Prof Hassan A. Saliu is the President of Nigerian Political Science Association (NPSA). In this interview with PAUL OKAH, he advises President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to implement policies that will bring about immediate succour to Nigerians because of fuel subsidy removal, among other national issues.
Gulf in leadership
There is a wide gulf between the people and the leaders. I don’t see Nigeria making it unless that gulf is addressed. Nigerians don’t trust their government and the government doesn’t trust Nigerians, yet we want Nigeria to develop. What miracle will bring that about? That is why you see the appeal being made by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu for Nigerians to exercise patience, saying, ‘we are working for you’. It has not solved the real problem in Nigeria. It has not resonated with the people and when people talk about the hardship in the land, it has not resonated with the government. The government may decide to take a position, while the people too are resigning to fate and that situation is dangerous.
Fuel subsidy removal
The issue of fuel subsidy removal would have been handled differently by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu. He would have communicated with Nigerians by telling them he had options for them to choose from, including complete removal of subsidy, 70 per cent removal of subsidy and investigation into past subsidy removal regimes. That would have been an effective communication with Nigerians. Or Mr President would have set up a committee to address the humongous amount the government is spending on fuel subsidy. Yes, Buhari didn’t provide for subsidy in the 2023 budget, but Tinubu is the new president. Once that decision was taken by the President in his inaugural speech, it has not been easy. It has been lack of smoothness in the relationship between government and the people. Yes, it may be a patriotic or nationalistic action on the part of government, but government would have realised the centrality of oil sector in Nigeria. In a nutshell, the manner of the announcement by President Tinubu deepened the suspicion of the Nigerian people in government. He didn’t start it. The people’s confidence in government was already going down. I don’t have a quarrel with Mr President’s decision, but the manner of the announcement. He is a new President with a new mandate. Buhari could have done that, but a new government coming in ought to have appreciated that it needs the people’s support. Now, there is a wide gulf between the people and the leaders. We have problems aligning with government policies, especially, with the monthly or quarterly increases in the price of oil. That is also creating a major problem for the government. Government may consider it appropriate to remove oil subsidy, but what about the people’s perception? In governance, perception is important. If it is the right thing to do, mustn’t you persuade the people? If oil subsidy is removed or not, the end effect will be the people. So, if oil subsidy removal should be in the best interest of the people, why not take them through your plan? As we speak now, Nigerians don’t know what is happening. If they know, they won’t be asking questions about what happened to the money saved from subsidy. Because the government has not come out on that, there are two perspectives. One, Nigeria has already taken loans, so the money from oil subsidy is being used to offset the loans under Buhari. Two, the money is being kept by someone and being looted. The two perspectives are correct, unless the government offers clarification.
Reversal or cushioning effect of subsidy for people
When fuel subsidy was partially removed under Babangida, there were structures put in place. Buses were bought for workers as a way of cushioning the effect. Therefore, it was less painful under Babangida, Obasanjo, Jonathan and the rest. The magnitude of the removalnof subsidy by Tinubu was such that the Nigerian economy will suffer for it, especially when there is nothing on ground, except promises of CNG buses. Where are they? In Ilorin, I only see one CNG centre. How can it take care of millions of people? So, this whole thing ought to have been planned for. The IMF and World Bank had said if you remove fuel subsidy that you will be able to save money, so why are we not seeing the money being saved? Why are things still hard, if their theories and assumptions are correct? The IMF and World Bank are doing well, but not too helpful when it comes to third world countries. This is because they don’t understand the informality that characterises the economy in Africa. Their books are only talking about formal sector. If you go to the border between Nigeria and Benin Republic, you will see the transaction taking place, both legally and illegally, formally and informally. I may not have the statistics, but between 60 to 70 per cent transactions take place informally, while 30 per cent is formal. So, how can you focus on 30 per cent and neglect 70 per cent? Even with the removal of subsidy, subsidy still happens, unless we are deceiving ourselves. Nigerians like deceiving themselves. How can you tell a man working to be comfortable with N70,000 as minimum wage? We are fooling ourselves and encouraging corruption. The man has to be corrupt in order to survive. How much is a bag of rice? How much is garri?
Fuel subsidy removal encouraging poverty
Fuel subsidy removal is already pushing more people into poverty. How many cars do you see on the road these days? They have reduced. In Ilorin, people prefer to trek or take okada to the office than their cars. Cars on the road have reduced by 40 per cent. That is an indication that poverty is on ground, even here in Abuja. There is a road that used to be busy in Ilorin, but you can trek for two minutes and few seconds without seeing a car passing because most car owners have parked their cars at home. Out of 1,000 cars, about 600 of them are on the road. The remaining car owners don’t have money to buy fuel, now that it is N1,100. When it was N700 or N600, people could not cope. Now, it is N1,100, so how do you expect they will cope?
