling for the removal of fuel subsidy have joined spirit with Cain who queried God for expecting him to be responsible for his brother’s safety or good.

It is the fundamental responsibility of government to see that the welfare of the citizens is protected through deliberate policies with human face. The planned removal of fuel subsidy would not have human face as far as the poor and hapless Nigerian masses are concerned. Government should rather look for other means of raising money to fund the nation’s socio-economic framework. In the last five decades, it has been the low and middle class that have carried the burden of national transformation, leaving the wealthy few to swim in their typically questionable affluence. Government can raise up to N1 trillion by imposing 2% annual tax (for 5 years from date of purchase) on every private car above N3 million, 2% tax on every private residential house costing more than N7 million, 1% on each local flight ticket/2% on each international flight ticket, 2% tax on accommodation in luxury hotels, and 50% reduction in the salaries and allowances of elected and appointed government officials.

Because of the hot political wind that is blowing across Africa, Nigerian masses have been weaned and would not be ready to tolerate further abuses of their corporate rights by government. Going by the colour of anger being expressed by many, it is very likely that the masses would raise their voices against the Goodluck Jonathan administration if it goes ahead with the planned removal of fuel subsidy next year. This is the ultimate desire of the West. They want Nigeria and the rest of Africa to be continuously enmeshed in political turmoil in order to sabotage her economic recovery efforts. Already, the United States believes that Nigeria will disintegrate by 2015. Seen and unseen hands have been positioned to turn the masses against President Jonathan. In return, the Niger Delta people will be instigated to cry fowl and forced to rock the foundation that carries the destiny of corporate Nigeria. This is the wish of the developed West. It is for this reason that President Goodluck Jonathan should sack the Coordinating minister of the Economy and minister of Finance for not properly reading the hand writing on the wall. She clearly has no answers to the economic problems of the country. Nigeria needs indigenous solutions to our national problems.

The fuel subsidy culture is a shame. As the world’s sixth largest producer of crude oil, Nigeria does not have any excuse to import fuel to service local demands. The federal government can end fuel subsidy by making our four refineries work at optimum capacities. Of all the OPEC countries, the pump price of petrol is costliest in Nigeria. Why is this so? Is there anything other OPEC countries are doing that we are not? This is the question our nation’s fiscal policy formulators and economic experts should have asked themselves. Instead, they are pouncing on poor and hungry masses to cover up their incompetence. President Jonathan must sack Okonjo-Iweala now before she puts him and Nigeria in serious trouble. This country is bigger than any one single individual.

Nigeria belongs to Nigerians. The oil and gas wealth belongs to Nigerians as well. We therefore have every corporate right to enjoy the benefits of oil and gas just like citizens of other OPEC countries are doing. Let us find out how is it that a liter of petrol sells for about N18 in Saudi Arabia and just N9 in Venezuela.

The fact that our oil industry is fowled by corruption is no longer in doubt. What is in doubt is the desire or ability of government to tackle the cabal that has for so long been milking the Nigeria people dry through fuel subsidy. This writer does not however support the idea of punishing the masses through the withdrawal of fuel subsidy as an option to fight the cabal that is hiding behind subsidy to milk the nation of trillions of Naira. Making our refineries work at optimum capacity is the best way to end fuel subsidy. The pump price of fuel will climb down below N65 if petrol is refined locally. Functional refineries will help to stimulate complementary economic streams. Furthermore, let us study the Venezuela model and do same in Nigeria. Sack Okonjo-Iweala now! She has no answers to the problems of our national economy.

KALI GWEGWE
2, Greenvilla-Customs Link Road
Biogbolo-Epie
Yenagoa
Bayelsa State
Nigeria
08064074810

GIVING FUEL SUBSIDY A BAD NAME

I have, over the last twenty-four months written severally on the need for government to maintain the current fuel subsidy regime. My main argument has been that Nigeria’s socio-economic framework is still too fragile to absorb whatever shock that may arise from further increases in the pump price of petroleum products. I am not unaware of the fact that the income and welfare of Nigerians have not improved for a long time.

