The Nigerian Association of Chambers of Commerce, Industry, Mines, and Agriculture (NACCIMA) has voiced serious concern over the escalating exit of businesses from Nigeria, attributing the trend to unfavorable economic policies.
President of NACCIMA, Dele Oye, stated this in a statement made available to newsmen, yesterday, in reaction to the recent exit announcement by South African retailer Pick n Pay, citing challenging market conditions.
NACCIMA President, noted that flawed Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) policies are a primary cause, leading to significant foreign exchange losses for businesses.
Additionally, opaque practices in the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) have spurred inflation in fuel prices after subsidy removal, compounding economic strain.
Oye stressed the need for the CBN to enact clear, stable policies to attract investment and stabilize the naira. He also urged for widespread reforms to improve the national business climate, fostering sustainable growth and appeal to both local and international investors.
Calling for an open dialogue among government, the private sector, and civil society, Oye emphasized that such collaboration is crucial for crafting solutions to Nigeria’s economic challenges.
In the resumed media war on prices of petroleum products, Dangote Petroleum Refinery has debunked insinuations that its product is more expensive than the imported ones. A statement by the Dangote’s Group Chief Branding and Communications Officer, Anthony Chiejina said that though the company had tried to refrain from engaging in media fights, but that it is being constrained to respond to the recent misinformation by IPMAN, PETROAN, and other associations. According to him, both organisations claimed that they could import petrol at lower prices than what is being sold by the Dangote Refinery. He said that Dangote benchmarked its prices against international prices, and believed that “our prices are competitive, relative to the price of imports. “If anyone claims they can land PMS at a price cheaper than what we are selling, then they are importing substandard products and conniving with international traders to dump low quality products into the country, without concern for the health of Nigerians or the longevity of their vehicles. “Unfortunately, the regulator (NMDPRA) does not even have laboratory facilities which can be used to detect substandard products when imported into the country. “Post deregulation, NNPC set the pace by selling PMS to domestic marketers at N971 per litre for sale into ships and at N990 for sale into trucks. This set the benchmark for our pricing, and we have even gone lower to sell at N960 per litre for sale into ships while maintaining N990 per litre for sale into trucks. “In good faith, and in the interest of the country, we commenced sales at these prices without clarity on the exchange rate that we will use to pay for the crude purchased. “At the same time, an international trading company has recently hired a depot facility next to the Dangote Refinery, with the objective of using it to blend substandard products that will be dumped into the market to compete with Dangote Refinery’s higher quality production. “This is detrimental to the growth of domestic refining in Nigeria. We should point out that it is not unusual for countries to protect their domestic industries in order to provide jobs and grow the economy. For example, the US and Europe have had to impose high tariffs on EVs and microchips in order to protect their domestic industries. “While we continue with our determination to provide affordable, good quality, domestically refined petroleum product in Nigeria, we call on the public to disregard the deliberate disinformation being circulated by agents of people who prefer for us to continue to export jobs and import poverty.”
