Blind support has destroyed many political leaders in the past. Sometimes, these support come in the form of ethnic, religious, or political patronage. I Thank God that President Goodluck Jonathan has finally realised this potent fact and decided to listen to the masses by exhibiting the rare courage of a true democrat by shifting grounds with regards the pricing of petrol. Unlike many may think, listening to the voice of reason does not in any way portray weakness. It rather gives beauty and strength to the political culture of democracy.
Right from the beginning when government announced the official withdrawal of fuel subsidy, I had come out to say, those who are appauding the decision do not love President Jonathan. I was convinced that this was not how democratic political leadership should be. There must be a linkage between vision and the people. The reason for my opinion is this: Democracy is centered around the people. Everything must therefore be done to protect the interests of the masses, most of whom cannot afford just one decent meal a day. The bitter truth is that the socio-economic framework of Nigeria is still too weak to sustain a further weakening of the purchasing power of the majority of citizens. The upward adjustment in the pump price of petrol by over 100% unarguably distorted the expenditure calculations of every Nigerian family, leaving the poor among us to hang on to gloom for survival.
According to statistics announced by the CBN governor, Mallam Lamido Sanusi, over 70% of Nigerians are living below poverty line. It meant that these Nigerians cannnot rely on their legitimate incomes to provide food, shelter, education, transport, and health care for their families. Apart from the problems of poor socio-economic infrastructure, the poverty situation in the country has been made worse by the high unemployment figures which is put at about 25%. Those supporting the withdrawal of fuel subsidy are not bothered about these facts. In most cases, they were simply carried away by government’s promises of what it intends to do with the money saved from the exercise. Others were touched by the opinion that it will help curb corruption. There is nothing wrong in all of these excepting the fact that they all failed to realise the consequences of ignoring the the prescription of the constituition in fighting corruption. Without doubt, the constitution is very clear about how to fight and punish corruption. It was therefore absurd for some persons, including Okonjo-Iweala and Lamido Sanusi to claim that members of the cabal are too powerful and cannot be tamed by the laws of the country. This is a shame. It was based on their wrong conviction that they advised the president to abandon the constitution and use the removal of subsidy to “punish” fuel importers that usually steal our common wealth in the name of fuel subsidy. This writer is glad that President Jonathan has identified this big lie and ordered the EFCC to investigate all fuel subsidy payments. This is the best way to deal with corruption- not using the masses as cannon-fodders.
My other argument was that it is government’s duty to keep our refineries working in order to avoid the importation of petroleoum products. Therefore, if it cannot do that, it should accept the burden of paying the subsidies and stop transferring the burden on the poor Nigerian masses. I had also argued that just as there are many ways to kill a rat, there are equally many ways to remove fuel subsidy. Of all the options, I had suggested that government pick that which will protect the interests of the 70% that are living below poverty line. Unfortunately, the option prescribes by Okonjo-Iweala and Lamido Sanusi was designed in line with the World Bank and IMF dictate. As in most instances with World Bank and IMF-prescribed fiscal policies, the 1st January announcement did not take into consideration the fact that over 100m Nigerians are waist deep inside the mud of poverty. It was for this reason I suggested that government choose a pro-masses option to remove fuel subsidy by ending the importation of fuel. No doubt, we will have no need to import petrol and pay subsidies if our refineries are working at full capacity. Nigerians should ignore the argument in some government quarters that our four existing refineries cannot produce to meet local consumption. This is a lie sponsored by the so-called cabal to mislead both government and the citizens of this country to validate the reason to continue importing and collecting subsidy for fuel imports.
While I hail President Jonathan for the exhibiting the courage of a true democrat, the Labour and civil society is encouraged to accept government’s offer with both hands. For one, those who stole our common wealth in the name of fuel subsidy will be brought to book. On the other hand, government should stop painting the shameful picture that it is incapable of stopping the cabal from looting our national treasury. All those involved in sharp practices, not minding their status in society should be made to face the law. This is one way government can win the confidence of Nigerians. No government; despite the genuine intentions of the leaders would succeed without the support of the people. I do not also want to believe that there are no credible Nigerians to keep the cabals at bay in handling the subsidy scheme while our refineries are being rehabilitated.
To all those who give blind support to political leaders based on ethnic, religious, or political reasons; I want to say the time has come for change. In shifting grounds, the president has practically confirmed the fact that the interests of masses are important to him. His aides and all those who claim to love him should not reason otherwise. In forming our opinions, let us always keep in mind our brothers and sisters that are deep inside the dirty mud of poverty. This is one way we can be our brothers’ keepers.