As at March 2009, the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) reported that about 10m Nigerians were unemployed. This figure is disputable. It reported a mere 19.7 employment rate. Sadly, unemployment has continued to be on a steady rise in the country owing to a number of critical factors. The volume of economic expansion has not been robust enough to correct the causes of growing unemployment in the country. Some of the major factors contributing to high unemployment figures are pandemic corruption in private and public sectors, high cost of doing business, poor power system, insecurity, lack of access to financing, high interest rate, and dilapidated public infrastructure among others. All of these have in turn helped to promote the negative culture of poverty, hunger, crime, disease, and underdevelopment.

It was in the midst of this sad reality that Goodluck Jonathan contested and won the 2011 presidential election. For one very simple reason, Nigerian masses wholeheartedly welcomed with both hands, the transformational agenda of President Goodluck Jonathan. It was aimed at alleviating the long time suffering of more than 60% of the nation’s population that literally sell their own blood in order to provide food, clothing, housing, transportation, education, and health care for members of their families.

The transformational agenda started well with a “zero tolerance for corruption” posture. For the first time, a large cache of “untouchables” were arrested and docked for issues bothering on graft. Deliberate efforts are also being made by government to diversify the nation’s economy through practical steps to discontinue our reliance on the unpredictable revenue from oil and gas. Another highpoint of the transformational agenda of the Jonathan-led administration is the renewed vigour towards fixing the very important power sector through increased funding and other complimentary instruments and policies. To crown it all, government found it wise to increase the basic salaries of workers after coming to the realization that the nation’s present socio-economic framework was too weak to support majority of households in the country meet their statutory obligations.

Owing to the ignoble activities of a few but powerful persons working with foreign collaborators, four of the nation’s refineries located in Rivers, Delta, and Kaduna States were systematically sabotaged in order to promote a needless fuel importation business. As the world’s sixth largest producer of crude oil, we have no reason to import petroleum products at all. As a matter of fact, Nigeria is importing petrol and kerosene today because government has lost the battle of “will” to a tiny group of people that feed on the common blood of Nigerians. Instead of going after these enemies of the nation, government is being stampeded into harassing hapless citizens through the arrogant attempts to remove fuel subsidy.
Signs suggesting that government have lost the soul of the nation to a small clan of greedy and heartless Nigerians and their foreign accomplices emerged when the governor of the Central Bank, Mallam Lamido Sanusi called for the immediate withdrawal of fuel subsidy shortly after resuming office. His major plank of argument was that only a “tiny cabal” was benefiting from the huge subsidy paid by government. I strongly disagree with Sanusi’s opinion.

It is quite regrettable that the CBN governor will in a cheap attempt to push his opinion through, dismiss and bury the fact that millions of Nigerians benefit from the subsidy government pay on petroleum products. For the few people like him that does not dip hands into their bottomless pockets to buy petrol, he may find it convenient to deny the benefits of fuel subsidy. This kind of attitude displays the mien of the average top government official. The truth is that, there are millions of Nigerians, including bus/taxi drivers, small scale enterprises, Okada riders, hair dressers, restaurateurs, hoteliers, and even religious organizations that save about N90 for every liter of petrol they buy. No person or amount of propaganda can drown this fact in a pool of insensitivity of a few well-heeled government officials. A lie will always remain a lie, no matter who tells it. This clarification is very important because of the high amount of respect President Jonathan has for his aides and other top government functionaries.

Sometimes, government officials acting the script of third parties, can deliberately give counsels that will put their principals in problem. The president should therefore take heed of this and ignore any policy that will put more holes in the pockets of ordinary Nigerians. In everything, let him stand with the masses. Events around the globe have shown that power actually belongs to the masses. I am tempted to believe that the enemies of Nigerian democracy (they are many) will take advantage of the expected uproar that will greet the removal of fuel subsidy next year to incite the masses to ask for the resignation of the president. These are some of the reasons why the president must be very cautious with the suggestions he receives from his advisers, ministers, and other top government functionaries.