Nigeria’s Presidency has written off some alternative measures proffered by the former Vice President, Atiku Abubakar, towards addressing socio economic challenges being faced in the country. “We have just read a statement credited to former vice president Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, in which he tried to discredit President Bola Tinubu’s economic reform programmes while pushing his untested agenda as a better alternative.” In a statement, Special Adviser to President Tinubu on information and strategy, Bayo Onanuga described Atiku’s ideas as lacking in details, adding that those were the ideas that Nigerians rejected in the 2023 poll. The Presidency feared that if Atiku had won the election in 2023 with such warped, untested ideas “we believe he would have plunged Nigeria into a worse situation or run a regime of cronyism.” Onanuga insisted that Atiku lost the election partly because he vowed to sell the NNPC and other assets to his friends. “Nigerians have not forgotten this, nor would they be comforted by Atiku’s antecedents when he ran the economy in the first term of President Olusegun Obasanjo’s government between 1999 and 2003. “As vice president, Atiku supervised a questionable privatisation programme. He and his boss demonstrated a lack of faith in our educational system, and both went to establish their universities while they allowed ours to flounder. “Talk is cheap. It is easy to pontificate and deride a rival’s programmes even when there are irrefutable indices that the economic reforms yield positives despite the temporary difficulties. “Despite the futile attempt to hoodwink Nigerians again in his statement, it is gratifying that the former Vice President could not repudiate the economic reforms pursued by the Tinubu administration because they are the right things to do. “His advocacy for a gradualist approach only showed that he was not in tune with the enormity of problems inherited by President Tinubu. “It is so easy to paint a flowery to-do list. It is expected of an election loser. “President Tinubu met a country facing several grave challenges. Fuel subsidies were siphoning away enormous resources we could ill afford, and there was criminal arbitrage in the forex market. “No leader worth his name will allow these two economic disorders to persist without moving to end them surgically. “While advocating for gradual reforms may sound appealing, Tinubu took measures that should have been taken decades ago by Alhaji Abubakar and his boss when they had the opportunity. “Alhaji Abubakar calls for empathy and a human face to reforms. We have no problem with this as it resonates well with our administration’s focus. President Tinubu has consistently emphasised the need for compassion and protection of the most vulnerable. “The administration has prioritised social safety nets and targeted support for those affected by recent economic transitions.”
Death has been announced of a veteran Nigerian Journalist, Dr. Ngozi Fidelia Anyaegbunam, aged about 67, after a brief illness. A statement signed by her son, Rocky C Agbese, on behalf of the family, described the deceased as a trailblazing journalist who had editorial stints with Champion Newspaper (1st female editor) and The Daily Times (where she authored the book Waziri Ibrahim: Politics Without Bitterness). The deceased, according to the statement, was born in October 1957 at Damaturu in modern day Yobe State to George and Victoria Anyaegbunam. It said that late Ngozi became a full time media management consultant to numerous blue chip companies. “She also held the distinction of being a female print media journalist to interview two sitting Presidents of Nigeria (Olusegun Obasanjo and Muhammadu Buhari). “A dedicated and loving mother, grandmother, sister, cousin and friend, Auntie Ngozi will be sorely missed by all who came across her and were impacted by her larger than life presence.” The statement said that funeral arrangements would be announced later.
The Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF) has urged the Nigerian government to halt the controversial treason trial of minors involved in recent #EndBadGovernance protests, labeling the proceedings as “a travesty.”
ACF’s National Publicity Secretary, Professor Tukur Muhammad-Baba, condemned the trial, particularly the alleged mistreatment of underage detainees.
Reports indicate that the trial judge abruptly left the court as some minors collapsed from hunger. Muhammad-Baba expressed dismay over stringent bail conditions, such as N10 million bonds, imposed on the detainees—many of whom come from impoverished backgrounds.
The ACF demanded that the government immediately address the rights violations against these youths, provide them with medical care, and investigate their prolonged detentions, which allegedly exceed constitutional limits.
The forum highlighted the importance of upholding human rights, advocating for transparent judicial practices.
Following a ruling by the Confederation of African Football (CAF) in favor of Nigeria’s Super Eagles, reports from Libya indicate that Nigerians in the country are now facing targeted crackdowns.
The CAF decision, which imposed a fine and awarded Nigeria three points after alleged mistreatment of the Super Eagles, has reportedly led to rising anti-Nigerian sentiment.
In Tripoli, Adenaike Emmanuel, a Nigerian resident, shared that arrests of undocumented Nigerians have already begun.
Libyan media and local blogs have fueled tensions by calling for fines and arrests, allegedly holding Nigerian workers responsible for the financial penalty imposed by CAF.
The incident underscores the Super Eagles’ troubled trip to Libya, which was marked by delays and logistical issues.
CAF’s ruling, perceived as punitive by Libyans, appears to have ignited resentment, with some Libyans viewing the Nigerian community as a scapegoat for the controversy.