Renewed Hope cash transfer
Cash awards or palliatives cannot lift anyone from poverty. Instead, it will promote laziness. If you are really serious about development, then you should think beyond cash transfers or palliatives. Government is giving N25,000 to households through NSIPA, but prices of things keep going up. The N50,000 that people got years ago will not be worth anything today. People will just use it to eat semovita. Do you know how much it takes to start a new business, no matter how small? The prices of things have gone up. So, how many people can government lift from poverty with N25,000?
LGA autonomy
We should commend President Tinubu and the Attorney General of the Federation for taking a step. Let’s also commend the Supreme Court for delivering a local government that was not overly a landmark. This is because the constitution has already provided that money should be sent to the LGAs through JAC. JAC stipulates that 10 per cent should be going to the LGAs, but how many are getting that? To confront the real issues, will autonomy solve the problems of the LGAs? The answer is no. the Supreme Court judgement is talking about a certain level of autonomy and their receiving money independently of state governments. We are talking about the chairmen in power, but we are overlooking the processes through which they came to power. How did they come to power? Who manipulated the primaries that brought the chairmen to power? Who controls the processes? Who financed the LGA election? Who swore them in? As long as answers to the questions are obvious, the LGA chairmen are on posting. With due respect to them, they are on posting. You think the man who manipulated the processes to favour them will go to sleep? The money may be going to them directly, but there is the threat of EFCC. This is Nigeria. It is not enough to say after being sworn in you will be getting your money directly, what about the conditions through which these people came to power?
NASS review
The Senate President also said the autonomy will not work unless there is constitutional amendment. I want to add that beyond constitutional amendment, attitudinal changes are required. If the governors continue with their frame of mind, this autonomy will be meaningless at the end of the day. Again, this is not the first time. Buhari signed Executive Order 10, but nobody paid attention to him. Just as they didn’t bother that time, they may not bother this time because you are giving independence to people who are not ready for it. Even the processes that brought them to power were never independent. My advice is for a political solution. The ruling party should come together. The ruling party should invite their executive members and people in respective positions like national chairmen, state chairmen and others. It should take a position that will prevail on the people elected under the party. As it is, we allow everything to give interpretation to judgments. They will not give you money unless you do election, but what is the quality of the election you have even seen? They are just fulfilling all righteousness in order to assess the money. In other words, we still have more work in order to have a local government system that will live up to our expectations.
Liberal democracy
No amount of amendment will make liberal democracy to work in our context. There is a great level of value disorientation. Unknown to our people, liberal democracy imposes some discipline for the benefit of capital. It is expected that democracy should open the economic space for private sector to thrive, but do we have private sector here? Without private sector operators, liberal democracy cannot work. Liberal democracy is the political face of capitalism. Even to participate in liberal democracy, you need a certain level of poverty. That’s why you see in America, those who don’t have money, they raise money for them. Liberal democracy is to encourage liberal economy principles to spread. It needs a certain level of production. What are we producing in Nigeria today?
Advice to government, citizens
The people should bear with the government and have some belief that just as government said, they know what they are doing and the pain will soon be over. The fact that they are suffering shouldn’t make them write off this government. Government should also be aware that several governments in the past have failed in promises made to Nigerians. If people are not trusting the government, that should not make government to get angry. Rather, government should continue giving assurances and double its efforts in order for programmes to come out as planned. Going by Nigerian history, we were told of Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP). It was a beautiful thing to happen, but what happened at the end of the day? We are yet to overcome problems created by SAP. The government at that time promised heaven on earth.
The previous government promised fighting corruption, insecurity and economic reforms. Today, people have not seen changes. Even the security thing that subsided a while, after a while, there was an upsurge. It is not new for leaders to be called names. It is coming all over the world. The previous President was called ‘Baba Go Slow’. President Tinubu being called T-Pain has economic significance to us as political scientists. So, if Tinubu sees that people are not happy with his administration, he should not get angry. Rather, he should appreciate the fact that the history of Nigeria suggests that our past leaders have not been sincere.
So, let him now work to restore that sincerity in government and to double-check the programmes that are being sold to him. He should double-check to see how such projects or programmes can ameliorate the hardship and sufferings Nigerians are facing. It should not be in 10 years’ time, but as quickly as possible. This is because the magnitude of suffering is getting to another level. So, he should start examining any programme being brought to him to see when it will start bringing succour to Nigerians. He should ignore anyone talking about three, four, five, years. The present government should know it doesn’t have a luxury of time, given where we are now. Any policy you want to use should be the one that will bring immediate succour so that when he makes promises tomorrow, people will listen. In a case where no promise has been successfully delivered, then it will create credibility problems, which will lead to legitimacy crisis.