The unilateral position of Sanusi concerning the removal of fuel subsidy was emboldened by the coming of Dr. Okonjo-Iweala as the Minister Finance in August, 2011. She too has been in the forefront of calls for the removal of fuel subsidy. I am not surprised owing to her background as a senior World Bank staff. The World Bank is a tool used by the West to promote and protect their economy. Unknown to many, the economic independence of Africa will be a threat to the West. They will hide behind any veil to destabilize the continent’s polity and economy. Some of these veils include Austerity Measures, Structural Adjustment Program, and Currency Devaluation.

Currently, attention has been shifted to the National Assembly. The minister of Finance is investing so much energy trying to convince the legislators on the need to remove fuel subsidy. Let them not be deceived by paper logic. Governance is more of a practical thing than paper logic. They should not be swayed by the beautiful pictures Okonjo-Iweala usually paints about Europe and America. If Nigerian workers earns as much as their contemporaries in those countries, nobody will complain about buying fuel even at N200 per liter.

Sadly, the latest call for the removal of fuel subsidy came from the Nigeria Governors Forum (NGF). According to its chairman and governor of Rivers State, Rotimi Amaechi; the fuel subsidy was enriching only a few people. I strongly condemn the series of lapses that have led to Nigeria becoming a petrol-import-dependent country. However, there is no way those who import petroleum products will not make profit. It is the huge profits these importers make that cause Sanusi and Amaechi to argue that only a tiny number of Nigerians are enjoying the benefits of fuel subsidy. This is a very faulty way to analyze issues and draw conclusion. It will be too wrong for government to sacrifice Nigerian masses just to “fight” those who milk Nigeria through the subsidy they receive from importing petroleum products to service the high demands in the local market.

There is also this suspicion that some persons and companies involved in the importation of petroleum products do collaborate with some government officials to engage in sharp practices that is costing the country trillions of Naira. There are also cases of smuggling of petroleum products out of the country. All of the factors enumerated above are reasons why the CBN governor, NGF, and minister of finance want fuel subsidy removed. If our refineries are working at optimum capacity, we would have no reason to import fuel and spend huge amount on subsidies. The Nigerian masses should not be forced to pay for the inefficiencies of government officials and organizations.

One fact that has emerged clearly from all the calls for the removal of fuel subsidy points to one direction. The nation’s fiscal policy formulators and advisers do not have regard for the Nigerian masses. They are therefore easily persuaded to take a pro-elitist stand each time the need for national transformation arises. In fact, they see the masses as inconsequential in the greater Nigerian Project. This is one strong reason why President Jonathan must be quick to dismiss whatever idea or suggestion that will cause him not to stand with the masses.

It is also a huge fact that the nation’s policy formulators, special advisers, and senior special assistants to the president are either lazy or ran out of ideas. The only option left for them is to take hold of the jugular of hapless masses by rooting for the removal of fuel subsidy. They see it as a short cut to fixing the nation’s frail socio-economic framework. Like I have suggested elsewhere, the phase has come for government to make the affluent bear the burden of nation’s transformational agenda for the first time in the history of the country. Since independence in 1960, it has been the suffering masses that carry the burden of the nation’s political and economic experimentations.
There is no doubt about the fact that the withdrawal of fuel subsidy will save billions of Naira for government to invest in other critical areas. However, the other side of the coin is that majority of Nigerians are too poor to buy a liter of fuel at N150. These are persons that earn less than $2 a day. It is with this $2 that they pay for the feeding, rent, clothing, education, and medical expenses of their family members. Withdrawing fuel subsidy at this time will definitely increase the level of poverty in Nigeria. The gains of the new minimum wage of N18,000 will be rubbished by the hike in the pump price of fuel.

Like I have suggested in my other write-ups on this same issue, those pushing for the removal of petroleum subsidy would sing a different song if they were earning even N100,000 a month. Many persons in the “president’s team” are not on the same page with him. Ordinarily, their opinions are supposed to be shaped by the pledge of the president, which is to “stand with the masses.”