I have been inundated with inquiries of what I would have done differently if I were at the helm of affairs of our country. I am not the president, Tinubu is. The focus should be on him and not on me or any other. I believe that such inquiries distract from the critical questions of what President Bola Tinubu needs to do to save Nigerians from the excruciating pains arising from his trial-and-error economic policies. However, I understand and appreciate the challenges faced by citizens in seeking alternatives to what is not working for them. I hope Tinubu and members of his administration are humble enough to borrow one or two things from our ideas in the interest of the Nigerian people. I would now go ahead and articulate some of our ideas that would have had the potential to transform our beloved country. IN GENERAL We would have planned better and more robustly: My journey of reforms would have benefited from more adequate preparations; more sufficient diagnostic assessment of the country’s conditions; more consultations with key stakeholders; and better ideas for the final destination. We would have been guided by my robust reform agenda as encapsulated in ‘My Covenant With Nigerians’, my policy document that sought to, among others, protect our fragile economy against much deeper crisis by preventing business collapse; our document had spelt out policies that were consistent and coherent. We would have sequenced my reforms to achieve fiscal and monetary congruence. Unleashing reforms to determine an appropriate exchange rate, cost-reflective electricity tariff, and PMS price at one and the same time is certainly an overkill. Add CBN’s bullish money tightening spree. As importer of PMS and other petroleum products, removing subsidy on these products without a stable exchange rate would be counterproductive. We would have been more strategic in our response to reform fallout. We would not over-estimate the efficacy of the reform measures or underestimate the potential costs of reforms. I would recognise that reforms could sometimes fail. I would not underestimate the numerous delivery challenges, including the weaknesses of our institutions, and would work assiduously to correct the same. I would, as a responsible leader, pause, reflect, and where necessary, review implementation. I would have led by example. Any fiscal reform to improve liquidity and the management of our fiscal resources must first eliminate revenue leakages arising from governance, including the cost of running the government and the government procurement process. I (and members of my team) would not have lived in luxury while the citizens wallow in misery. We would have communicated more effectively with the people, with civility, tact, and diplomacy. Transparent communication with the public is essential to build public trust, which in turn is important to ensure that the public understands what the government is doing. We would have consulted more with all stakeholders to learn, negotiate, adapt, and modify, among other policy goals. We would have demonstrated more empathy. My Reforms would wear a human face. We would have been more strategic in the design and implementation of reform fallout mitigating measures. I would not run a ‘palliative economy’ yet, we would have a robust social protection programme that will offer genuine support to the poor and vulnerable and provide immediate comfort and security to enable them to navigate the stormy seas. SPECIFIC MEASURES We would have undertaken extensive reforms of the public sector institutions to maximize reform impact. We would have placed special focus on security viz • Commenced on day one, the reform of security institutions with improved funding, and enhanced welfare. My Policy Document had spelt out a Special Presidential Welfare Initiative for security personnel that we would implement • Adopted alternative approaches to conflict resolution such as diplomacy, intelligence, improved border control, deploying traditional institutions, and good neighbourliness. We would have launched an Economic Stimulus Fund (ESF), with an initial investment capacity of approximately US$10 billion to support MSMEs across all economic sectors. How would this have been funded? Details are in my Policy Document. Alongside the ESF, we would have launched a uniquely designed skills-to-job programme that targets all categories of youth, including graduates, early school leavers as well as the massive numbers of uneducated youth who are currently not in education, employment, or training. To underscore our commitment to the development of infrastructure, an Infrastructure Development Unit (IDU) directly under the President’s watch would have come into operation. The IDU will have a coordinating function and a specific mandate of working with the MDAs to fast track the implementation of the infrastructure reform agenda within the framework provided herein. The IDU will hit the ground running in putting the building blocks for our private sector driven Infrastructure Development Fund (IDF) of approximately US$25 billion. To engender fiscal efficiency and promote accountability and transparency in public financial management, we would have committed to a review of the current fiscal support to ailing State-Owned enterprises. We would’ve also begun a process review of government procurement processes to ensure value-for-money and eliminate all leakages. We would have initiated a review of the current utilization of all borrowed funds and ensured that they were deployed more judiciously. SUBSIDY REMOVAL Yes, I have always advocated for the removal of subsidy on PMS because its administration has been mildly put, opaque with so much scope for arbitrariness and corruption. Mind boggling rent profit from oil subsidy accrued to the cabals in public institutions and the private sector. I would have prioritized the following: First, tackling corruption. Fighting corruption should have commenced with the repositioning of the NNPCL, which is a huge beneficiary of the status quo. Its commitment to reform and capacity to implement and enforce reforms is suspect. The subsidy regime has provided an avenue for rent seeking, and the NNPCL and its guardians will be threatened by