The steep increase in the price of petrol and the attendant public outcry could have been better managed. Truth be told, subsidy removal was one of the banana peels strewn in the path of the new administration by the Buhari regime. History has now recorded the level of Buhari’s cluelessness in fixing the problems in the petroleum sector as unprecedented. For eight years, the former president doubled as President and Petroleum Minister but he failed to revive Nigeria’s local refineries; neither did he discontinue the scam called fuel subsidy. Today, Nigeria is the only oil producing country in the world that imports petroleum products.

We knew that this day would come. For those milking Nigeria through bogus subsidy claims, the party is over. About time too. But there is the not-so-little matter of procedure in the way petrol pump prices tripled in one fell swoop. A measure as far reaching as subsidy removal with implications for hyperinflation in transportation, food, services and commerce, among others, should have been handled differently.

Even in our traditional setting, things would have been handled differently. In a typical African village, the elders send messages pertaining to a death in the family in stages. If the son of the deceased lives faraway, they would send a message that his father is gravely ill and that he should endeavour to come home. Shortly after, another message follows, saying that the illness was worsening and that his father was now in intensive care. Finally, by the evening of that day, if he hadn’t yet arrived, they would break the news that his father did not make it. My friend, Chukwukadibia, who is a master in these matters, told me that there is sense in village wisdom. You don’t just break bad news the way you break coconut.

Several times during Buhari’s presidency, I gave free professional advice on how to engage the populace in decisions that would eventually affect their lives. A good government goes the extra mile to cultivate the people’s empathy and understanding before taking difficult decisions. However, the immediate past administration was not famous for accepting unsolicited counsel.

This new government should run the shop differently. I have no doubt that the petrol subsidy thing is a gravy train that should be stopped in its tracks. However, to avoid unintended casualties and disaffection, you prepare the ground for the big decision. Say what you will about Ibrahim Babangida, the Evil Genius, the Maradona… that was one leader who knew how to involve the people in crucial debates even where he already had his mind made up to introduce a jack-in-the-box

Every leader who wants to be taken seriously must marshal out a communication and public relations programme to sell his ideas and secure the people’s cooperation. Public communication is both an art and a science with a proven methodology that delivers positive results again and again. Winning the people’s support in these digital times, has gone beyond the traditional practice of sending veteran opinion vendors to various broadcast stations to spread unverified rumours labelled as facts. Nigerians have seen beyond those obvious cheap gambits.

When the government is in the process of introducing a programme, it is no longer enough to map out the budget implications as if the programmes, in the final analysis, are implementable sans people. Advocacy ought to precede public pronouncements. Take the recent withdrawal of petrol subsidy for example. The bitter pill would have been easier to swallow if a massive advocacy programme had been unleashed.

Public relations is the art and science of building mutually beneficial relationships between organisations and their publics. The Nigerian government can use public relations to sell a difficult program by using various techniques such as media relations, community relations, crisis management, public affairs, lobbying, advertising and folk media.

A good public relations and marketing campaign can be so expertly designed that even when you’re telling the audience to go to hell, they actually look forward to the trip! But when you just suddenly drop a bombshell without preparing the audience for the shock, you alienate potential allies and justify the negative portrayal of those outside your political camp.

The Nigerian government must learn to use public relations experts at the design stage of their policies to enhance the chances of their acceptability by the populace. If advocacy had preceded the announcement of the price hike, chances are that people would have been more receptive to the idea.

It doesn’t help matters when a pro-government television guest says, “If we don’t increase the price of petrol in Nigeria, our marketers will continue smuggling the product to neighbouring countries”. Such statements actually rile the people. What is the business of the government if it cannot police the borders? Is a government that admits its incapacity to stop smugglers worthy of the name it pretends to bear?

Also, in the last eight years, the phenomenon of ghostly barges and tankers sailing into Nigeria and disappearing with millions of tonnes of crude oil became rife. In a few cases, some of the thieves were intercepted. But no one is fooled. The Niger Delta is still considered a juicy posting if you’re a military or security personnel. Stories abound of officers becoming multi millionaires within months of getting there. When one adds up the official stealing with the unofficial thievery by local pipeline vandals, it is a miracle that Nigeria still manages to export appreciable quantity.

Mind you, this is not about the merit or otherwise of the government’s action. Most sensible Nigerians want the subsidy scam to end. On that score, half the job is already done. The problem is how to transit with minimum stress from one price regime to the other. That is why communication and public relations experts should have been consulted first.

In their attempt to justify the increase, some government officials dredge up figures from other countries to show that Nigerians are being spoilt by low prices. They selectively pick one item to the exclusion of all other variables, and conclude that any Nigerian protesting the price hike is an ingrate.

