NDWG Member: Crisis was self-imposed

10 January 2012

I'm no economist but it's obviously nonsense; I can't think of any basic need or transaction that ordinary citizens routinely access that wouldn't be affected by transport costs, not to mention that people themselves need to move around and to go any distance, must rely on some version of the internal combustion engine.

It seems to me that the necessary argument is not whether one is for or against removal of the subsidy - most people given the facts will come the rapid conclusion that it needs to go.  But the approach they have adopted is another matter.  Where in the world could you more than double pump prices overnight, without warning and not face a backlash? Anyone could foresee  that the transition needs to be gradual to be sustainable, and long advance notice given so that people had time to get used to the idea. And why should promises about investing in development cut any ice with a population that has, year after year, seen government funds stolen or spent on anything but development? If they were really serious about winning support for the policy, could they not have revived the anti-corruption effort and let it show some results first, set up and demonstrated new transparency standards for government expenditure, or shared the pain by announcing big savings in government costs before hitting people's in their wallets? Having watched, less than a year ago, as federal budget after federal budget was raided to pay for the PDP's election campaign, Nigerians have every reason to be cynical about what will be done with the savings. They are not stupid and it really doesn't make sense for critics of the subsidy to repeatedly remind us that  it's a bad thing - that just isn't the issue ... 

This crisis was self-imposed, unnecessary and massively decreases the authority of the Nigerian state at a time when there are  other serious risk factors: the Jonathan administration - already  undermined by its incompetent and incoherent response to Boko Haram's attacks - has been shown to be completely out of touch with the country and there is a corresponding loss of respect at street level. Jonathan has compounded the damage by informing the world that his administration, his security agencies, the judiciary and the legislature are all infiltrated by Boko Haram supporters, indeed, that the situation is more alarming than during the civil war! Why, in the midst of so many other problems, would he think it helpful to inform Nigerians that foundational institutions have been compromised by a fundamentalist sect? If he thinks it is true, there is every reason to use discretion while he tries to address the situation. If  - as is more likely - it is an hyperbolic attempt to revive waning support, he has not thought it through - such a strategem can only end badly; why citizens should not conclude that they should immediately arm themselves, as the helpful leaders of CAN advise, I do not know - in fact that plainly is the inclination in the south-east at the moment.