Instead of strangulating the poor and hapless masses to raise additional money to service the nation’s socio-economic framework, government should pay more attention to the development of the non-oil sector of the economy. This should be done by energizing the private sector to perform at optimum capacity. This will however mean having a robust power groundwork, cheap access to credit facilities, lower interest rates, improved security of lives and property, friendly tax regime, and a sound transport infrastructure among others. With these fiscal policies, the economy will pick up and help create jobs and improve the welfare of the citizenry. It is at this point that government can contemplate the removal of fuel subsidy. By then, the nation’s socio-economic framework would be able to absorb the shocks that would come with it.

Calls for fuel subsidy removal: How not to help the president

Never in the history of Nigeria has any president or military ruler enjoyed the overwhelming support of the low and middle class as Goodluck Jonathan does. These two socio-economic classes make up over 80% of the Nigerian population. The interpretation of this analysis is that Goodluck Jonathan is Nigeria’s first “people’s president.” Several reasons are responsible for this political development. However, let me dwell on the fundamental factor.

After decades of uncertainty, Nigerians have come to accept democracy as the best form of government. Up till 1999, a greater percentage of Nigerians preferred military dictatorship to civilian administration. The foundation of this aberration is not far-fetched. Previous democratic experiments crashed on the heads of hapless Nigerian masses. It happened that most politicians simply used their privileged positions in government to pursue personal, tribal, and religious interests. This sad political development went on to rubbish the fair spirit of democracy. Soon, corruption, tribalism, religious intolerance, political thuggery, and decaying public infrastructure drowned the fertile expectations of the hoard of the unemployed, middle and low income Nigerians. What followed this distasteful reality was not unexpected. People started clamouring for change. Sadly however, this change came not through the ballot boxes, but barrel of guns. At first, it never mattered much to the masses. People were just interested in a change; not minding the colour or taste.

Just in no distant time, falsehood grew weak and collapsed on the laps of military dictators. These despots spoke in tongues that resembled those of saints. Despite the quality of propaganda they unleashed on harmless and unsuspecting Nigerians; all their lies could not be turned into truth. It however cost Nigeria the sweat and blood of some patriotic citizens for the unsuspecting masses to come to the realization that democracy was superior to dictatorship. The important point to note is that the problem with Nigerian democracy was traditional. It had something to do with our peculiar political attitude.

In countries where democracy is working, it is the political leaders that have made it so. This directly rests the blame for Nigeria’s poor democratic culture on the shoulders of the nation’s political class, which have continued to ignore the fundamental fact that democracy is all about identifying and finding solutions to the needs of society. These needs include peace, security of lives and property, economic growth, infrastructural development, and social welfare.

It was in this state in the political history of Nigeria that Dr. Goodluck Jonathan came into the scene. From every available indication, Jonathan’s emergence is more of a divine interjection than human connections. President Jonathan is no doubt Nigeria’s first unassuming head of government. He is intelligent, humble, hardworking, and a God-trusting personality. His captainship of Aso Rock defied many national traditions and norms. Apart from the fact that he is the first PhD holder to mount Nigeria’s presidency, Jonathan is the only minority to have been entrusted with the nation’s driving seat. His famous “I was not born rich” speech endeared him to many voters, weeks leading to the April 2011 presidential election. Millions of ordinary Nigerians, including myself hurriedly saw Jonathan as “our man.” This was a man that went to school without sandals or bag to carry his books. He slept under an electric fan only at the University of Port Harcourt.

It never took many suffering Nigerians more than ten seconds to pick Jonathan as their presidential choice. The outcome of the 2011 presidential election did not come as a surprise to many. Even the few that expressed doubt about his chances did so based on their fears about the towering ethnic and religious factors in Nigerian politics. They therefore wondered how Jonathan could survive an election that will be decided by tribe and creed. It is gladdening that Nigeria has crossed the bridge of parochial sentiments.