Such squint-eyed interventions only manage to win more foes for the government. And the people on the receiving end of these measures are no longer docile. They are flinging back the bricks one after the other. One such Nigerian took up the challenge to show that singling out petrol price alone for comparison is like comparing a mango with a grapefruit. The writer says he is making his petrol price comparison in Naira using the exchange rate of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN). His analysis:

Spain – 246.9 Naira per litre.

USA – 403.3 Naira per litre.

UK – 330.6 Naira per litre.

Germany – 330.6 Naira per litre.

France – 335.7 Naira per litre.

Nigeria – 500 to 600 Naira per litre.

Having compared cost of petrol per litre between the listed countries, he then proceeds to compare the minimum wage paid in each country using the CBN exchange rate:

Spain –  535,559 Naira per month.

USA  –  535,340 Naira per month.

UK – 955,876 Naira per month.

Germany – 947,618 Naira per month.

France – 866,241 Naira per month.

Nigeria – 30,000 Naira per month.

President Tinubu recently charged the service chiefs to stamp out terrorism and economic sabotage. There should be a timeline. The era of do-nothing security chiefs should be over by now.

Nigerians believe that we are gifted with very capable security men and women but that nepotism and corruption have eaten deeply into the system. One such Nigerian, Lawrence, took to the social media to explain that the way the Nigerian security operatives abducted Nnamdi Kanu from  Kenya to Nigeria shows that they could have captured former Boko Haram leader, Abubakar Shekau, if they were so inclined. He argued further that smuggling of petroleum products will stop on the day the military and immigration officials decide that it should stop.

Now that organised labour is threatening to go on strike from June 7, the new administration is having its baptism of fire so early in the day. There is likely to be a change of tactics by operatives of the new administration, away from the bellicosity of the former administration’s labour minister, Chris Ngige. The government should take advantage of the experience of Adams Oshiomhole to navigate the negotiations with Labour in an atmosphere of mutual respect. It doesn’t take a tarot reading to know that the government can do without a labour crisis at this stage.

Operatives of the new administration should lean on Richie Norton’s encouraging words, “Every sunset is an opportunity to reset. Every sunrise begins with new eyes”.

Attributing poor governance in Nigeria to corruption has become exceedingly simplistic in view of its unending inclination. A more sustained attack on the adverse effects of different specific dimensions of corruption on national development might be more useful.

It is therefore time for the nation’s scholars and analysts to throw more light on such unambiguous phases of the subject – a good example being the notorious hobby of last minute contracts and appointments that successive Nigerian political leaders engage in. Such efforts might help track the problem for action considering its pervasive nature of creating stunted growth at federal, state and local areas across the country.

Just before leaving office last week, the administration of President Muhammadu Buhari (2015-2023) carried out several injury-time appointments as if it came into office two months ago instead of the recorded period of 8 years. Among those who have condemned the act is a member of the ruling party and also member-elect of the House of Representatives, Chief Philip Agbese.

He explicitly criticised the appointment of a new Accountant General of the federation, which he felt was done without recourse to the rules and numerous petitions on ground against the process. Agbese also disagreed with the approval for the board of the North East Development Commission to resume work without confirmation by the Senate thereby undermining the powers of the legislature.

There were similar criticisms against the activities of the immediate past minister of aviation, Captain Hadi Sirika. The Centre for Social Change and Democracy, CSCD, had accused the minister of appointing his cronies to different offices which made it to demand a thorough investigation of the appointments, employments and awards of contracts in the aviation sector.

In particular, the Centre wants the Minister to explain how funds budgeted for the Nigeria Air project were utilized. This criticism resonated through the sector with many deprecating what they perceived as hurried arrangements to surreptitiously place our aviation sector under Ethiopian authorities. If the assignment had been diligently handled in good time, may be it would not have elicited as much uproar.

The point must be made however, that it was not the first time that the federal government or some of its powerful officials engaged in such last-minute dubious transactions.

In 2015, the hobby of getting some favourites into certain offices also took place. Even the appointment of Chief Executives of federal bodies which others did routinely was herculean to President Goodluck Jonathan’s government. At a point, there were about 13 bodies whose heads acted for years without confirmation. In some cases, it looked like a strategy to make the appointees patently malleable.

For instance, one of our colleagues at the NTA acted as Director-General for more than 2 years before government remembered to replace him. If he was not competent, why was the organization left in seemingly wrong hands for so long? If he was not incompetent why then was he removed? Yet, the same government appointed 5 different chief executives for the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) in 5 years, that is an average of one a year.