reforms. Second, paying particular attention to Nigeria’s poor refining infrastructure. We are by far the most inefficient OPEC member country in terms of both the percentage of installed refining capacity that works and the percentage of crude refined. We would’ve commenced the privatization of all state-owned refineries and ensure that Nigeria starts to refine at least 50% of its current crude oil output. Nigeria should aspire to export 50% of that capacity to ECOWAS member states. Third, adopt a gradualist approach in the implementation of the subsidy reforms. Subsidies would not have been removed suddenly and completely. It is instructive that when I was Vice President, we adopted a gradualist approach and had completed phases 1 and 2 of the reform before our tenure ended. The incoming administration in 2007 abandoned the reforms, unfortunately. The majority of the countries that review or rationalize subsidy payments adopt a gradualist approach by phasing price increases or shifting from universal to targeted approach (Malaysia, 2022 and Indonesia, 2022 -2023). In many EU economies, complete withdrawal often takes 5 years to effect. The gradualist approach allows for adjustments, adaptation and minimizes disruptions and vulnerability. Fourth, implement a robust social protection programme that will support the poor in navigating the cost-of-living challenges arising largely from reform implementation. We would’ve invested the savings from subsidy withdrawal to strengthen the productive base of the economy through infrastructure maintenance and development; to improve outcomes in education and healthcare delivery; to improve rural infrastructure and support livelihood expansion in agriculture; and develop the skills and entrepreneurial capacity of our youth in order to enhance their access to better economic opportunities. ON FOREIGN EXCHANGE REFORMS I also made a commitment to reform the operation of the foreign exchange market. Specifically, there was a commitment to eliminate multiple exchange rate windows. The system only served to enrich opportunists, rent-seekers, middlemen, arbitrageurs, and fraudsters. What would I have done? A fixed exchange rate system was out of the question because it would not be in line with our philosophy of running an open, private sector friendly economy. On the other hand, given Nigeria’s underlying economic conditions, adopting a floating exchange rate system would be an overkill. We would have encouraged our Central Bank to adopt a gradualist approach to FX management. A managed-floating system would have been a preferred option. Atiku Abubakar is Vice President of Nigeria (1999-2007) and Presidential Candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (2023) Abuja
The only thing obscene about the Federal High Court proceedings in Abuja on November 1, was the nature of the charge, which is allegedly treason. Minors, that is if they are less than 16 years, are usually treated as adults when they are found committing crimes. So had they been charged for the right offences in the territory of the States where they allegedly misconducted themselves, I would have had no problems. For me, the highest offences that they could have been charged for are ‘conduct likely to cause a breach of the peace’ ‘unlawful assembly’ ‘willful destruction of public property’ ‘theft’ otherwise known in the South of Nigeria as ‘Stealing’ and other offences of like nature I.e., ‘Affray’, which are not only State Offences but bailable offences. Thus, the Attorney General of the Federation has no locus to charge any of the young men we saw in the dock for any offence committed during the #end bad governance riots within the territory of their respective States. It is a complete caricature of the Federalism that we claim to operate in Nigeria, where State Governments abdicate their responsibilities to the Federal Government and turn a blind eye to the pillaging of the rights of their citizens. For the avoidance of doubt, there was nothing treasonable in the conduct of these children or young men as discernible from the charge and if our systems were working, they could easily have been charged for the offences mentioned above in Juvenile or Magistrate Courts, within the territory of the States where it is alleged they committed those riot induced offences. One point that is clear here, which appears to have been glossed over by a lot of us is that the defendants, be they children or adults, have already spent over three months in very dehumanizing detention conditions. This is very inhuman and a breach of their fundamental rights. It is my view that even if they committed the offences they are being accused of, (certainly not Treason), the maximum sentences that could have been handed down should have been reasonable fines and in serious cases, imprisonment not exceeding three months in the proximate correctional facility or borstal institution. Federal Government intervention typified by this unwarranted movement to Abuja was totally unnecessary and a failure of our systems. We rightly ought to feel a collective sense of guilt and shame. I call on the federal government to discontinue these charges and release all those charged for these State offences, with adequate rehabilitative compensation paid to them. One last point is to interrogate the sense of responsibility of those who have the custody of these young men since they were arrested and incarcerated three months ago. What happened to the monies voted for taking care of them whilst in custody? Did any of them die in custody? These, to me, are the points to interrogate. If the federal government or the President is serving Nigerians, there ought to be a multi-departmental inquiry into this matter. The whole saga seriously questions our ability to govern ourselves as an independent nation. Thus, it is not always about aspiring to be named to the Security Council of the United Nations, it is about whether we are a civilized nation worthy of standing shoulder to shoulder with other responsible nations whose systems work. It is also not about throwing palliatives and food rations to us as solutions to clear existential problems of insecurity. There is much work to do ahead. It is time to re-engineer Nigeria.
