Atiku’s fuel subsidy and Tinubu’s church rat

The political campaign in Nigeria has taken an unexpected turn, anchored on the issue of fuel subsidy, according to presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Alhaji Atiku Abubakar. This development has caught everyone off guard, as the government has primarily responded with personal attacks against Atiku or by denying the reality faced by the majority of citizens.

Atiku's statement regarding the fuel subsidy has effectively shifted the political landscape. The government, which has had three years to address the issue, failed to do so and is unlikely to achieve success before the elections. The core of the debate is not just about fuel subsidy but about the overall cost of living, which has skyrocketed and left most Nigerians struggling.

The government acknowledges the pain caused by the removal of fuel subsidy, but claims it is necessary for the greater good. However, the timing of when the pain will be alleviated remains unclear. Despite the government's weak case, there are a couple of points where one can agree with them. Firstly, the economy presented to Bola Tinubu in 2023 was on the brink of collapse and required urgent measures to save it. Secondly, the old subsidy regime was mismanaged, leading to an unsustainable fiscal burden.

President Tinubu, however, failed to recognize the dilemma. He saw the removal of the subsidy as a reckless act rather than a necessary step. Public policy experts understand that reforms are often successful when the public's concerns are addressed and alternatives are provided. Simply dismissing an idea as populism or unrealistic is not enough. Instead, experts should propose alternative solutions.

The government argues that N5.5 trillion was spent on fuel subsidy in July alone, suggesting that the removal has been beneficial. However, this claim only strengthens the argument of the suffering populace who cannot see the benefits. State governments, given the increased allocation, have become awash with money, yet their conduct has been questionable.

While they have received more money than any previous generation, their actions have made it difficult for anyone to accept this as a positive outcome of fuel subsidy removal.

States today are overflowing with money, yet the people who bear the brunt of the removal are getting poorer. Travel across Nigeria, and one can see that many governors have constructed fly-over bridges that serve no purpose, while rural roads remain in poor condition, hospitals lack basic drugs, and transportation remains expensive. Should President Tinubu be blamed for this? Not entirely, but he missed an opportunity to make a significant improvement in the lives of the people.