But above all, I want reiterate that many of President Jonathan’s aides are not of any help to him. Some of them are working to destroy him from inside. Some of these persons have sympathy for Boko Haram. Others simply give advises or prescribe fiscal policies that will pitch the masses against him. This is the reason why he must be careful.
Monday, January 16, 2012
Thursday, January 5, 2012
Fuel Subsidy: Reasons behind its removal
It is important that we understand why Government has decided to remove fuel subsidy.
Reason No. 1:
Government do not have the capacity to generate enough revenue to fund national budget. This is due to the fact that our economic experts and fiscal policy formulators are dry of ideas. If not so, there are many other ways to generate revenue without hurting the masses. The removal of fuel subsidy is killing the masses. Democratic governance is not all about Naira and Kobo. Let us think of better ways to fund national budget.
In this regard, government should reduce the size of governance, cut the salaries and allowances of elected and political office holders by 50%, introduce a Wealth Verification legislation, and tax the wealthy. Visit my blog http://nigeriademocracywatchtower.blogspot.com for more details on this issue.
Reason No. 2:
Government is unable to curb corruption in the oil sector. A minority but powerful cabal has taken over the NNPC and all its subsidiaries. This cabal actually decides the fate of Nigeria, since we depend on oil for national development. The cabal is so powerful that no one dares them. They have systematically ruined our refineries so as to promote the fuel-import business where they make billions of naira in illegal deals. Though, government is aware of this, there is no courage to confront them. The safest thing it could do was to remove subsidy. In doing this, government is using the masses as cannon fodders to fight corruption in the NNPC. This is wrong. We cannot afford to sacrifice the poor suffering masses to fight the cabal. We are all aware of the pains Nigerian masses are suffering owing to the jump in the prices of goods and services.
The palliatives as announced by government will not do much. This is because, Nigeria is still largely rural. This will make it impossible for the palliatives to get across. Take for instance the issue of 1,600 diesel powered buses that will be distributed across the country. Apart from the fact that many rural areas do not have roads that these buses will ply, who will regulate the fares that the transporters will charge since the loans will be paid back in five years time?
It is most painful that while other nations are designing fiscal policies that will strengthen the purchasing power of citizens, we are doing the direct opposite here in Nigeria.
The governor of the CBN, Lamido Sanusi said 70% of Nigerians are living below poverty line. Ironically, this same Sanusi believes that these poor Nigerians can withstand a further weakening of their purchasing power. My opinion is that Nigeria's socio-economic framework is still too weak to withstand any devaluation of the pocket-worth of the 70% poor Nigerians. Government should first fix the power problem, make our four refineries operate at optimum capacities, reduce corruption, and make our public infrastructures functional to stimulate economic growth. This will reduce poverty and create new jobs that will be sustainable.
I also do not agree that it is only the rich that benefit from fuel subsidy. We do not need to tell lies in order to make our argument look attractive. Based on the meager resources at their disposal, it is the poor that actually benefit more from the fuel subsidy. Now that it has been removed, we can appreciate the wisdom in my argument.
Reason No. 1:
Government do not have the capacity to generate enough revenue to fund national budget. This is due to the fact that our economic experts and fiscal policy formulators are dry of ideas. If not so, there are many other ways to generate revenue without hurting the masses. The removal of fuel subsidy is killing the masses. Democratic governance is not all about Naira and Kobo. Let us think of better ways to fund national budget.
In this regard, government should reduce the size of governance, cut the salaries and allowances of elected and political office holders by 50%, introduce a Wealth Verification legislation, and tax the wealthy. Visit my blog http://nigeriademocracywatchtower.blogspot.com for more details on this issue.
Reason No. 2:
Government is unable to curb corruption in the oil sector. A minority but powerful cabal has taken over the NNPC and all its subsidiaries. This cabal actually decides the fate of Nigeria, since we depend on oil for national development. The cabal is so powerful that no one dares them. They have systematically ruined our refineries so as to promote the fuel-import business where they make billions of naira in illegal deals. Though, government is aware of this, there is no courage to confront them. The safest thing it could do was to remove subsidy. In doing this, government is using the masses as cannon fodders to fight corruption in the NNPC. This is wrong. We cannot afford to sacrifice the poor suffering masses to fight the cabal. We are all aware of the pains Nigerian masses are suffering owing to the jump in the prices of goods and services.
The palliatives as announced by government will not do much. This is because, Nigeria is still largely rural. This will make it impossible for the palliatives to get across. Take for instance the issue of 1,600 diesel powered buses that will be distributed across the country. Apart from the fact that many rural areas do not have roads that these buses will ply, who will regulate the fares that the transporters will charge since the loans will be paid back in five years time?