The outcome of the 2011 presidential election was indeed a coup against the few but powerful enemies of Nigeria. The down-trodden masses decided to join forces to say no to the dirty and old order, where they are used and hurriedly dumped after oiling the ambitions of a few smooth-tongued politicians. Even in the midst of the darkest night, one thing has become very clear. Nigerians are tired of bad political leadership. President Jonathan appreciates this fact too. Unfortunately, not many in his team are on the same page with him. This is not only dangerous for him as an individual, but a big threat to the culture of democracy in Nigeria. The president must therefore do everything within his powers to moderate the opinions and counsels of his advisers and aides.

The greatest problem political leaders worldwide face is in the selection of a “winning team.” This is responsible for the many cases where government officials reason and walk in different directions. In such cases, the president usually fails to deliver on his mandate. Like President Jonathan himself confessed shortly before the nomination of his cabinet, people seek political offices for different reasons. While some are for service, others for personal gains. There are still some who seek power just to protect the interests or agendas of third party organisations. Quite frankly, it is very difficult to separate the “clean” from the “dirty” because they all wear the same faces and robes.

To help differentiate between the “clean” and “dirty”, political leaders are expected to listen to the opinions of their advisers, but strongly consider the interests of the masses. This is the secret of successful political leaders. Very few government officials will be ingenious enough to climb down from their Olympian heights to consider the feelings of the unemployed or low income earners. Their reasoning is always unilateral. The beauty of democracy is not in how sweet a song is, but how many people “feel” the lyrics. The truth is that democracy is all about numbers. The majority may be wrong in some cases. They cannot be wrong all the time. Nigerian masses are indeed right in asking for the continuation of fuel subsidy at least for now.

It is a huge fact that many of those who voted for President Jonathan are card-carrying members of political parties other than the People’s Democratic Party (PDP). This is one good reason why the president must ignore every temptation and continue to absorb criticisms from the opposition. This will make him a better president than all his predecessors. No doubt, criticisms will come from labour, NGOs, cultural, and even faith-based organisations. It is also true that some persons and organisations simply find it fashionable to criticize every government policy or programme. This is wrong. Ordinarily, criticisms should be constructive.

However, one very important fact to consider is that criticisms of government policies and programs usually arise from isolated issues. For instance, labor and civil society organisations have vowed to resist any attempt to increase the pump price of petrol following the announcement by the minister of Finance, Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala that that government is planning to remove petrol subsidy soon. Protests also greeted the revelation that electricity tariff will be reviewed upward early next year. It is not as if these government policies are bad. The problem lies in the fact that in developing policies and frameworks, most government officials usually refuse to look at all the sides of the coin. Every policy must take into consideration associated factors such as culture, income strength, percentage of unemployment, and level of poverty. Take for instance calls for the removal of fuel subsidy. Those making this call hinge their argument mainly on the fact that other developed countries have saved a lot of money through the withdrawal of fuel subsidy. Unfortunately, the proponents of fuel subsidy removal have forgotten that the least citizens of those countries earn is as much as $130 a day. One cannot for any reason compare this to a country where many earn less that $2 a day. They have deliberately ignored the fact that the level of unemployment and poverty are still very high in Nigeria.

There is no doubt about the fact that the withdrawal of fuel subsidy will save billions of Naira for government to invest in other critical areas. However, the other side of the coin is that majority of Nigerians are too poor to buy a litre of fuel even at N65. These are persons that earn less than $2 a day. It is with this $2 that they pay for the feeding, rent, clothing, education, and medical expenses of their family members. Withdrawing fuel subsidy at this time will definitely increase the level of poverty in Nigeria. The gains of the new minimum wage of N18,000 will be rubbished by the hike in the pump price of fuel. Like I have suggested in my other write-ups on this same issue, those pushing for the removal of petroleum subsidy would sing a different song if they were earning even N100,000 a month. Many persons in the “president’s team” are not on the same page with him. Ordinarily, their opinions are supposed to be shaped by the pledge of the president, which is to “stand with the masses.”