The recent submission of four executive tax reform bills to the National Assembly by President Bola Tinubu has sparked intense debate. Central to the controversy is Zacch Adedeji, Chairman of the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS), whose clarifications on the reforms have yet to clear the air but intensified discussions. At first glance, the four bills appear to serve distinct purposes: The Nigeria Tax Bill seeks to harmonise various tax laws to reduce multiplicity; the Nigeria Tax Administration Bill focuses on standardising tax processes and compliance requirements; the Nigeria Revenue Service Bill aims to replace the FIRS Act and establish a National Revenue Service (NRS) to be responsible for collecting both domestic and international revenues; and the Joint Revenue Board Bill will create a framework for resolving revenue conflicts between states and local governments. A key aspect of these proposals involves replacing the FIRS with the NRS, which would become a central and most powerful revenue service in the history of Nigeria with the task of being the only agency responsible for collecting all government revenues, including those currently managed by other agencies in oil, customs, and port and other sectors. It will be more powerful and influential than the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and Nigeria National Petroleum Company NNPC and others. Another contentious point is the proposed Value Added Tax (VAT) distribution model. Under the new framework, states receiving VAT collections would retain significant revenue. However, some northern leaders fear this model will disproportionately benefit states where companies are headquartered rather than those where goods and services are consumed. In a statement from Alhaji Muhammad Inuwa Yahaya, Gombe State’s Governor and Chairman of the Northern Governors Forum, northern governors opposed the proposed derivation-based VAT distribution model, citing concerns that it would disadvantage their states. They urged National Assembly members to reject any legislation perceived as unfavourable to any region of the country. The communiqué stated: “The Forum is concerned by the recent Tax Reform Bill sent to the National Assembly, especially the proposed shift to a derivation-based VAT distribution model, which disadvantages the North.” The governors reaffirmed their commitment to national development while emphasising the need for equity in policy implementation to prevent any geopolitical zone from feeling marginalised. Consequently, the following day, the National Economic Council (NEC), chaired by Vice President Kashim Shettima, recommended President Tinubu withdraw the Tax Reform Bills from the National Assembly. The NEC convened for its 144th meeting at the State House in Abuja, where state governors and Federal Executive Council members, including Finance Minister Wale Edun and Budget and National Planning Minister Abubakar Bagudu, participated. Oyo State Governor Seyi Makinde remarked that the council recognised the necessity for further understanding and alignment on the bills, emphasising that more comprehensive consultation would be in the nation’s best interest. Despite this recommendation by Nigerian governors and federal cabinet members in NEC, President Tinubu asserted that he would not withdraw the proposed tax reform bills. His spokesperson, Bayo Onanuga, indicated that the president believes the legislative process should continue, allowing room for input and adjustments through public hearings. Tinubu remains committed to reforming Nigeria’s tax system. Through these proposed bills, the government aims to streamline tax administration, enhance efficiency, and align with global best practices. The bills—the Nigeria Tax Bill, Nigeria Tax Administration Bill, Nigeria Revenue Service (Establishment) Bill, and Joint Revenue Board Establishment Bill—seek to unify tax processes, reduce overlapping responsibilities, and simplify compliance for both businesses and individuals. It is widely believed that Zacch Adedeji, as the Executive Chairman of the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS), is the driving force behind these reform proposals. His educational background, prior positions, and current role have established him as one of the most influential figures in Tinubu’s administration. Born on January 8, 1978, in Ogbomosho, Oyo State, Adedeji graduated with first-class honors in Accountancy from Obafemi Awolowo University (OAU), Ile-Ife, where he also obtained his Master’s and PhD in the same field. He began his professional journey at Procter & Gamble (P&G) as Corporate Finance Manager for West Africa and later as Finance Leader for SAP Implementation. He also served as Finance Commissioner in Oyo State under Governor Isiaka Ajimobi (2011–2015). He was appointed Executive Secretary of the National Sugar Development Council (NSDC) by President Muhammadu Buhari before becoming the Executive Chairman of FIRS under President Tinubu. While his political ambition is fuzzy—having avoided any major controversy—some