It is most painful that while other nations are designing fiscal policies that will strengthen the purchasing power of citizens, we are doing the direct opposite here in Nigeria.
The governor of the CBN, Lamido Sanusi said 70% of Nigerians are living below poverty line. Ironically, this same Sanusi believes that these poor Nigerians can withstand a further weakening of their purchasing power. My opinion is that Nigeria's socio-economic framework is still too weak to withstand any devaluation of the pocket-worth of the 70% poor Nigerians. Government should first fix the power problem, make our four refineries operate at optimum capacities, reduce corruption, and make our public infrastructures functional to stimulate economic growth. This will reduce poverty and create new jobs that will be sustainable.
I also do not agree that it is only the rich that benefit from fuel subsidy. We do not need to tell lies in order to make our argument look attractive. Based on the meager resources at their disposal, it is the poor that actually benefit more from the fuel subsidy. Now that it has been removed, we can appreciate the wisdom in my argument.
Friday, December 30, 2011
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.
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.
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
The art of misleading a president
While it is not criminal for a magistrate or judge to err in law, same cannot be said of a president when he or she errs in democracy. In law, an appellate court will simply correct the error which is also seen as “mistake of law.” In a presidential democracy, the electorates will correct an erring president by voting him out of office if he or she is seeking re-election. On the other hand, the electorates are easily persuaded to embrace the opposition if the erring president is not seeking re-election. This has happened several times in American presidential democracy.
There is an emerging line of reasoning that sound political leaders can never be misled by their lieutenants in a democracy. This is not true. It must be noted that 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. In most cases, those who prime themselves to deliberately mislead political leaders wear honourable personalities and also parade very attractive credentials that can flatter anybody. They are the ones I term “false patriots.” This is what Jesus Christ said of such people in Matthew 24:24-25, “For false Christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. See, I have told you beforehand.” There are very many “false patriots” in the corridors of power in Abuja. The only way to survive this minority but influential clan of “false patriots” is for the president to stand with the masses.
One question that readily comes to mind at this point is: why are political leaders easily misled by “false patriots” even in the light of all the deliberate designs put in place to protect the culture of democracy and promote good governance? Specifically, political leaders are misled due to the peculiar template of democratic bureaucracy, where internal independence is usually granted some specialized sectors such as military, economy, agriculture, science and technology. For instance, current and past global economic crisis are products of internal independence granted some specialised agencies of governments in the West. To be more specific, former president George Bush of the United States was misled into ordering the invasion of Iraq in 2003 owing to false intelligence. It has now become clear that internal independence gives too much room for administration officials to mislead political leaders and heads of national government.
As part of efforts to effectively tackle this problem, most legislatures in the developed climes have responded by showing deeper interests in critical national issues that are traditionally left in the hands of the executive arm of government. The aim is to safeguard national security and economy. In almost all advanced democracies today, national security has been elaborated to consciously identify causes of dissent arising from unpopular government policies. Members of the legislature and the media play a major role in this regard.
It is in realization of this important fact that the fanatical anti-subsidy apostles in Nigeria have now shifted their battle to the sacred floors of the National Assembly in Abuja. The aim is to lure lawmakers to endorse plans by the federal government to remove fuel subsidy next year after stiff opposition from NLC, TUC, NUPENG, NBA, and other pro-masses organizations. Nigerian masses have come to the conclusion that the promised palliative measures cannot adequately compensate for their already feeble purchasing power that will be further weakened by the increase in the prices of goods and services that have direct and indirect link with petrol. This writer does not know of any product or service that does not have direct or indirect attachment to petrol.
One basic fact need to be highlighted here. The nation’s economic advisers and fiscal policy formulators are lazy and non-creative. They are merely “copying and pasting” foreign fiscal policies. An economic strategy that works in country A may not necessarily do well in country B. This is because population, literacy level, culture, religion, science and technology determines which policy works where and when. The IMF and World Bank have all accepted this fact. Sadly however, both the IMF and World Bank are quick in advising developing economies to devalue their currencies and abandon subsidy regimes. But unknown to many, the United States, Canada, and members of the European Union subsidize critical sectors of their economies in order to protect their citizens cum national security. High unemployment, poverty, and hunger pose great threats to the national security of a country.
