By Hon. Yemi Arokodare
Former Member, House of Representatives | Ombudsman
I strongly support the recent position of former Vice President Atiku Abubakar that Nigeria must reconsider its approach to fuel subsidy and introduce a targeted, transparent and properly managed intervention to reduce the unbearable economic pressure on ordinary Nigerians.
Let us stop pretending that subsidy removal has solved Nigeria’s problems.
It has not.
The promise was that removing fuel subsidy would eliminate waste, curb corruption, strengthen government finances and create a more efficient petroleum sector. Yet Nigerians continue to witness serious concerns about transparency, accountability, inefficiency and corruption across the oil and gas value chain.
Subsidy removal did not magically eliminate corruption in Nigeria’s petroleum sector.
If corruption remains, if leakages remain, if inefficiencies remain, and if the institutions responsible for regulating the sector remain incapable of delivering full accountability, why should the ordinary Nigerian be expected to carry the overwhelming burden of the adjustment?
Why should the worker pay more for transportation?
Why should the farmer pay more to move his produce?
Why should the trader pay more to transport goods?
Why should businesses pay more for energy and logistics?
Why should families watch their income lose value every month?
Why should Nigerians become the beast of burden for failures they did not create?
Economic reform cannot mean transferring the consequences of government and institutional failures directly into the homes and pockets of citizens.
The reality is undeniable. When petrol prices rise sharply, transportation costs rise. When transportation costs rise, the cost of moving food rises. When logistics become more expensive, businesses increase their prices. And when the prices of food, goods and services rise faster than incomes, the Nigerian family becomes poorer.
This is not an abstract economic theory.
It is the daily reality of millions of Nigerians.
Government cannot celebrate increased revenue while ignoring the declining purchasing power of the people whose taxes, labour and consumption sustain the economy.
Fiscal stability is important, but the welfare of citizens cannot be treated as collateral damage in the pursuit of fiscal stability.
The purpose of government is not merely to collect more money. Government exists to create an environment in which citizens can live, work, produce and prosper with dignity.
This is why Atiku Abubakar’s proposal deserves serious consideration.
A targeted fuel subsidy should not be presented as a return to the old regime of opaque subsidies, fraudulent claims and import racketeering. It should be a strategic intervention designed to provide immediate relief while government fixes the structural problems in the petroleum sector.
And there is an important distinction that must be made:
A targeted subsidy is an intervention, not a permanent economic solution.
It should have clear objectives, strict accountability, measurable outcomes and a defined pathway toward eventual reduction as domestic refining capacity, local production and energy efficiency improve.
The purpose should be to give Nigerians breathing space—not to create another permanent drain on public resources.
Government should use such an intervention to support domestic refining, reduce the cost of transportation and logistics, protect vulnerable households, support farmers and small businesses, and ultimately bring down the cost of food and essential commodities.
But alongside this temporary intervention, government must confront the real problems.
We need functional refineries.
We need greater domestic refining capacity.
We need transparency across the oil and gas value chain.
We need stronger regulation.
We need accountability for corruption and leakages.
We need policies that encourage investment and increase domestic production.
And we need an energy sector that can eventually stand on its own without perpetual government intervention.
The answer cannot be to abandon Nigerians to unbearable hardship simply because previous subsidy regimes were badly managed.
If the old system was corrupt, fix the corruption.
If the system was opaque, introduce transparency.
If importation created opportunities for racketeering, strengthen domestic refining.
If public funds were stolen, prosecute those responsible.
But do not punish 200 million Nigerians for the failures of a system they did not design and do not control.
There is nothing progressive about making people poorer in the name of reform.
There is nothing sustainable about an economy where wages cannot keep pace with the cost of transportation, food and basic necessities.
And there is nothing responsible about asking Nigerians to endure indefinite hardship on the promise that prosperity will eventually arrive.
Nigerians cannot eat promises.
They cannot transport themselves to work with promises.
They cannot feed their families with economic statistics.
They cannot keep their businesses alive with assurances about future utopian prosperity.
The people need relief now because the Government is not cutting any costs but asking a bewildered and beleaguered people to continue to fasten a belt that is already overfastened.
Atiku’s position therefore deserves more than political dismissal. It deserves a serious national conversation about how Government can combine immediate intervention with long-term structural reform.
The debate should no longer be trapped in the false choice between “subsidy removal” and “subsidy restoration.”
The real question is:
«What policy will reduce the burden on Nigerians today while ensuring that Nigeria does not need such an intervention tomorrow?»
That is the responsible approach.
That is the balanced approach.
And that is the conversation Nigeria urgently needs.
Nigeria is a country blessed with oil, gas, human capital and enormous economic potential. Our people should not remain trapped in poverty because government has chosen to measure reform by what it spends rather than by what it delivers.
Reforms must serve the people, not sacrifice the people for their elected representatives and their unelected family members to live in obscene opulence.
Nigerian families should not be the beast of burden.
The burden of reform must be shared fairly, and government must carry its own share.
I therefore welcome Atiku Abubakar’s renewed commitment to a targeted subsidy intervention that prioritises the welfare and purchasing power of Nigerians.
The ultimate goal must be an economy where fuel is affordable because Nigeria produces and refines efficiently, not because Government is permanently paying the difference.
Until we reach that point, however, Government has a responsibility to protect its citizens from policies that make survival increasingly impossible.
Nigerians deserve relief, accountability and economic dignity, not endless hardship disguised as reform.
That should be the priority of every responsible government.
