Thursday, 17 May 2012
Yes To Remove Oil Subsidy By Christopher C Eke
By Christopher C Eke
I finally spent a little over 4hrs to watch and digest the YouTube debate video from the second town hall meeting on subsidy removal, moderated by Nduka, with government officials, labor and civil society represented. I also heard unverified rumor that organized labor was since paid off to call off their protest against subsidy removal. Before I saw this video, I saw quite a bit of news clips of many Nigerians from all works of life, across the globe, protesting the removal of fuel subsidy and using that as an opportunity to “occupy Nigeria,” with additional demands to end all the ills of government, including corruption.
No doubt in my mind that I have all along stood for the subsidy removal, except for two misgivings. First, like most informed Nigerians, I think the Nigerian government should have drastically cut their cost of running government, put in place certain shock absorbers before it removes the subsidy, and as well as phase in the subsidy removal. Second, allay the fears of Nigerians regarding a general lack of confidence in their ability to truly reinvest the conceived savings from the subsidy removal. Only government’s better performance can satisfy this second point.
In a true capitalists society the market forces must be allowed to work properly for the good of all. That means government cannot do everything for its people, except provide those things which the people cannot provide for themselves and entrench opportunities to aid the very poor to rise and join the middle or upper class without necessarily being socially connected and privileged. These are the areas where the government of Nigeria has repeatedly failed Nigerians.
In my opinion, capitalism is best described by citizens’ acknowledgement of who is in possession of factors of production—hopefully in the hands of private individuals, in the right way. Thus, governments have no business running things, except to provide the climate within which things are run efficiently. I have always advanced the definition of leadership to be a movement. That is, a leader must have the ability to take people and things from one location to another, from where they are to where they want to be. This of course presupposes that the led have willingness to follow or are persuaded with superior arguments and accomplishments to follow, but not coerced to follow.
The two questions that most Nigerians ought to constantly ask are: who are our leaders? Why are they not efficient and effective most of the times? Hopefully as you/we ask these questions, you/we look at yourself/ourselves in the mirror and ask if you/we possess the same leadership deficiencies of our current or past leaders. The point is leadership comes from the “group.” Logic suggests that the Nigerian society is corrupt, inefficient, among other things, and that is why it attracts leaders who are a reflection of its society at large. Our redeeming grace lies in someday having a courageous leader with impeccable character traits and heart unafraid to set the tone from the top downward and eventually remove corruption from the fabric of our society.
My unpopular position is that fuel subsidy does not provide poor class of Nigerians much needed incentive to freely navigate their common sense away farther from the viciousness of poverty. For instance, folks having too many kids because of their religious or customary or political beliefs should face the trickle down effects of transportation costs and the cost of all other things associated with energy as a way for society at large to be serious with family planning—a common sense issue in today's world. Why bite more than you can chew? Nigerian central government has a tough role here too, to be the chief advocate for family planning by providing contraceptives and counseling to those needing them.
However, the federal government may unlikely fulfill this role unless through voluntary states participation because of religious and political reasons. I think that the political need of certain regions of the country to always maintain the highest number of people to ensure exclusive control of Nigerian politics will trump any attempt for a meaningful future population control policy. Ideally, there should be strength in numbers but in Nigeria’s experience, more numbers without proper and efficient allocation of resources is setting the country backward to fast becoming a failed nation. Invariably, the government’s numerous chats to illustrate Nigeria’s oil production and revenue per citizen compared to countries with oil wealth but with smaller population also prove our exploding population is a hot button issue no one wants to address.
According to Democritus, an ancient Greek philosopher and later confirmed by modern elementary physics, an atom is the smallest indivisible particle of matter difficult to see with the naked eye. Electrons and other subatomic particles are smaller than atoms and are even more difficult to discern with the naked eye except, I guess, by those with super eye sight. If Nigeria continues to divide its finite oil wealth among its exploding population, a time will fast approach when each citizen’s share will be difficult to see with the naked eye, let alone benefit anyone in any meaningful way. Some will argue that right now most Nigerians don’t even see their share of the oil wealth or benefit from whatever wealth Nigeria claims to possess. Frankly, because of Nigeria’s endemic corruption, I couldn’t agree more with that argument.