This brings to the fore how ministers, special advisers, senior special assistants, and other aides are not helping the president to “stand with the masses.” Just as there are many ways to kill a rat, there also many ways they can help the president succeed without hurting the masses. Since from independence, hapless Nigerian masses have been forced to carry the burden of national economic transformation agendas, leaving the elites free as eagles in a clear sky. Like is usually done in western democracies, formulators of fiscal policies should turn the heat on the wealthy this time around. Government should introduce heavy taxes on luxury cars, mansions, and all imported goods that can be produced locally. Government should also reduce the salaries and allowances of elected officials and political appointees. More than that, the fight against corruption should be taken to the zenith.

Furthermore, government should pay more attention to the development of the non-oil sector of the economy. This should be done by energizing the private sector to perform at optimum capacity. This will however mean having a robust power groundwork, cheap access to credit facilities, lower interest rates, improved security of lives and property, friendly tax regime, and a sound transport infrastructure among others. With these fiscal policies, the economy will pick up and help create jobs and improve the welfare of the citizenry. It is at this point that government can contemplate the removal of fuel subsidy. By then, the nation’s socio-economic framework would be able to absorb the shocks that would come with it.

It is a shame that the world’s sixth largest producer of crude oil is importing fuel for local consumption. It shows that something is wrong with us as a nation. Instead of joining forces with the ministry of Petroleum Resources to make our refineries work at optimum capacity, the Minister of Finance, Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala and Governor of Central Bank, Mallam Sanusi Lamido Sanusi see the removal of petroleum subsidy as a magic wand that will help provide the bulk of the money Nigeria needs to service her socio-economic masterplan. They should look elsewhere to raise money. The Nigerian masses have seen enough this last fifty years! This is very important because fuel is one thing that everybody uses directly or indirectly. There is no doubt that any increase in the pump price of fuel will prompt the upward review of transport fares, school fees, house rent, food stuff, and health care services.

Okonjo-Iweala: A Patriot Blinded By The West

In one of my books, “Western Democrats in Glass parliament”, published in 2000, I have argued that western democracies will never tolerate Africa’s economic independence owing to the direction of their national ideologies. It is no secret that the economies of many western countries are energized by the inability of Africa’s political leaders to deploy sound fiscal policies aimed at stimulating rapid economic growth. This sad development has continued to keep Africa as an export- dependent economy despite the fact that the bulk of the raw materials used in the manufacture and production of finished goods imported by African countries are sourced from the continent.

There is no doubt about the fact that Nigeria is blessed with great brains and patriots. Among them are Wole Soyinka, Dora Akunyili, Oby Ezekwesili, Lamido Sanusi, and Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala among others. What is in doubt is whether all of them are aware that the developed democracies will be too willing to do anything under the sun to promote and protect their national economies. Colonisation, the Cold War, civil wars, tribal conflicts, and the several international humanitarian/peace-keeping missions are all tools used by western democracies to secure economic victories over the African continent.

It has become evident that both the World Bank and IMF are tools in the hands of western democracies. As long as African intellectuals refuse to accept this overflowing truth, their brains and patriotism will do the continent very little or no good at all. Is it not surprising that the many Africans in diaspora have not been able to make meaningful differences whenever they are given the opportunities to serve their countries in various capacities?

Perhaps, I should also point out here that Structural Adjustment Program, Currency Devaluation, and Subsidy Removal are examples of some of the pills western democracies such as the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Italy, and Spain prescribe as cure for the continent’s economic problems. In actual sense, they hide behind these false fiscal policies to cripple the economies of African countries. As part of the plot, they task international institutions such as the World Bank, IMF, and world class universities to recruit the best brains from the continent. These intellectuals are hurriedly thought the Core Values of human and economic management. This is aimed at arousing the patriotic fiber in them. At this point, they are drugged (paid far more than their contemporaries at home), blinded (unable to recognize the evil in their employers), and given a pair of “western eyes.” At this point, these intellectuals no longer see things from the African perspective. They both reason and look at Africa with “western eyes.”

