The announcement by the Tinubu administration of a 30-day petrol discount at NNPC filling stations exposes the contradictions and political opportunism that have characterised the government's handling of the fuel subsidy question.
For months, President Bola Tinubu and the ruling APC have insisted that
petrol subsidy is gone for good. When former Vice President Atiku Abubakar
proposed a transparent, production-based subsidy to make locally refined petrol
affordable, the administration and its propagandists dismissed the proposal as
economically reckless.
Today, the same administration is announcing government-negotiated price
ceilings, discounted petrol sales and arrangements to cushion consumers against
market fluctuations.
What has changed: the economic realities or the approach of the 2027
general elections?
While we welcome any genuine attempt to reduce the suffering of
Nigerians, a temporary intervention must not become another exercise in
political window-dressing.
The first question is one of fairness and accessibility.
NNPC Retail has a network of more than 900 outlets nationwide. Spread
across Nigeria's 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory, that represents
an average of roughly 25 stations per state and the FCT, although the actual
distribution is far from uniform.
What happens to Nigerians living in communities without NNPC filling
stations? Must they travel long distances, spending scarce money on transport,
to access a government-sponsored discount?
More troubling is NNPC's own July 2026 report, which placed petrol
availability across its retail network at just 52 per cent.
How does a government that has struggled to guarantee consistent petrol
availability across its own retail network intend to deliver meaningful
nationwide relief through that same network?
The second question concerns the government's increasingly convenient
definition of subsidy.
Finance Minister Taiwo Oyedele insists that the proposed interventions
are neither subsidies nor price controls. Yet the government is negotiating a
ceiling below which petrol costs may be held, while proposing that refiners and
importers recover any resulting shortfall when market conditions improve.
Who ultimately bears that shortfall? How will it be recovered? Will
public resources, NNPC revenues or future consumers carry the burden?
An intervention that transfers costs, postpones their recovery or uses
public resources to make petrol cheaper raises legitimate subsidy-related
questions that cannot be dismissed by changing its name.
The third question is why Nigerians must settle for 30 days of selective
relief after more than three years of escalating hardship.
Nigerians need permanently affordable petrol, not an election-season
discount that expires after 30 days.
Atiku's production-based subsidy proposal offers a more coherent
direction: support domestic refining through transparent, targeted and
time-bound crude-pricing arrangements, with safeguards to ensure that lower
production costs translate into lower pump prices for consumers across the
country.
It is designed to strengthen local production, reduce avoidable costs
and provide relief beyond a handful of retail outlets.
Interestingly, the Tinubu administration is now also discussing forward
crude sales to domestic refiners. This reinforces the case for examining
production-side interventions rather than treating them as economic heresy
simply because Atiku proposed them.
The Tinubu government cannot condemn Atiku's proposal in September and
embrace the logic of petrol-price intervention in October while pretending
there is no contradiction.
Policies are made for the welfare of people. People are not created to
suffer for the sake of policies.
We challenge the administration to publish the details of its proposed
price modulation, disclose the financial implications, identify all
participating outlets and explain how Nigerians without access to NNPC stations
will benefit.
Most importantly, the government must explain how this intervention will
translate into lower transport fares, cheaper food and meaningful reductions in
the cost of living.
Nigerians deserve an enduring policy response, not temporary political
relief calculated against the electoral calendar.
It is particularly revealing that this announcement comes barely a day
after Daniel Bwala, President Tinubu's Special Adviser on Policy Communication,
acknowledged on national television that the administration's economic reforms
had pushed more Nigerians into poverty.
On Channels Television's Politics Today on Wednesday, Bwala admitted
that more Nigerians had fallen into poverty as a consequence of the
government's reforms.
When even the President's own adviser acknowledges that government
policies have pushed Nigerians deeper into poverty, it becomes indefensible to
continue treating those policies as untouchable.
The question is no longer whether Nigerians are suffering. Even the
Presidency has acknowledged it. The question is why the government waited until
the approach of another election to begin contemplating measures it previously
dismissed when Atiku proposed them.
If the Tinubu administration has finally recognised that government
intervention is necessary to protect Nigerians from unbearable petrol prices,
it should have the humility to acknowledge that reality instead of playing
politics with the welfare of citizens.
Nigerians cannot eat economic theories, fuel their vehicles with
political propaganda or feed their families on promises of future prosperity.
President Tinubu needs to be reminded that between 1999-2007, fuel
subsidy was not removed nor were taxes increased yet the government of
that era grew the Nigerian economy to number one in Africa. But today,
with all the increases, Nigeria is number three.
The welfare of Nigerians must come before Tinubu's political chess game
and the survival of an administration increasingly preoccupied with securing
another term.
.jpg)
0 Comments
DISCLAIMER
The views and opinions expressed on this platform as comments were freely made by each person under his or her own volition or responsibility and were neither suggested nor dictated by the owners of News PLATFORM or any of their contracted staff. So we take no liability whatsoever for such comments.
Please take note!