I have read widely about various reactions on the fuel subsidy removal policy. It could be generally concluded that Dr. Ibe Kachikwu, the Minister of State for Petroleum is the face of the policy and the consequent criticisms. But he seems to be a bold public servant to find it crucial to embark on this controversial policy. The benefits of the policy to the country are sub­stantial.

Well, our beloved Nigeria, a country full of astonishing contrasts in the midst of its enor­mous natural and human resources, is edgy because of fuel subsidy removal by the fed­eral government. Interestingly, besides oil and natural gas, Nigeria is splendidly endowed with varieties of solid minerals of various categories ranging from precious metals to diverse stones, including industrial minerals such as marbles, barytes, gypsum, and kaolin, just unlike any other country. Why then is then is the majority of its population suffering extreme in poverty? Theme will be parsed later.

The nation is equally endowed with tin, co­lumbite, iron ore, coal, limestone, lead, zinc, palm oil, peanuts, cotton, rubber, wood, hides and skins, and materials for textile and cement. Without a doubt, Nigeria is truly blessed with abundant natural and human resources. How­ever, it appears that 95% of Nigeria’s wealth is controlled by less than 5% of the population who bathe in profligate wealth while the masses seethe in abject poverty. This is the core com­plaint of incessant labor union actions in the country. Politically unacceptable inequality in the distribution of wealth in the country will con­tinue to be the underlying causes of agitation of the masses, particularly against any policy of the government that may impact negatively in eco­nomic terms the purchasing power of those who could least afford basic necessities.

In any case, fuel subsidy removal is a good policy for the country in general. Some may ar­gue that it is a bad policy with the trappings of bad timing, inadequate planning, and lackluster implementation. There will be no perfect time to implement a policy such as fuel removal subsidy.

It is understandable that the policy will cause a temporary hike in fuel prices and most fuel station owners would exploit the situation by hoarding and selling fuel at exorbitant prices. It was incumbent upon the federal government to have understood that the implementation of fuel removal policy would cause some economic dislocations whereby the exploiters of the policy could effectively manipulate the fuel prices to their advantage. During my brief visit last month, I could see long queues at filling stations causing transporters enormous discomfort and as they expended their precious time. While some stations were selling at a high price, most fuel stations stopped selling fuel in anticipation of would quadrupling their profit at the exponen­tial expense to the masses.

Also, the policymakers should have known that the mere announcement of the fuel sub­sidy removal would be greeted with scorn, and lurking behind would be the exponential rising costs of petroleum products, transportation, consumer goods and services. With this knowl­edge, the federal government should have first implemented the programs that would have mitigated the effects of full removal of the subsidy. The government should have started building and completing more refineries with the potential savings from the fuel removal. Additional refineries could have increased the capacity not to meet the seemingly increase in demand for petroleum products, but also to ameliorate the shortages that would be created by an artificial scarcity.

Related News

Considering the standard of living in Ni­geria, coupled with the fact that the country lacks a middleclass and majority of the people are not earning a sustainable wage, the federal government should have removed the fuel sub­sidy, in phases, to avoid the economic tremor the masses are experiencing now. Better yet, the policymakers should have implemented a gradual phasing out of fuel subsidies to avoid total economic jolt transmitted to the masses the implementation.

That said, the agitation of any group or people against the fuel subsidy removal policy is ill-conceived. The subsidy is aiding large companies—for paucity of space, I will spare their names—who would like the federal gov­ernment to continue to run huge deficits for their selfish ends. Nigerians should take time to study how the subsidy had not benefited the common man; the large corporations are en­joying the benefits of fuel subsidies while the masses were getting the crumbs. In fact, the anger should have been directed toward the corporations that have been exploiting both the government and the masses. With the policy, it is reported that Nigeria is saving “N647.2 mil­lion” every day.

It appears that the people against the policy have been co-opted to do the biddings for com­panies, who have been enjoying the benefits of oil subsidy to the detriments of the working class and rising budget deficit. So, Nigerians should refocus their attention to corporate greed that is part of Nigeria’s enigma, as well as fighting corruption at all levels.

It is obvious that the Premium Motor Spirit subsidy removal is temporarily creating eco­nomic havoc to most Nigerians and mixed reactions abound, but I strongly support the policy because it is beneficial to the country in general. If the windfall from the policy is managed profoundly well the masses would also benefit. Well, the policy is in place now; I encourage the policymakers to find creative ways to increase the supply of fuel without im­posing a price ceiling.

I implore all fellow Nigerians to support the government on this policy, but insist that the savings from the fuel removal subsidy are re-invested transparently. The situation pres­ents a good opportunity for every group and government to find common areas of interest where the proceeds from the policy can be best utilized.