There is no denying the fact that palliatives, by their very nature, are designed to provide short-term relief in times of crisis. While they may offer a brief respite from immediate hardships, they do little to address the root causes of the economic difficulties that plague the nation. Given the foregoing backdrop, it is not out of place to argue that Nigeria’s current economic challenges, ranging from skyrocketing inflation to widespread unemployment, cannot be remedied by handing out token gestures of assistance. Instead, these challenges require a comprehensive and sustainable approach that tackles the systemic issues head-on.

In fact, the drawbacks that are inherent in dishing out palliatives to the people might had been the reason why the People’s Democratic Party Governors’ forum on Friday called on the federal government to subsidize agriculture, health, Education rather than distributing palliatives.

In a Communiqué issued at the end of the meeting in Jalingo, Governor Bala Muhammed of Bauchi State, and also the chairman of the forum described the distribution of palliatives by the federal government as an insult to the sensitivity of Nigerians.

The governors, who urged President Bola Tinubu to reconsider the distribution of palliatives, argued that these temporary measures are not sustainable and, in reality, amount to nothing more than crumbs offered to the masses. This perspective is not only valid but also necessary for guiding the nation toward a more stable and prosperous future.

In fact, it is not an exaggeration to opine that the experience of other African nations underscores the limitations of palliatives as a solution to economic hardships. In Kenya, for example, the government has repeatedly turned to palliative measures in times of crisis, only to find that they offer little more than temporary relief. The underlying issues, such as high unemployment, poor infrastructure, and economic inequality, have persisted, leading to continued struggles for the Kenyan people. This highlights the need for long-term strategies that address the root causes of economic difficulties rather than simply applying short-term fixes.

It will be recalled in this context that the PDP governors rightly pointed out that palliatives, however well-intentioned, create a dependency that does not empower citizens to rise above their circumstances. The focus should not be on providing temporary relief, but on implementing policies and programs that will foster long-term economic growth, job creation, and social stability.

Given the outcome of the PDP’s Governors meeting, it can be opined in this context that to truly uplift the nation, the Tinubu administration must prioritize initiatives that go beyond immediate handouts. In fact, policies aimed at revitalizing key sectors such as agriculture, manufacturing, and technology will create jobs and stimulate economic activity. Furthermore, investing in education and skill development will equip the youth with the tools they need to contribute meaningfully to the economy.

Another critical area for attention is infrastructure development. Improving transportation networks, power supply, and access to clean water will not only enhance the quality of life for Nigerians but would also attract investment and spur economic growth. The government must also focus on improving the ease of doing business in Nigeria, reducing bureaucratic red tape, and fostering an environment that encourages entrepreneurship and innovation.

Additionally, addressing corruption and ensuring that public funds are used effectively and transparently will help restore trust in government institutions and ensure that resources are allocated where they are needed most.

In fact, while palliatives may offer short-term relief, they are not a sustainable solution to Nigeria’s economic woes. The experience of other African nations like Kenya, as earlier mentioned, shows that such measures do little to resolve long-term hardships. The Tinubu administration must heed the advice of the PDP governors and shift its focus toward implementing policies and programs that will create lasting change. By addressing the root causes of the nation’s hardships, the government can build a stronger, more resilient economy that benefits all Nigerians, not just today, but for generations to come.

In fact, it is expedient for the leadership of the ruling party, the All Progressives Congress (APC) with specific mention of Mr. President in this context to heed the voice of the Opposition.

The reason for the foregoing view cannot be farfetched as in a thriving democracy, the role of opposition parties is not merely to challenge the ruling party but to provide constructive criticism, offer alternative perspectives, and suggest policies that could benefit the nation. Often, these suggestions are dismissed outright, perceived as politically motivated or baseless. However, history has shown that ignoring the voice of the opposition can be detrimental to the health of a democracy and the well-being of its citizens. It pays for the ruling party to always listen to the suggestions made by opposition parties, as not every piece of advice or criticism can be adjudged as wrong.

Without a doubt, the opposition parties are an essential part of any democratic system. They serve as a check on the ruling party, ensuring that decisions are made in the best interest of the people. When opposition parties critique policies or propose alternatives, they do so not just to gain political mileage, but to offer different viewpoints that could lead to more balanced governance. The diversity of opinions is the bedrock of a vibrant democracy, and it is this diversity that prevents the concentration of power and encourages accountability.

There have been numerous instances globally where ruling parties have ignored the warnings and suggestions of opposition parties, only to regret it later. In Nigeria, for instance, the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) has at times been accused of dismissing the warnings of the opposition, particularly regarding economic policies. The opposition’s criticism of the government’s handling of issues like inflation, unemployment, and the devaluation of the naira has often been brushed aside as mere political posturing. Yet, these issues have persisted, suggesting that a more inclusive approach to governance might have yielded better results.

Similarly, in the United States, the Democratic Party’s opposition to certain policies of the Trump administration, such as the handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, was initially dismissed. However, the eventual outcomes highlighted that some of the opposition’s concerns were valid, and a more collaborative approach could have mitigated the situation.

Criticism, when constructive, should not be feared or dismissed. Instead, it should be seen as an opportunity for growth and improvement. President Tinubu should remember that opposition parties also represent a significant portion of the population. Their perspectives and suggestions are a reflection of the concerns and aspirations of the citizens. By considering opposition viewpoints, the ruling party can create more inclusive policies that address the needs of a broader spectrum of society.

Moreover, embracing opposition suggestions can foster a sense of national unity. When the ruling party demonstrates that it is willing to listen to and act on good ideas, regardless of where they come from, it builds trust among the electorate. It signals that the government is truly working for the people, not just for those who voted them into power.

Analyzed from the foregoing perspective, governance should not be about winning arguments but about making the best decisions for the nation. Ruling parties must, therefore, adopt a mindset that is open to suggestions, even from those across the political aisle. This approach will not only enhance the quality of governance but will also contribute to the stability and progress of the nation.

In fact, while it is natural for the ruling party to be wary of the opposition’s motives, it is crucial to recognize that not all criticisms or suggestions from the opposition are wrong. By listening to and incorporating valid points from the opposition, ruling parties can avoid the pitfalls of echo chambers and ensure that their policies are robust, inclusive, and in the best interest of the nation. After all, in a true democracy, the best ideas should always win, no matter where they come from.