In 2010, the European Union spent €57 billion on agricultural development programme. Of this amount, €39 billion was spent on direct subsidies. Who is fooling who? The West is indeed fooling Africans. They are however using some of our willing intellectuals to do so. It is the duty of every government to identify the critical sector in its economy to intervene. Frankly, it would be wide of the mark for Nigeria to remove fuel subsidy because Britain or the United did so. It is so sad that our fiscal policy formulators and economic advisers have become so lethargic that they have relegated themselves to merely copying and pasting foreign fiscal policies that do not fit with our peculiar circumstances.
For months now, our nation’s “false patriots” have been fighting dirty to win the subsidy removal battle. It is extremely absurd for anyone to remind Nigerian masses of the pump price of petrol in the United States, Canada, or Europe all in a bid to buttress their campaign for the removal of fuel subsidy. Apart from the fact that unemployment figures are low in those climes, they also have cheap and efficient mass transportation systems, discounted housing and health care programs. These are just a few of the safety nets put in place by governments in developed democracies to protect the welfare of their citizens. These safety nets were not deployed in four or eight years. For instance, it would take up to a decade to build an effective national transportation infrastructure. That is one reason why those who are in a position to appreciate what it would take government to put in place safety nets to cushion the effects of withdrawal of fuel subsidy suspect government’s sincerity. For the avoidance of doubt, it would cost government more than what it spends on fuel subsidy to deploy effective safety nets to cushion the effects of increase in the price of petrol. Government should not make the mistake of tying the deployment of new and the rehabilitation of existing national public infrastructure to the removal of fuel subsidy. It is something government owes the citizenry.
It will also be necessary to remind the minority clan of anti-subsidy campaigners that Nigerians would be too willing to buy a liter of petrol for even N150 if public and private sector workers earn as much as their contemporaries do in America and Europe. Instead of being creative, the nation’s fiscal policy formulators and economic experts in government have chosen to take the short-cut to national transformation by merely copying and pasting World Bank and IMF prescriptions. It is longer secret that both the World Bank and IMF are tools used by the West to pursue their hidden economic agendas against developing countries especially in Africa. Most of the fiscal prescriptions that come out of the World Bank and IMF are usually anti-people and specifically designed to pitch the masses in developing countries against their governments so as to brew economic crisis and consequent social dissent. With this, they would be able to discreetly sabotage rapid economic growth in Africa and protect the export-based economies of Western democracies. Some of such fiscal prescriptions are Structural Adjustment Program, Currency Devaluation, and Anti-Subsidy policy.
The time has come for President Jonathan to hear the truth. There are too many “false patriots” in his administration. No doubt, they are honourable in appearance and eloquent during debates. The truth is that they do not mean well for him and Nigeria. Like it is in every developed country, the people are the centerpiece of democracy. For this singular reason, any policy that will injure the welfare of the people must be jettisoned. Call for the removal of fuel subsidy is one of them.
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 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.
For the avoidance doubt, 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 shouldered 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.
Furthermore, government should build more refineries and also ensure that the four existing ones operate at optimum capacities. With this, the pump price of petrol will fall in line with what is obtainable in other OPEC countries, where a liter of petrol sells between N9 and N45. The masses should not be punished for the deliberate ineptitude of some government officials that sabotaged our local refineries in order to promote the fuel import business.
There is an emerging line of reasoning that sound political leaders can never be misled by their lieutenants in a democracy. This is not true. It must be noted that 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. In most cases, those who prime themselves to deliberately mislead political leaders wear honourable personalities and also parade very attractive credentials that can flatter anybody. They are the ones I term “false patriots.” This is what Jesus Christ said of such people in Matthew 24:24-25, “For false Christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. See, I have told you beforehand.” There are very many “false patriots” in the corridors of power in Abuja. The only way to survive this minority but influential clan of “false patriots” is for the president to stand with the masses.
One question that readily comes to mind at this point is: why are political leaders easily misled by “false patriots” even in the light of all the deliberate designs put in place to protect the culture of democracy and promote good governance? Specifically, political leaders are misled due to the peculiar template of democratic bureaucracy, where internal independence is usually granted some specialized sectors such as military, economy, agriculture, science and technology. For instance, current and past global economic crisis are products of internal independence granted some specialised agencies of governments in the West. To be more specific, former president George Bush of the United States was misled into ordering the invasion of Iraq in 2003 owing to false intelligence. It has now become clear that internal independence gives too much room for administration officials to mislead political leaders and heads of national government.
As part of efforts to effectively tackle this problem, most legislatures in the developed climes have responded by showing deeper interests in critical national issues that are traditionally left in the hands of the executive arm of government. The aim is to safeguard national security and economy. In almost all advanced democracies today, national security has been elaborated to consciously identify causes of dissent arising from unpopular government policies. Members of the legislature and the media play a major role in this regard.
