National Leader of the All Progressives Congress, APC, and former governor
\nof Lagos State, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu, has described former president
\nGoodluck Jonathan\u2019s Sure-P programme as a monumental fraud which only
\nobjective was to siphon public funds into the pockets of its architects.<\/p>\n
According to Tinubu, the only thing sure about Sure-P was that its
\narchitects would siphon the public\u2019s funds to fatten their own wallets.
\n\u201dThey wanted to save money (for themselves) yet expend the people for no
\ngood reason at all,\u201d he added.<\/p>\n
In a statement entitled: Ending Price Fixing, The Making of Economic
\nSense, released on Thursday, the APC leader commended President Muhammadu
\nBuhari for being courageous in his decision to remove the oil subsidy,
\nadding that the president did what is right.<\/p>\n
\u201dPresident Buhari after carefully weighing the options decided to do what
\nis right. In an act of courage he removed the oil subsidy thereby freeing
\nthe downstream component of this strategic sector of the economy from the
\ndistortions of price fixing.\u201d<\/p>\n
Tinubu\u2019s statement read:<\/em><\/p>\n Ending Price Fixing, The Making of Economic Sense<\/em><\/p>\n To construct the right building sometimes means we have to tear down the<\/em> As political progressives, we are anchored by a healthy and strong regard<\/em> Yet, as progressives we must be pragmatic and not allow ourselves to<\/em> Against this background, we must assess the recent decision to allow the<\/em> Understandably the new pricing decision elicited mixed reactions from a<\/em> The decision to end the subsidy was hard but it was also inevitable. It<\/em> While the price of fuel was cheap in paper, these were the hidden costs<\/em> President Buhari after carefully weighing the options decided to do what<\/em> The Buhari government took a vastly different approach. Given the<\/em> Thus, President Buhari followed through with a 500 billon fund to support<\/em> With regard to our petroleum sector, The President\u2019s decision constitutes<\/em> For almost 3 decades we have entertained distortions in the downstream<\/em> The oil sector became unattractive to both local and foreign investors.<\/em> As it now stands, while we were paying on the front end a low price for<\/em> Moreover, there are vastly better ways to spend the same money and<\/em> National Leader of the All Progressives Congress, APC, and former governor of Lagos State, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu, has described former president Goodluck Jonathan\u2019s Sure-P programme as a monumental fraud which…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":28056,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[17,5],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-49413","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-exclusive","category-news"],"yoast_head":"\n
\nwrong one standing in our way. Our economic development hinges in equal<\/em>
\nmeasure on saying good bye to debilitating and corrupted old practices as<\/em>
\nit does on embracing efficient, wealth creating new ones.<\/em><\/p>\n
\nfor the positive role government must assume in ensuring fair play and the<\/em>
\njust allocation of wealth and benefits within our political economy. We<\/em>
\nunderstand that the so called free market is not always fair. This is the<\/em>
\nmajor reason that we advocate a comprehensive policy of economic<\/em>
\ndevelopment projects coupled with social programs. These development<\/em>
\nprojects will build the infrastructure and create jobs that were beyond<\/em>
\nthe ability and rationale of our private sector to do. The social programs<\/em>
\nwill bring succor to those the dynamics of the free market would have<\/em>
\notherwise left behind.<\/em><\/p>\n
\nbecome blinded by or render ourselves subservient to ideological bias.<\/em>
\nIdeology is meant to serve us, not us to serve it. As such, we must<\/em>
\nrecognize that there are certain things the workings of the market perform<\/em>
\nbetter over the longer arc of time than government may perform.<\/em>
\nEstablishing the most efficient price for what is essentially an economic<\/em>
\ncommodity is one such thing better left to the interplay of supply and<\/em>
\ndemand. While short-term exigencies may at times call for government<\/em>
\naction to stabilize markets and prices, government\u2019s long-term<\/em>
\ndetermination of such economic prices, although initiated with the finest<\/em>
\nintentions, often contorts into something ugly and callous. It tends to<\/em>
\ntransmute into corruption, waste and distorted pricing signals that cost<\/em>
\nthe economy more than they benefit the people.<\/em><\/p>\n
\nworkings of supply and demand to determine the price of fuel. Most of us<\/em>
\nhave called this process one of deregulation. This is an inaccuracy that<\/em>
\nshould be promptly corrected. This decision should end arbitrary<\/em>
\ngovernment price fixing. By ending this price fixing, government<\/em>
\nregulation of this market will not be eliminated. It will simply change<\/em>
\nfrom its emphasis on maintaining a subsidized price to ensuring that the<\/em>
\nmarket remains free and devoid of collusion so that sufficient supply is<\/em>
\navailable at a defensible and affordable albeit higher than subsidy price.<\/em>
\nGovernment must still monitor this market to ensure against unjust<\/em>
\nenrichment that comes from attempts at price fixing.<\/em><\/p>\n
\ncross section of Nigerians. This is understandable in view of the fact<\/em>