suspect his positions on tax reform and proposed legislation harbour hidden agendas. In light of these concerns, he proactively engaged with members of the National Assembly following the submission of the bills. He addressed both the Senate Committee on Finance, chaired by Senator Sani Musa, and the House of Representatives Committee, led by Hon. James Faleke. Adedeji articulated the reforms’ goals, emphasising the need to harmonise existing tax laws, streamline administration, and align Nigeria’s tax system with global standards. He conveyed that the reforms aim to consolidate disparate tax laws and enhance transparency while improving efficiency in revenue collection. He highlighted that these changes would modernise Nigeria’s tax system, adapt to the realities of the digital economy, and position the country attractively for investment. He confirmed that no additional taxes would be introduced, aligning with President Tinubu’s commitment to “not taxing poverty and inflation.” However, until the full details of the bills are made public, speculation will undoubtedly continue. The discrepancy between President Tinubu’s stance and Vice President Shettima-led NEC’s recommendation only adds to the confusion. The contradictory stance of FEC and NEC is indeed puzzling, especially considering the All Progressive Congress (APC) controls governance at the national and state levels. A unified and diplomatic approach would have been more effective in addressing the tax reform proposals unless the drama was a deliberate script for political purposes. As the debate continues, Adedeji’s true intentions and the broader impact of these reforms on Nigeria’s economy remain in question. The outcome will undoubtedly shape the nation’s economic trajectory.
Yushau A. Shuaib is the publisher of PRNigeria and Economic Confidential. yashuaib@yashuaib.com
Ahead of the November 16 Governorship election in Ondo state, Kogi State Governor, Ahmed Usman Ododo has called on members of Egbira people in the state to vote for the All Progressives Congress (APC) and its candidate, Governor Lucky Aiyedatiwa to sustain the achievements of the APC government in the state. Governor Ododo who is the deputy chairman of the election management and strategy committee of the Ondo State Governorship Election Campaign Council made the call while addressing party supporters at the APC rally in Owo. The Governor described Ondo state as a second home for Egbiras and urged them to repeat the feat of the 2020 Governorship election during which the APC recorded overwhelming victory in the state. “I have come to thank you for the support you gave the APC in the last governorship election in Ondo state. “I am aware that we have a large population of our people in Owo, Ifo and Ose local government areas, as well as other parts of Ondo state and I want you to take our message to all of them. “Come November 16, 2024, I urge you to vote for the APC and Lucky Aiyedatiwa as the Governor of Ondo State.” Governor Ododo assured the people of Ondo State that the APC and its candidate, Lucky Aiyedatiwa will deliver the desired dividends of democracy to the people of the state by improving physical infrastructure, access to education, healthcare, water and sanitation, agricultural development, and security of lives and property across communities in the state. He reaffirmed the commitment of the APC administration at both national and sub-national levels to recognize and reward the people for the confidence reposed in the party. He described Governor Aiyedatiwa as a tested hand who can be trusted to build on the pedestal of growth and development already attained by Ondo state under the late Governor Oluwarotimi Akeredolu who died in December, 2023. “We know Governor Aiyedatiwa, he has been tested and can be trusted. We want continuity and consolidation and he has started very well. “I want to let you know that the Ebira, Igala and Okun communities in Ondo state are hundred percent behind you. They will all come out en masse on November 16 to vote for you.” This was even as Governor Aiyedatiwa emphasized the importance of unity and peaceful co-existence among ethnic groups residing in Ondo state. He promised to create more opportunities for non-indigenous communities in the state if elected in the November 16 election. At a courtesy visit earlier, the Ohinoyi of Anegbira in Owo, Adayi Isa Ahmed had expressed delight in receiving Governor Ododo, saying that Egbira people in Ondo will vote for the APC candidate, Governor Lucky Aiyedatiwa in the governorship election. He commended Governor Aiyedatiwa for appointing five members of the Egbira community into positions of authority in his administration and promised that the people will reciprocate the kind gesture by mobilizing more votes than what was achieved in the last governorship election in the state. The APC rally in Owo was attended by members of the Egbira community from Utose, Omolonge, Utelu, Agopanu and others from the six local government areas in Ondo north senatorial district and other parts of the state.