It must be noted that every society has its own peculiarities. As a result of this, what has worked in country A may not necessarily work in country B. Africans wearing “western eyes” will never realize this fact even though it is profusely clear. For instance, the governor of Nigeria’s Central, Lamido Sanusi and Minister of Finance, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala are all bitterly agitating for the removal of fuel subsidy simply because same has worked elsewhere in America and Europe. Since they are wearing “western eyes”, they have failed to realize that: (a) Unemployment figures are very low in America and Europe (b) An average American or European worker earn as much as $130 or N19,500 per day. With this kind of salary, Nigerians can afford to buy fuel even at N150 per liter.

There is no doubt that both Okonjo-Iweala and Lamido Sanusi will not try stampeding government into removing fuel subsidy if they were earning monthly salaries of N50,000 per month. While tens of millions of Nigerians are earning less than $2 daily, they go home with outrageous salaries and allowances. One had expected them to suggest better ways of putting the nation’s economy back on track. The poor masses cannot continue to sacrifice the little they have while the few well-heeled federal government officials are allowed to laugh away in the comfort of their cars, offices, and houses each time government decides to find solutions to the problems of the country. Okonjo-Iweala and Sanusi do not need to be reminded that the removal of fuel subsidy will translate into the sharp upward movement of the prices of goods and services such as food, rent, transportation, education, health care, and building materials among others.

But if one may ask: What is wrong in subsidizing fuel? Are the beneficiaries of fuel subsidy not Nigerians whose interests the president, ministers, legislators, governors, and governor of the Central Bank all swore to protect? As a matter of fact, owing to the collapse of the culture of sound political leadership, fuel subsidy has turned out to be the only sure way Nigerian masses can benefit from the oil and gas revenue accruing the nation. There is no citizen that does not benefit from fuel subsidy direct or indirectly. Removing it will therefore bring out the fire in the heart of millions of suffering Nigerian masses. This is what the west is looking for. President Goodluck Jonathan must therefore not allow American and European powers to tie his hands behind him and plunge the country into the abyss of socio-economic instability. The west does not want Africa to gain economic independence. It is only through orchestrated socio-economic instabilities that they can achieve such evil plots. This is the more reason why despite all the noise they make about corruption; American and European banks still accept billions of stolen dollars from Africa.

With the way Okonjo-Iweala and Sanusi are going about the fuel subsidy removal debate, I am pretty sure that they will one day ask the federal government to stop spending billions of Naira to construct roads. While our fiscal policy formulators and advisers are busy giving subsidy a bad name, agricultural subsidies accounts for more than 40% of the total budget of the EU. Who is fooling who?

Hugo Chavez is definitely on my mind. The time has come for President Jonathan to call all the anti-people members of his team to order or fire them out rightly. There is enough evidence to show that the nation’s fiscal policy formulators and advisers are out of touch with the vision of the present administration. They have clearly run dry of ideas. Spending N600b to assist Nigerians buy fuel at an affordable price is not a crime. Rather than call for the removal of fuel subsidy, the anti-subsidy apostles should task their brains and think of better ways to increase the revenue receipt of the nation without worsening the already bad plight of ordinary Nigerians. In this regard, government should be serious with the war against graft, reduce the monetary rewards of elected officials and political appointees, stabilize electricity to expand industrial production, increase investments in the non-oil/gas sectors, improve basic socio-economic infrastructure such as roads/railway/waterways, provide affordable quality health care service, and provide free quality education from primary to secondary levels. All of these will help energize and expand the national economy. With this, the likes of Okonjo-Iweala and Sanusi will not have any reason to bother about how much government spends to subsidize fuel.

More than that, concerted efforts must be put in motion to stop the continuous importation of petroleum products. This is part of the wider agenda of western democracies. They simply coopt a few willing Nigerians to ensure that our refineries do not work at optimum capacities. With this, they will be able to import crude from us and sell petrol and kerosene to us with a very appreciable profit margin. The same thing applies to the power sector. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala should wake up from her slumber and return the “western eyes” she is wearing. Also help Lamido Sanusi do same.