\nthat the fuel subsidy had been with us for such a long period that it<\/em>
\nseemed integral to our political and economic life. However, we should not<\/em>
\nlament the departure of something just because of its longevity<\/em>
\nparticularly when that very policy had ceased to serve us long ago.<\/em><\/p>\n
\nhad distorted into a system where wrongdoers benefited at the expense of<\/em>
\nthe innocent. The bogus supplier was paid for supplying nothing while you<\/em>
\nsweated in long lines for fuel that was never there. The smuggler secreted<\/em>
\nfuel across the border while our economy crossed the border into fuel<\/em>
\nscarcity. As the price stayed fixed at a low level, investors were<\/em>
\napprehensive about fixing existing or building new refineries. Our<\/em>
\npetrochemical industry remained unfertilized because potential investors<\/em>
\ncould not decipher how they could make a decent return under such a<\/em>
\npricing regime. Because of these imbalances, we were forced to export hard<\/em>
\ncurrency and many jobs to purchase fuel and other products abroad.<\/em><\/p>\n
\nthat made the subsidy regime an expensive and heavy yoke the nation could<\/em>
\nill continue. With dwindling revenue from oil due to the slump in global<\/em>
\noil prices and a dwindling forex reserve, the country could no longer live<\/em>
\nin denial.<\/em><\/p>\n
\nis right. In an act of courage he removed the oil subsidy thereby freeing<\/em>
\nthe downstream component of this strategic sector of the economy from the<\/em>
\ndistortions of price fixing.<\/em>
\nHowever, this decision was not to be a step toward conservative austerity<\/em>
\nas practiced by the former government. That government simply wanted to<\/em>
\nend the program that they may prove obedient to neoliberal economic<\/em>
\ndoctrines. They offered no programs of valid compensation to the people.<\/em>
\nInstead, they instigated a policy of monumental fraud known as Sure-P.<\/em>
\nHowever, the only thing sure about it was that its architects would<\/em>
\nsiphon the public\u2019s funds to fatten their own wallets. They wanted to<\/em>
\nsave money (for themselves) yet expend the people for no good reason at<\/em>
\nall.<\/em><\/p>\n
\ninefficiencies inherent in the pricing regime, this administration asked<\/em>
\nthe fundamental question: could this money be better spent to help the<\/em>
\nmost vulnerable of our people. For it was also recognized that the pricing<\/em>
\nregime was a regressive feature. Its benefit went disproportionately to<\/em>
\nthe well off who needed no such help. Better to use the sums to more<\/em>
\ndirectly and exclusively assist poor and working class Nigerians.<\/em><\/p>\n
\na social safety program and empower the poor and needy. Five million<\/em>
\nSchool children will be fed for 200 days. Other plans of funding social<\/em>
\ninfrastructure, education, transportation, health and other critical areas<\/em>
\nneeding attention. What the President did is about the future of our<\/em>
\ncountry and that of the next generation.<\/em><\/p>\n
\na major step toward removing the nightmare of fuel importation and its<\/em>
\nattendant hardships especially to our foreign reserve condition. It was<\/em>
\nthe right choice to make. The club of fuel importers had become a parasite<\/em>
\nand a drain on our economy. With this decision the exploitation by<\/em>
\nmarketers, the unchecked smuggling, mismanagement, lost of productive man<\/em>
\nhours with people waiting in fuel queues, traffic congestion and health<\/em>
\nhazards associated with black market and other desperate practices will<\/em>
\nsteadily pass away.<\/em><\/p>\n
\nsector by operating an opaque system susceptible to manipulation and<\/em>
\nstructured in a way that allowed a few people to gain mightily from the<\/em>
\nsystem and feed fat on the misery and frustration of millions of<\/em>
\nNigerians.<\/em><\/p>\n
\nGovernment price pricing was a disincentive. Our oil refineries became<\/em>
\nepileptic and later comatose. But now investment in the sector will open<\/em>
\nto all. Instead of fighting this measure, opposing segments of organized<\/em>
\nlabor should consider collective investment in refineries. Such investment<\/em>
\nwill enrich membership and give them a direct interest in the success of<\/em>
\nrefineries crucial to our national growth.<\/em><\/p>\n
\nfuel when it could be gotten, we were being asked to pay too high a price<\/em>
\nin hidden and indirect costs for such malpractice to continue. Not every<\/em>
\ncost is defined by what comes out of your pocket. There are times when the<\/em>
\ngreatest cost is the failure to receive a benefit otherwise due.<\/em>
\nIt is time to come to grips with the hard facts of the price fixing. It<\/em>
\ncuts and bleeds the economy in ways more numerous and deeper than those<\/em>
\nit heals.<\/em><\/p>\n
\nmaterially improve the wellbeing of millions of our people. This<\/em>
\ngovernment did not withdraw the subsidy in order to save them but spend<\/em>
\nthe people. It is transferring the funds to better spend them and better<\/em>
\nsave the people.<\/em>
\nNothing in this world is perfect but this decision is a just and correct<\/em>
\none aimed at bolstering the economy while better caring for those the<\/em>
\nsystem has unfairly treated. I can find little fault in the new policy<\/em>
\ntaken and the reasons for it. When all is placed in the balance, the<\/em>
\nscales now better tip in favor of better economy and future because of<\/em>
\nthe decision so wisely made.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"