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
What I Would Have Done Differently If… By Atiku Abubakar
I have been inundated with inquiries of what I would have done differently if I were at the helm of affairs of our country. I am not the president, Tinubu is. The focus should be on him and not on me or any other. I believe that such inquiries distract from the critical questions of what President Bola Tinubu needs to do to save Nigerians from the excruciating pains arising from his trial-and-error economic policies. However, I understand and appreciate the challenges faced by citizens in seeking alternatives to what is not working for them. I hope Tinubu and members of his administration are humble enough to borrow one or two things from our ideas in the interest of the Nigerian people. I would now go ahead and articulate some of our ideas that would have had the potential to transform our beloved country.
IN GENERAL
We would have planned better and more robustly: My journey of reforms would have benefited from more adequate preparations; more sufficient diagnostic assessment of the country’s conditions; more consultations with key stakeholders; and better ideas for the final destination.
We would have been guided by my robust reform agenda as encapsulated in ‘My Covenant With Nigerians’, my policy document that sought to, among others, protect our fragile economy against much deeper crisis by preventing business collapse; our document had spelt out policies that were consistent and coherent.
We would have sequenced my reforms to achieve fiscal and monetary congruence. Unleashing reforms to determine an appropriate exchange rate, cost-reflective electricity tariff, and PMS price at one and the same time is certainly an overkill. Add CBN’s bullish money tightening spree. As importer of PMS and other petroleum products, removing subsidy on these products without a stable exchange rate would be counterproductive.
We would have been more strategic in our response to reform fallout. We would not over-estimate the efficacy of the reform measures or underestimate the potential costs of reforms. I would recognise that reforms could sometimes fail. I would not underestimate the numerous delivery challenges, including the weaknesses of our institutions, and would work assiduously to correct the same. I would, as a responsible leader, pause, reflect, and where necessary, review implementation.
I would have led by example. Any fiscal reform to improve liquidity and the management of our fiscal resources must first eliminate revenue leakages arising from governance, including the cost of running the government and the government procurement process. I (and members of my team) would not have lived in luxury while the citizens wallow in misery.
We would have communicated more effectively with the people, with civility, tact, and diplomacy.
Transparent communication with the public is essential to build public trust, which in turn is important to ensure that the public understands what the government is doing.
We would have consulted more with all stakeholders to learn, negotiate, adapt, and modify, among other policy goals.
We would have demonstrated more empathy. My Reforms would wear a human face.
We would have been more strategic in the design and implementation of reform fallout mitigating measures. I would not run a ‘palliative economy’ yet, we would have a robust social protection programme that will offer genuine support to the poor and vulnerable and provide immediate comfort and security to enable them to navigate the stormy seas.
SPECIFIC MEASURES
We would have undertaken extensive reforms of the public sector institutions to maximize reform impact.
We would have placed special focus on security viz
• Commenced on day one, the reform of security institutions with improved funding, and enhanced welfare. My Policy Document had spelt out a Special Presidential Welfare Initiative for security personnel that we would implement
• Adopted alternative approaches to conflict resolution such as diplomacy, intelligence, improved border control, deploying traditional institutions, and good neighbourliness.
