By Ishola Balogun
Government’s plan to remove subsidy on petroleum products from January 2012 has been receiving a lot of knocks from all classes of people. To government and in line with economic theories, subsidy is the bane of economic growth and development.

Apart from the belief that unsubsidised economy will mean more money in the hands of government to carry out developmental programmes, government over the years have continued to hammer on the need for liberalisation of the oil sector.

But analysts over the years have complained of incessant wastage of resources, unbridled corruption and wanton mismanagement of resources as major setbacks for development. Under this status quo, they maintained that no meaningful economic programme and development would see the light of the day.

Oyegun, Fasoranti and Osibajo

The masses who are always at the receiving end have helplessly cried out for prudent management of resources, provisions of new refineries and refurbishment of the existing ones to ameliorate the attendant pains of removal of subsidy if at all there is any to be removed. Meantime, Labour leaders, opposition parties and prominent citizens have described the plan as misadvised and urged government to look another way and drop the idea.

A popular argument Nigerians are used to in favour of the subsidy takes the line that the money raked in from the removal of subsidies would be used for provision of infrastructure, but how true is that, given the fact that previous experiences that brought about increase in petroleum products under successive administrations never yeilded any positive result, instead, corruption became widespread.

Mismanagement, wastage of resources and leakages in revenue collection, and expensive style of administration have formed the character of governance since the last three decades. Successive governments have always come with their promise of addressing these issues and making themselves accountable, but have they ever delivered on their promises?

Instead of making Nigerians comfortable in their current state of poverty, unemployment and deplorable infrastructure, government is now planning a voyage of unsubsidised petroleum products that people say can only render the poor economy prostrate. Saturday Vanguard spoke with some Nigerians and they shared their views.

One of those who hold the view that the move is senseless is the former Edo state governor and Vice presidential candidate of the All Nigerian Peoples Party (ANPP) in the 2011 election, Chief John Odigie Oyegun. The politician said the move does not make any sense. He explained that in a country where basic infrastructure such as electricity, roads, security have collapsed, removal of subsidy will only emasculate the economy and further impoverish the citizenry.

“We are talking of a country that does not look after its citizens, a country that does not have electricity, a country that has not provided roads, we are talking of a country that has not provided security, a country that its education system is seriously fractured, a country where the people are angry, a country where every day, there is report of colossal waste in the process of governance as well as the overhead cost, (not capital cost); it is not a wise thing to do.

“People are angry at the wasteful management of their resources and unfortunately, there is no move to block all theft and leakages but government thinks that it can now impose more hardship on the ordinary man and woman; I think it doesn’t make sense.”

He continued: “those who like them should tell them not to do it. If they have done all the things mentioned above, and we found out the nation is still suffering from the so-called subsidy, then we can talk about removal of subsidy, if indeed there is a subsidy to be removed at that point.”

He suggested that all areas of leakages and theft must all be brought under control. He noted that the people must be convinced that government has done its best to block all the corruption and loopholes before they can reasonably convince the populace of any justifiable subsidy withdrawal. “We can then come back to ask the people for yet another sacrifice. But right now, I think it is ill-advised, and I hope the governemnet does not take to it because we don’t know when the last straw that will break the back of the Nigerian camel will come. Our problem is wastage, theft and leakages and not removal of subsidy.”

Chief Ebenezer Babatope was however reserved in his comment. He stated that the move was speculative, adding that the Federal Government has not made an official statement on the issue. He therefore said: “all we are hearing are newspaper speculations. Until the government announces that subsidy will be withdrawn, then many of us will know how to address the issue.”

He however stated that if it happens, government would have to deduce reasons for the move. “We will then go into analysis and we will let the people know the implication, but right now, as an intellectual, it is not proper for me to start reacting to speculations,” he added.

He was not alone in his approach to the issue, Professor Pat Utomi also declined comment on the issue. He said the matter should be treated as a mere speculation, adding that when government comes out with an official statement on that, he would comment.

Corroborating Chief Oyegun, one of the most brilliant lawyers in Nigeria today, Professor Yemi Osibajo said removal of subsidy does not in any way solve the problems on hand now. He said: “What I think we have is a situation where there is a track record of mismanagement of resources especially at the federal level. It is apparent from what we see that there is no new road that has been built for the past twelve years.

Even in the power sector, billions of naira have been expended and nothing has changed. He concluded that removal of removal of subsidy on petroleum products would not solve the problems until a genuine attempt is made at addressing the problem of mismanagement. “For me, putting in more money in the hands of government by way of subsidy is not the solution and we seemed not to be addressing the problem. What is important now is to change the attitude of mismanagement of resources.

The leader of Afenifere, the apex Yoruba socio-cultural group, Chief Reuben Fasoranti opined that “Life is already very hard for the people. Government should not impose additional burden on Nigerians that will further impoverish them.” He maintained that there is no point aggravating the suffering of the people with the withdrawal of oil subsidy, an already bad situation worse.

He, like Chief Oyegun maintained that until the provision of basic infrastructure and other facilities that will make life easy for people, subsidy should continue. He stated that it could be withdrawn gradually only when the proper things are done. “Subsidy should continue until the proper things are done. Then, it can be gradually withdrawn. The people are already poor and are suffering from acute poverty; unemployment is on rife. If you hike the price of fuel again, what you are saying is that you want to create an additional problem for the people”.

On whether he foresees any break down of the economy should the government go ahead to enforce the removal, he said that Labour are warming up and would be up to the task in finding solution to the problem.