If federal authorities angered people by their last minute activities, happenings in the states were not less appalling.  In Niger state, the government spent no less than 6 of its 8-year tenure without filling vacancies in the public service thereby explaining its decision to recruit as many as 3,000 new workers at the tail end of the tenure of the immediate past governor, Abubakar Sani Bello. The former secretary to the state government Alhaji Ahmed Ibrahim Matane said the new appointees were to replace many civil servants who had retired or died since 2017.

In Plateau state, former governor Simeon Lalong, waited till the dying minutes of his tenure to swear-in five new judges of the State High Court and a judge of the State Customary Court of Appeal. It was only then it occurred to Lalong, himself a lawyer that a robust and vibrant Judiciary capable of meeting the needs of the people for justice delivery was expedient.

In Abia State, it was only after his preferred candidate lost the governorship election that former governor Okezie Ikpeazu suddenly woke up to the need to reconstitute the Governing Councils of some critical state institutions. By appointing Eme Okoro, the immediate past secretary to the state government (SSG) as chairman of the Abia State College of Health Science and Management Technology, Okezie betrayed the real motivation for his tail-end action.

Other favourites according to media reports were appointed to head the State Civil Service Commission and the State Polytechnic. In Jigawa state, most of the last-minute activities were essentially basic contracts such as the construction and renovation of classrooms and roads, drilling of hand pumps/ conversion of diesel motorized boreholes to solar powered as well as completion and upgrading of some health facilities. But then, no one understood why they were left for the tail end of the former governor Muhammad Badaru Abubakar’s administration.

To establish that last minute contracts which many see as phoney had become part of our political culture, it is probably necessary to refer to older relevant activities. In Imo state, opposition parties publicized daily, alleged awards of last-minute jobs by former governor Rochas Okorocha. The said contracts which were yet to be executed in the last few days of the administration had been reportedly paid for in full. Okorocha was also said to have recruited over 2000 employees into the public service at about the same time while several vehicles were auctioned at give-away prices. This made the then incoming governor Emeka Ihedioha to warn financial institutions against entering into any transaction with the then outgoing governor.

Similarly, the incoming government of governor Umaru Fintiri had to caution all Banking institutions in the state that giving arbitrary loans or overdrafts to government at the time was at their own risk. He spoke against the backdrop of a number of appointments, promotions and boards of some government agencies constituted close to the end of his predecessor, governor Mohammed Bindow.

Fintiri fulfilled his threat by cancelling all last minute suspicious activities carried out before he assumed duties. He was not alone. In Sokoto state, the new governor, Ahmad Aliyu reversed with immediate effect all recent appointments into the State Civil Service made by the outgoing government of Aminu Waziri Tambuwal after March 19th, 2023. In Osun state, the new governor, Ademola Adeleke, announced the reversal of late appointments by former governor, Gboyega Oyetola which were hurriedly done without following due process. Interestingly, this included the appointment of some ‘partisan’ Obas.

The reversals of several contracts and appointments had many adverse implications not only on societal development but also on innocent victims. For example, only two days ago, there were reports that the new Kano State Governor, Abba Kabir Yusuf, had commenced the demolition of structures believed to be illegally erected on properties belonging to the government. The owners were said to be cronies of the previous government to whom the plots were allegedly allocated. 

There is however doubt if the trend of phoney or unpopular last minute favours would end soon as some of the new beneficiaries were old victims. In Benue state for instance, it was interesting to hear that governor Samuel Ortom who cancelled last minute recruitment by his predecessor on account of inability of the government to pay workers’ salaries and other entitlements for several months was at the twilight of his own tenure attempting to build an airport. With what funds?

In the legislative arm of government, the situation has been the same. In the last one week, our federal legislators have suddenly become active. Part of their busy assignment was to investigate former Niger Delta Minister, Godswill Akpabio yet, they were unavailable when Akpabio reported.

Whereas, the most sanguine feature of any law making process is the quality of the average lawmaker, members of the Nigerian 7th Senate whimsically set an unbroken record of passing 46 bills in 10minutes on the last day of their tenure! Alas, we have neither reputable/seasoned legislators nor those that legendary Albert Einstein said should be “ready to live their lives for others.”

On Monday afternoon, my friend in Benin, Edo state, went to his father’s house for some daddy-and-son time. His fuel gauge was on red, but because the next gas station was on the other side of the road and he would need to make a long turn, he decided to buy petrol on his way back. That was what his driver suggested anyway. After watching President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s inauguration and listening to his speech, he headed back home. But the world had changed within the twinkle of an eye. He ran into a sudden traffic caused by fuel queues. That was when he remembered Tinubu’s statement of “subsidy is gone!” which was instantly greeted with petrol “scarcity” all over Nigeria.

