Chapter 5 (5): Some Areas Requiring Redressing

Fuel Subsidy: The Path to Effective Governance and Equitable Distribution

The removal of fuel subsidy, coupled with the equitable distribution of the resultant dividends, is a necessary step forward for Nigeria. If we examine closely how much the nation loses to international communities, particularly neighbouring African countries, due to the presence of oil subsidies, it becomes evident that removing these subsidies is in the best interest of both the nation and its citizens.

The artificially low price of fuel, a consequence of the subsidy, has fostered a thriving black market, where a new cartel exports vast quantities of subsidised fuel out of Nigeria to neighbouring countries. This not only undermines the nation’s economy but also exacerbates the very issues the subsidy was intended to alleviate.

Corruption has been a persistent challenge in Nigeria, and when any system offers free or easy money, it inevitably creates opportunities for looters and plunderers to exploit the country’s resources. This has often rendered the benefits of subsidy removal negligible, as the gains are siphoned off by a corrupt few, leaving the country no better off than before.

For the removal of fuel subsidies to be truly effective, it must lead to an improvement in the quality of life for all citizens, not just a privileged few. A sincere government intent on removing oil subsidies must commit to transparent governance, ensuring that the funds saved from subsidy removal are directly channelled to critical sectors such as agriculture, education, and healthcare. These sectors have the potential to impact every citizen positively, driving broad-based development and reducing inequality.

However, if the subsidy removal is designed to benefit only a select group, it will inevitably lead to unaccountability and further corruption. This approach is not the solution but merely a shift in the address of the looters from one pocket to another.

The mismanagement of oil subsidies has been a significant factor contributing to bad governance in Nigeria. As an oil-producing nation, oil remains one of the main pillars of the economy, and how we manage subsidies will significantly influence the nation’s economic trajectory and the well-being of its citizens.

The experience of other countries that have dealt with fuel subsidies offers valuable lessons. In Venezuela, for instance, long-standing fuel subsidies contributed to economic decline, leading to widespread poverty and social unrest. Despite being one of the world’s largest oil producers, the country’s economy collapsed under the weight of corruption and mismanagement, exacerbated by the continuation of fuel subsidies that became unsustainable.

Similarly, in countries like Iran, the government’s initial attempt to remove fuel subsidies led to public outrage and protests. However, by redirecting the savings from subsidies into cash transfers to the poor, the government was able to cushion the impact on the most vulnerable, demonstrating a more equitable approach to subsidy removal.

In contrast, Nigeria has struggled to replicate such success. Leaders who prioritise satisfying a segment of the population or appeasing the wealthy cannot simultaneously build a society that provides quality life for the general populace. The focus must shift to policies that benefit the entire nation, ensuring that the removal of subsidies leads to tangible improvements in the lives of all Nigerians.

For Nigeria to move forward, the government must demonstrate a commitment to transparency, accountability, and equitable distribution of resources. Only then can the removal of fuel subsidies pave the way for sustainable development and good governance.

Land Acquisition and Governance

To steer Nigeria towards progress, it is imperative to reconsider the Land Use Act, which centralises all land under the control of the federal government. This centralisation often displaces the rightful landowners—those who have a historical and cultural connection to the land—and in some cases, transfers ownership to foreigners or non-native entities. The term “foreigners” in this context refers not just to those from other countries but also to individuals or corporations that are not indigenous to the area in question.

A pertinent example can be found in the Nigerian Mining Act, which has enabled the acquisition of land from local communities, ultimately enriching expatriates and foreign entities rather than the native population. This imbalance highlights the need for a fairer approach, where governance prioritises the well-being and rights of its native people first.

Empowering citizens with control over their lands and the ability to use them for productive ventures is essential for Nigeria’s advancement. When individuals are granted the authority to protect their land from encroachment and utilise it for their benefit, it fosters economic growth and development. Conversely, when the government disregards the rights of landowners, it not only hinders progress but also breeds discontent and distrust among the populace.

A contemporary issue that exemplifies this problem is the controversy surrounding grazing lands. Animal husbandry is a legitimate business, but those engaged in it should secure their own land rather than encroaching on others’ farmlands. Grazing should not equate to livestock roaming freely and destroying crops with impunity. The lack of clear regulations on how animals should graze has contributed to food shortages in Nigeria, as farmers are unable to protect their crops from such destruction. This situation directly reflects poor governance, as the government fails to protect the livelihoods of its citizens.

A responsible government ensures that the rights of all citizens are upheld, enabling them to be productive and to maximise their resources. The collective wealth of individuals contributes to the nation’s overall prosperity. Unfortunately, many farmers in Nigeria have been driven into poverty, and some have even lost their lives or fled their lands due to the unchecked activities of marauders who claim government-owned lands as their own. These individuals often allow their cattle to destroy crops, further impoverishing those who rely on agriculture for their survival.

The core of this argument is that resolving Nigeria’s agricultural challenges requires a reevaluation of land policies. Although Nigeria is an oil-producing nation, it remains largely agrarian, with many citizens dependent on farming. It is essential to ensure that communities owning the lands on which the government operates receive fair compensation. The practice of acquiring land, such as oil fields, without adequately compensating the rightful local owners is tantamount to robbery. Compensation should not only be directed to state governments but also to the actual landowners. Before allowing outsiders to exploit these lands, the government must ensure that the original owners are included in the benefits their land generates.

This exclusion and exploitation are significant reasons for the current socio-economic challenges facing the nation. There is a fundamental spiritual law at play here: success cannot be built on the exploitation or robbery of others’ resources.

It is advisable that any government policy regarding land use should focus on enhancing the utility of the land for its rightful owners first—whether individuals, states, or regions. The federal government cannot effectively manage lands across the country without meaningful collaboration with local entities. Decentralising land control is crucial for fostering growth and development, as it allows for better management and utilisation of resources, ultimately benefiting the entire nation.