We would have launched an Economic Stimulus Fund (ESF), with an initial investment capacity of approximately US$10 billion to support MSMEs across all economic sectors.
How would this have been funded?
Details are in my Policy Document.
Alongside the ESF, we would have launched a uniquely designed skills-to-job programme that targets all categories of youth, including graduates, early school leavers as well as the massive numbers of uneducated youth who are currently not in education, employment, or training.
To underscore our commitment to the development of infrastructure, an Infrastructure Development Unit (IDU) directly under the President’s watch would have come into operation. The IDU will have a coordinating function and a specific mandate of working with the MDAs to fast track the implementation of the infrastructure reform agenda within the framework provided herein. The IDU will hit the ground running in putting the building blocks for our private sector driven Infrastructure Development Fund (IDF) of approximately US$25 billion.
To engender fiscal efficiency and promote accountability and transparency in public financial management, we would have committed to a review of the current fiscal support to ailing State-Owned enterprises. We would’ve also begun a process review of government procurement processes to ensure value-for-money and eliminate all leakages.
We would have initiated a review of the current utilization of all borrowed funds and ensured that they were deployed more judiciously.
SUBSIDY REMOVAL
Yes, I have always advocated for the removal of subsidy on PMS because its administration has been mildly put, opaque with so much scope for arbitrariness and corruption. Mind boggling rent profit from oil subsidy accrued to the cabals in public institutions and the private sector.
I would have prioritized the following:
First, tackling corruption. Fighting corruption should have commenced with the repositioning of the NNPCL, which is a huge beneficiary of the status quo. Its commitment to reform and capacity to implement and enforce reforms is suspect. The subsidy regime has provided an avenue for rent seeking, and the NNPCL and its guardians will be threatened by reforms.
Second, paying particular attention to Nigeria’s poor refining infrastructure. We are by far the most inefficient OPEC member country in terms of both the percentage of installed refining capacity that works and the percentage of crude refined. We would’ve commenced the privatization of all state-owned refineries and ensure that Nigeria starts to refine at least 50% of its current crude oil output. Nigeria should aspire to export 50% of that capacity to ECOWAS member states.
Third, adopt a gradualist approach in the implementation of the subsidy reforms. Subsidies would not have been removed suddenly and completely. It is instructive that when I was Vice President, we adopted a gradualist approach and had completed phases 1 and 2 of the reform before our tenure ended. The incoming administration in 2007 abandoned the reforms, unfortunately. The majority of the countries that review or rationalize subsidy payments adopt a gradualist approach by phasing price increases or shifting from universal to targeted approach (Malaysia, 2022 and Indonesia, 2022 -2023). In many EU economies, complete withdrawal often takes 5 years to effect. The gradualist approach allows for adjustments, adaptation and minimizes disruptions and vulnerability.
Fourth, implement a robust social protection programme that will support the poor in navigating the cost-of-living challenges arising largely from reform implementation. We would’ve invested the savings from subsidy withdrawal to strengthen the productive base of the economy through infrastructure maintenance and development; to improve outcomes in education and healthcare delivery; to improve rural infrastructure and support livelihood expansion in agriculture; and develop the skills and entrepreneurial capacity of our youth in order to enhance their access to better economic opportunities.
ON FOREIGN EXCHANGE REFORMS
I also made a commitment to reform the operation of the foreign exchange market. Specifically, there was a commitment to eliminate multiple exchange rate windows. The system only served to enrich opportunists, rent-seekers, middlemen, arbitrageurs, and fraudsters.
What would I have done?
A fixed exchange rate system was out of the question because it would not be in line with our philosophy of running an open, private sector friendly economy. On the other hand, given Nigeria’s underlying economic conditions, adopting a floating exchange rate system would be an overkill. We would have encouraged our Central Bank to adopt a gradualist approach to FX management. A managed-floating system would have been a preferred option.
Atiku Abubakar is Vice President of Nigeria (1999-2007) and Presidential Candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (2023)
Abuja