There are reports that some Governors are retreating from their wholehearted support for the decision of President Goodluck Jonathan to remove subsidy on petroleum products starting from January next year. The Governors are reported to have set up a panel of six to advise them on the subsidy issue, as well as the Sovereign Wealth Fund. Substantial investment into the Fund is expected to come from the revenue that will be realized from the fuel subsidy if or when it is removed. Then, the Chairman of the Northern Governors Forum, Dr. Mu’azu Babangida Aliyu and the former Governor of Benue State, Senate Minority Leader George Akume had a public falling-out over the merits or disadvantages of removing the subsidy. At a seminar to mark the 77th birthday of General Yakubu Gowon, Governor Babangida Aliyu supported the removal of the subsidy but regretted that Nigerians do not understand its benefits. He said only very few Nigerians benefit from the subsidy, but Senator Akume disagreed; saying that removing the subsidy will have a negative effect on Nigerians, and put the basic things in life well beyond the reach of most people.
It is not surprising that many Governors are reacting to hostile public opinion which greeted their ringing endorsement of the subsidy policy. They got their fingers burnt in their desire to acquire a bigger share of the revenue that accrues from our petroleum resources. Their case is straight-forward, or so it appears to them. They need a lot more resources than they presently realize to execute development plans, projects and programmes that will impact on the people. The new N18, 000 national minimum wage is eating too deeply into the little they have, and they are now virtually limited to paying salaries of civil servants, and nothing more. In spite of efforts to lay-off thousands of state employees, they find that there is little left for anything else. Their hundreds, or in some cases, thousands of political appointees have to be settled. Luxurious lifestyles and huge take-home pays are at risk, and a political process which survives only on its capacity to dispense huge patronage cannot be sustained any longer. Governors had always suspected the subsidy as a wasteful drainage which deprives them of huge resources without accountability or transparency. In the vast majority of the States, petrol, kerosene and diesel sell at much higher prices than they should, so Governors from these States wonder who or what the subsidy is helping. Most Governors in these States whose citizens pay huge amounts to buy the products, in addition to paying huge subsidies so that a few Nigerians can become filthy rich or have the products at much lower costs, believe that it is in the interest of their citizens that the subsidy is removed.
There is a case to be made for the manner in which majority of Nigerians pay huge subsides with nothing to show for it, as an excuse for supporting the removal of the subsidy. Governors who think they receive much lower allocations each month as a result of the subsides need to engage their people and explain the basic economics and politics of the policy. To endorse it in a meeting with the President, and then turn around and blame the public for ignorance is not responsible leadership. Most Governors have only a remote knowledge of the crushing poverty and hopelessness of most Nigerians. Their problem is that they are too removed from their citizens, either because they fear them, or because they cannot handle the deluge of legitimate demands which communities make. They are surrounded by handpicked appointees, cronies and bureaucrats who have lost their capacities to advise. Governance has been reduced to what the Governor does or says in the comfort and luxury of Government House.
If Governors want to make a positive contribution to the national debate on removal of subsidy, and wish to avert looming and potentially-damaging crises, they should first advise President Jonathan to embark on genuine and far-reaching consultations with major stakeholders in the nation, including labour and civil society groups before he removes the subsidy. Second, they must, themselves, engage the citizens in dialogue that will highlight the benefits and disadvantages of the removal of the subsidy. They must have facts and figures which should show that more will be gained than lost by the removal. Third, they must look inwards and examine strategies for reducing their dangerous dependence on monthly allocations from proceeds from sale of crude petroleum. This is particularly important for northern Governors who have become complacent and spoilt by monthly handouts that are becoming increasingly threatened by politics.
Governors should represent their people fairly and courageously in their dealings with each other and the Federal Government. Their eager endorsement of the subsidy removal plans of President has pitched them against public opinion. They need to know that Nigerians are suspicious over the plans of the administration and do not trust their leaders. When Governors support a major policy of the Federal Government, they are committing their people behind it. They become part of whatever problem such policy generates, and cannot be part of the solution. The heat they feel from public reaction to the issue is genuine. They should respect the views and opinions of Nigerians and either go with them or work to change them. They are servants of the people, not masters who should take whatever decisions they want because the people are too ignorant to decide for themselves.
No comments:
Post a Comment