With all of Tinubu’s experience in government, I thought a presidential pronouncement on such a very sensitive and emotive topic could have been better managed. There are people who have built their careers on opposing the removal of petrol subsidy and you do not expect them to take it lying down. Policy communication is as important as the policy itself. Many good policies have suffered miserable death in the slaughter room of populist activism partly because of the way they were communicated or marketed. One mistake many policy makers make over and again is to assume that if a policy makes sense and has benefits, it would be readily embraced. It doesn’t work like that.

I do not suggest that if a good policy is well marketed, there would be no resistance. It also doesn’t work like that. However, there are people who genuinely want to understand a policy and its promises. There are people who want to be persuaded so that they too can persuade others. In reality, there will always be resistance to the removal of petrol subsidy in Nigeria, no matter how well you communicate it. But you have a duty to sell the idea to educate your people, especially the new generation of Nigerians some of who believe that the UN will take over a country if a public protest goes on for three weeks or that INEC can only announce election results between 8am and 4pm.

I must also admit that there is no best time to remove petrol subsidy. No matter when you remove it — morning, noon or night; January, May or October; Sunday, Wednesday or Friday — there will always be some resistance. You do not withdraw a 50-year-old benefit that Nigerians have taken as a birth right and expect them to give you a standing ovation. It is our entitlement, as far as we can see. Since we hit oil boom in 1973, we have been hooked on subsidies, most of which we have got rid of — like giving meal tickets to university students and even paying for their laundry. We have successfully ended subsidies on diesel, gas and kerosene. But petrol is the most stubborn of them all.

Why do most Nigerians oppose the removal of petrol subsidy? At this point, I would like to speak for myself. I was a fierce advocate of petrol subsidy — until shortly before President Goodluck Jonathan pulled the trigger in 2012. By then, I had become more receptive to the economic case. I used to be nauseated with the argument that removing subsidy would curb smuggling, which I considered a grand celebration of the weakness and incompetence of state institutions. That Nigeria’s petrol was the cheapest in the world, as was being advanced as a major reason to remove subsidy, was also a problematic argument to me because I didn’t see why anybody should be saddened by that.

But the core economic argument that won me over in 2011 was that petrol subsidy was not an efficient way of spending a country’s resources. If you must subsidise, pick the productive link in the economic chain, not the consumption point. I think it was the then CBN governor, Mallam Sanusi Lamido Sanusi, that kept hammering on that. Moreso, why pour trillions of naira into subsidising petrol when healthcare, education, power and roads are crying for help on a daily basis? Is that not a more efficient way of spending money compared to dispensing petrol at subsidised pump prices? These arguments resonated with me more than the claim that petrol was cheaper than Coke.

It got more interesting for me when Jonathan withdrew the subsidy in January 2012 and some of those who openly supported it were lobbying me, through back channels, to argue against it in my writings. I was shocked. All my life, I had been playing into the hands of these buccaneers with my pro-subsidy campaign which I thought was helping the poor. It finally dawned on me that the more government retained the subsidy, the more these buccaneers profited from the system and the less the real object of my campaign benefited. Jonathan was, unfortunately, forced to beat a retreat as the opposition parties came after him. Otherwise, we would have passed this stage ages ago.

Nevertheless, there were two fundamental reasons for my lifelong opposition to the removal of petrol subsidy until I abandoned my position in 2011. One, I strongly believed (and still believe) that the poorest Nigerians would suffer the most, at least in the short run, in terms of the cost of living, particularly as transportation is a major expense in most Nigerian cities. Two, I did not (and still do not) trust the government to spend the gains judiciously and make life better for Nigerians. There were other reasons — such as the smuggling argument — but those were tangential. Generally, I was never in the mood for anti-subsidy debates and I dedicated my life to savaging the campaign.

On my first point, for instance, there is no doubt that the burden of subsidy removal is disproportionately borne by the poorest whose incomes can barely sustain their living costs. Transport fares go up instantly and they have no wriggle room to deal with it. For an economy that runs largely on “I pass my neighbour” generators, cost of doing business for barbers, beauty salons, eateries and vulcanisers will go up. Cost of food items will go up, notably in the cities which rely on road transportation for supplies. Poor people will surely suffer. This was my position when I was a pro-subsidy campaigner and it remains my position even as I am now in support of subsidy removal.