That brings me to this conclusion. To all you passionate “occupy” folks out there, fight the Nigerian government for corruption, its inability to provide safety of lives and property, lawlessness and its general inefficiencies, but don’t stop it, without the benefit of doubt, from improving the structure of the country’s economy.
Comments
10 comment(s)
Post a comment
@Tundemash - I beg to disagree!
Submitted by OC (not verified) on February 1, 2012 - 10:58.
In a civilised manner, and I'll expect the same courtesy (if you have to respond), permit me to clarify your point made about the Benefits for Children in the UK. It is not entirely true your statement that 'the higher the number of kids (children) the more your benefits from the system'. The benefit is worked out pro-rata to accommodate those with children. In real terms you are not getting more. The issue is also now becoming very controversial as the Government is cutting down or pegging the amount and decreasing the benefits. The UK Government is also trying to make it unfashionable to remain on benefits. So it is not the norm but the exception to stay on Benefits.
And re:'No wonder the Western world does not really respect an average black man!', perhaps, you have some FACTS on this, which someday you would care to share. The Western world respects the intellectual and the intelligent amongst blacks or Whites.
@Ibrahim Sad - Re - 'WHY ARE WE IMPORTING FUEL?'
Submitted by OC (not verified) on February 1, 2012 - 10:24.
I thought this is a very nice article, and intellectually and intelligently written. There is nothing 'apologist' or 'ignorant' about the writer or any pro-fuel subsidy removal.
Rather, only an'ignorant' person would think or assume that:
1. The issue of Fuel importation started today, yesterday or the day before yesterday or even 20 years ago.
2. Stopping the importation of FUEL can happen overnight without a good strategy and without considering the CONSEQUENCES.
3. The rot and decay of several decades can be fixed overnight.
You must first ask yourself, HOW DID WE GET HERE TO START IMPORTING FUEL? WHY CAN'T OUR REFINERIES BE FIXED? WHAT ARE THE IMPEDIMENTS AND HOW CAN WE OVERCOME THEM? WHAT STRATEGIES ARE NEEDED? An intelligent person would ask these questions.
In today's world people in
Submitted by NigelH on February 1, 2012 - 09:36.
In today's world people in general bit off more than they can chew and then expect other people to take care of them. Thank goodness there is a growing movement of people who are wondering what ever happened to personal responsibility.
-
When people take on too much by having too many kids going after the big ones that they can't afford to feed they get upset when people don't want to help them because they do nothing to help themselves.
Author
Submitted by Rhomax (not verified) on February 1, 2012 - 03:00.
Mr. Author, i wonder what you were thinking while you thought you were watching the video. Fuel subsidy is a scam. I believe you wrote this just because you want to boast that you've written something on fuel subsidy. In that case, we've read you. People who say SR doesn't post articles that support GEJ's policy, here is a time-wasting one for you to read. Goodluck to you all but as for me, i'm good.
@Christopher C Eke: You have just wasted 4hrs of your lifetime
Submitted by tundemash (not verified) on January 31, 2012 - 23:55.
@Christopher C Eke
U claimed u watched the video but unfortunately it looks like u just wasted 4 hrs of your lifetime.
Could u tell this forum if any of those Minister knew how much fuel Nigerians actually consumed. In your world, increase in price of fuel should be used to control population? what a thought. No wonder the Western world does not really respect an average black man! For your info, in the united kingdom, the higher the number of kids, the more your benefits from the system.
can you also tell this forum, from the home video you watched, what was govt's response when queries why our refineries isn't working? Could also tell this forum why Nigeria is the only oil producing country in the world with no functioning refinery and importing refined fuel ?