It is in realization of this important fact that the fanatical anti-subsidy apostles in Nigeria have now shifted their battle to the sacred floors of the National Assembly in Abuja. The aim is to lure lawmakers to endorse plans by the federal government to remove fuel subsidy next year after stiff opposition from NLC, TUC, NUPENG, NBA, and other pro-masses organizations. Nigerian masses have come to the conclusion that the promised palliative measures cannot adequately compensate for their already feeble purchasing power that will be further weakened by the increase in the prices of goods and services that have direct and indirect link with petrol. This writer does not know of any product or service that does not have direct or indirect attachment to petrol.
One basic fact need to be highlighted here. The nation’s economic advisers and fiscal policy formulators are lazy and non-creative. They are merely “copying and pasting” foreign fiscal policies. An economic strategy that works in country A may not necessarily do well in country B. This is because population, literacy level, culture, religion, science and technology determines which policy works where and when. The IMF and World Bank have all accepted this fact. Sadly however, both the IMF and World Bank are quick in advising developing economies to devalue their currencies and abandon subsidy regimes. But unknown to many, the United States, Canada, and members of the European Union subsidize critical sectors of their economies in order to protect their citizens cum national security. High unemployment, poverty, and hunger pose great threats to the national security of a country.
In 2010, the European Union spent €57 billion on agricultural development programme. Of this amount, €39 billion was spent on direct subsidies. Who is fooling who? The West is indeed fooling Africans. They are however using some of our willing intellectuals to do so. It is the duty of every government to identify the critical sector in its economy to intervene. Frankly, it would be wide of the mark for Nigeria to remove fuel subsidy because Britain or the United did so. It is so sad that our fiscal policy formulators and economic advisers have become so lethargic that they have relegated themselves to merely copying and pasting foreign fiscal policies that do not fit with our peculiar circumstances.
For months now, our nation’s “false patriots” have been fighting dirty to win the subsidy removal battle. It is extremely absurd for anyone to remind Nigerian masses of the pump price of petrol in the United States, Canada, or Europe all in a bid to buttress their campaign for the removal of fuel subsidy. Apart from the fact that unemployment figures are low in those climes, they also have cheap and efficient mass transportation systems, discounted housing and health care programs. These are just a few of the safety nets put in place by governments in developed democracies to protect the welfare of their citizens. These safety nets were not deployed in four or eight years. For instance, it would take up to a decade to build an effective national transportation infrastructure. That is one reason why those who are in a position to appreciate what it would take government to put in place safety nets to cushion the effects of withdrawal of fuel subsidy suspect government’s sincerity. For the avoidance of doubt, it would cost government more than what it spends on fuel subsidy to deploy effective safety nets to cushion the effects of increase in the price of petrol. Government should not make the mistake of tying the deployment of new and the rehabilitation of existing national public infrastructure to the removal of fuel subsidy. It is something government owes the citizenry.
It will also be necessary to remind the minority clan of anti-subsidy campaigners that Nigerians would be too willing to buy a liter of petrol for even N150 if public and private sector workers earn as much as their contemporaries do in America and Europe. Instead of being creative, the nation’s fiscal policy formulators and economic experts in government have chosen to take the short-cut to national transformation by merely copying and pasting World Bank and IMF prescriptions. It is longer secret that both the World Bank and IMF are tools used by the West to pursue their hidden economic agendas against developing countries especially in Africa. Most of the fiscal prescriptions that come out of the World Bank and IMF are usually anti-people and specifically designed to pitch the masses in developing countries against their governments so as to brew economic crisis and consequent social dissent. With this, they would be able to discreetly sabotage rapid economic growth in Africa and protect the export-based economies of Western democracies. Some of such fiscal prescriptions are Structural Adjustment Program, Currency Devaluation, and Anti-Subsidy policy.
The time has come for President Jonathan to hear the truth. There are too many “false patriots” in his administration. No doubt, they are honourable in appearance and eloquent during debates. The truth is that they do not mean well for him and Nigeria. Like it is in every developed country, the people are the centerpiece of democracy. For this singular reason, any policy that will injure the welfare of the people must be jettisoned. Call for the removal of fuel subsidy is one of them.
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 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.
For the avoidance doubt, 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 shouldered 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.
Furthermore, government should build more refineries and also ensure that the four existing ones operate at optimum capacities. With this, the pump price of petrol will fall in line with what is obtainable in other OPEC countries, where a liter of petrol sells between N9 and N45. The masses should not be punished for the deliberate ineptitude of some government officials that sabotaged our local refineries in order to promote the fuel import business.
Friday, November 4, 2011
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
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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