The issue now is: how do you make things less painful for the poorest? This takes me to my second point. The N3 trillion we have spent on subsidy this year alone is enough to make public hospitals hospitable to Nigerians. If we pour N3 trillion into the health sector today, buying the necessary equipment and drugs, upgrading the wards and paying the medical personnel decent wages and benefits, the “poorest of the poor” would feel the impact. If we choose to pour the N3 trillion into public schools, modernising the infrastructure, training teachers and treating them as human beings, the “poorest” would benefit and be glad. People need to experience, not just hear of, the benefits.

Obviously, the core reason for opposition to subsidy removal is lack of trust in government. People would rather petrol sells at N185/litre and their daily transport fare remains N500 than to be promised better life if petrol is N500/litre and transport fare goes to N1000. They would prefer the devil they know. Besides, many believe that “if not for corruption” Nigeria is rich enough to spend N6 trillion yearly on subsidy and still provide free electricity, free education and free healthcare. Many do not know that we currently owe over N46 trillion. Even if no kobo is stolen, we are in a mess. The simple truth is that we cannot afford petrol subsidy anymore. The economy is choking to death.

In fairness, Nigerians have earned the right not to trust the government. Of all the fuel price increases and the promises of better life in the last 40 years, why are we still here? Why are most roads, schools and hospitals still like this? Why are primary healthcare centres still lacking in basic drugs and personnel? Why are primary schools still lacking chalks and good teachers? Why are public taps still dry and poor people are drinking from the stream and contracting cholera? And we keep reading that one minister has stolen N20 billion, one governor has bought private jets, and one commissioner has mansions. And we expect poor Nigerians to embrace subsidy removal like a pillow!

In our history, only once or twice has the government increased petrol price and the people could point to how the gains were spent to improve their lot. In November 1994, Gen Sani Abacha raised the price and set up an intervention agency to rebuild public infrastructure, mostly roads, healthcare, education and water. That remains the gold standard. Alas, we are now operating a federal democracy and the president cannot dictate to states on how to spend their money. If Tinubu says let’s modernise hospitals but a governor says it is “cargo airport” that he wants to build in a state with poor health facilities, what can the president do? Nothing. That is our “true federalism”.

The best way forward, nonetheless, is for the government to win the trust of the people. As a starting point, I propose that all the revenue that will accrue to every tier of government from petrol subsidy removal should be isolated into a special fund and spent on specific social intervention programmes. Agreed, no tier of government can dictate to the other on how to spend its funds, but they can mutually reach a consensus in the interest of national development. How these funds are spent should also be publicised monthly for transparency and peer review purposes. Tinubu, as the leader, has to work harmoniously with the governors to deliver dividends from this subsidy removal.

AND FOUR OTHER THINGS…

FAREWELL, DOKPESI

Dr Raymond Aleogho Dokpesi died on Monday after falling on his treadmill while recuperating reportedly from a stroke that had held him down for months. It was so painful. The maritime engineer is best known as the founder of Ray Power 100 — Nigeria’s first private radio station. He later launched the African Independent Television (AIT). With Ray Power and AIT, Dokpesi built men and women and contributed in no little way to the growth of journalism and entertainment industry. I first heard his name in a Sunny Ade song decades ago but I had no idea who he was, only to learn that he owned Africa Ocean Lines, Africa’s first indigenous shipping line. He was a great man. Adieu.

MIND THE GAP

Although President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has spent less than one week in office and deserves his honeymoon, some things need to be handled better in the days ahead. For one, press statements have been signed by at least three different persons. We in the media don’t even know who to relate with. We are practically scavenging for photographs of official engagements on the internet. Senator Remi Tinubu, the first lady, tweeted congratulations to Rt Hon Femi Gbajabiamila before he was officially announced as the chief of staff. The transition between the Buhari and Tinubu administrations was not as seamless as you would expect of people from the same party. Lacuna.

ACT OF COMMISSION

The senate passed an amendment bill last week effectively castrating the chairman of the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC). After reading the amendments to the ICPC Act, I concluded that the commission does not need a chairman any longer. The board will be able to meet at his back and appoint a member to preside. Certain provisions mentioning the “chairman” have been replaced with “commission”. Could it be that the current chairman, Prof Bolaji Owasanoye, has stepped on some toes and the senators believe the best way to deal with him is to destroy the 22-year-old institution? Will he be chairman forever? Bewildering.

DSS VS EFCC

Nigerians woke up on Tuesday to the disturbing news that there was some beef between the Department of State Services (DSS) and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) at the Ikoyi office whose entrance they both share. They are in the same compound. The property used to belong to a DSS legacy agency before EFCC was created. Until now, there was no sign of any dispute or tension between the two. The EFCC accused the DSS of preventing its staff from gaining access to the office. The DSS response was coded. I still do not understand what went down but I hope we will never witness anything like this again. Not a good way of welcoming a new president. Mysterious.