Upside Down Reasoning
Submitted by tonsoyo (not verified) on January 31, 2012 - 22:13.
You reasoned upside down like a bat. Where did you put the essential ingredient of governance as a social contract?
The fact that the primary duty of a government is the welfare of its people?
If you agree that corruption is rife, why take more from the people to feed the corruption clearing house of government?
Which one should come first, taking care of corruption or taking more from we the people for the corrupt public officials to manage, stoopid?
I wonder why morons like you still make fool of yourselves in the public?
Well said. Population is a
Submitted by Nsikak Udo (not verified) on January 31, 2012 - 20:04.
Well said. Population is a factor that rarely features in local analyses of the poverty equation. Yet it is the most important one after corruption. You may even argue that the population explosion drives corruption. Take the man with 4 wives and 3 children from each. You are talking of a family of 17. What legal income can he earn to sustain the large family? It is myopic that so called oil wealth holds significant aces. Population has already caught up with the oil reserves. This is pobvious if you consider Saudi Arabia, population: 35 million, Reserves 260 billion barrels, Iran: Reserve: 137 billion barrels, Population:76 million. Iraq: Reserve: 115 billion barrels, Population:28 million. Libya: Reserve: 47 billion barrels, Population: 6.6 million, Kuwait: Reserve: 102 billion barrels, Population:2.6 million. Ecuador: Reserve: 16.2 billion barrels, Population: 14 million. Nigeria's 160 million people exclusively rely on 35 billion barrels.
Lets stop being myopic. We
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on January 31, 2012 - 16:11.
Lets stop being myopic. We just think Oil, Oil, Oil and thats all?
SAME BEATUP IDEAS
Submitted by ibrahim saad (not verified) on January 31, 2012 - 09:30.
WHEN "INTELLECTUALS" START THE SUBSIDY ISSUE ON REDUCING CORRUPTION, PROVIDING SHOCK ABSORBERS, USING THE SAVINGS FROM FUEL AND ALL THAT NONSENSE I KNOW IMMEDIATELY THAT THEY ARE EITHER IGNORANT OR IMF APOLOGISTS. THE REAL THOUGHT STOPPER IN THIS CASE IS THE SIMPLE QUESTION "WHY ARE WE IMPORTING FUEL?" NOT ONLY DO WE IMPORT BUT WE HAPPEN TO BE THE ONLY OIL PRODUCER IN THE WORLD TO DO SO. WHO WILL ASK THE GOVT FOR ME WHAT THEY ARE DOING ABOUT INTERNAL REFINING? I DONT WANT CHEAP FUEL AND I DONT WANT FUEL MADE EXPENSIVE BECAUSE OUR NEIGHBOURS SELL AT A HIGH PRICE.
VENEZUELA HAS SUCCEEDED IN BRINGING DOWN THE PRICE OF REFINED FUEL IN THE SOUTH AMERICAN SUB-REGION BECAUSE IT SELLS CHEAPER THAN THE MULTINATIONAL GIANTS.
IF WE CAN REFINE FUEL INTERNALLY AND SELL TO OUR CITIZENS AND NEIGHBOURING COUNTRIES AT N40 PER LITER AND STILL MAKE A PROFIT, WHAT IS WRONG WITH THAT?
WHY DO WE SEEK INTERNATIONAL PROFITS WHEN WE DONT PAY INTERNATIONAL WAGES?
DISCREDITED CAPITALISM
Submitted by Peter (not verified) on January 31, 2012 - 04:39.
'My unpopular position is that fuel subsidy does not provide poor class of Nigerians much needed incentive to freely navigate their common sense away farther from the viciousness of poverty. For instance, folks having too many kids because of their religious or customary or political beliefs should face the trickle down effects of transportation costs and the cost of all other things associated with energy as a way for society at large to be serious with family planning—'
Indeed. And the children who are being equally punished by draconian economic measures are being incentivised to do what? Visit the likes of you at night with AK-47s?
