Devaluation is grossly overrated, by Simon Kolawole - Newstrends
Connect with us

Opinion

Devaluation is grossly overrated, by Simon Kolawole

Published

on

On Monday, Vice-President Yemi Osinbajo might have made his boldest pitch yet for his expected presidential bid in 2023. Speaking at the administration’s midterm retreat — with President Muhammadu Buhari and Mr Godwin Emefiele, the governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), in the room — Osinbajo appeared to have broken ranks with the government over its forex policy, faulting the demand management strategy and declaring the exchange rate as “artificially low” and “negatively affecting” the inflow of foreign exchange into the economy. The solution, he proposed, was to move “our rates” to be “reflective of the market” to encourage an inflow of “new dollars”.

The VP also raised issues with CBN’s direct intervention programmes which, he said, make it look like there is a competition between the monetary and fiscal authorities. (Interestingly, Osinbajo is the chairman of the steering committee of the Infrastructure Corporation of Nigeria Ltd, another brainchild of the CBN). His call for synergy between monetary and fiscal authorities is definitely in order and his worries over the potential room for arbitrage with multiple exchange rates are valid. But my little concern was that these are basic house-keeping issues that the VP should not be discussing on TV. We outsiders may get the impression that this government is divided against itself.

By being publicly critical of this administration’s demand management policy — which seeks to reduce forex outflow by curtailing importation of goods not considered as essential, such as rice and private jets — Osinbajo might also have sent a strong message to certain constituencies that he is his own man. That is, “Osinbajonomics” is going to be different from “Buharinomics”. This should please the World Bank/International Monetary Fund (IMF) and some Nigerian experts who have always maintained that for the country to attract foreign capital and boost forex supply, the naira has to be floated. They argue that like water, the national currency will eventually find its level.

Osinbajo’s position was quite clear and unambiguous, despite the attempted clarification by his media team. My first response was: “Shots fired!” Buhari has spoken openly against devaluation since he came to power. Why would the VP be openly critical of a policy that clearly has the imprimatur of the president all over it? Why make such comments at a televised forum? Why shout at someone you can whisper to? Was it an error of judgment? The headlines thereafter said Osinbajo called for devaluation. No matter his intention, the ordinary interpretation on the streets would be that the vice-president was campaigning for more hardship on Nigerian masses.

Nevertheless, the clarification begged the question: is devaluation a dirty word? In my own admittedly limited knowledge of economics, there could be justifications for devaluation. Three instantly come to mind (1) to make non-commodity exports cheaper in the global markets (2) to stimulate foreign investment (3) to encourage forex inflow into the system — as the vice-president himself was trying to suggest when he said “we can’t get new dollars into the system where the exchange rate is artificially low”. That is why I still do not understand why his media team tried to take back or re-phrase his words thereafter, saying he was only talking about eliminating arbitrage.

My point of departure with the vice-president is that he committed the same error as is the wont of many Nigerian neo-liberal economists and economic analysts: preaching the gospel of “seek ye first devaluation and every other thing shall be added unto thee”. Devaluation is packaged as the ultimate solution to all forex problems. The claim is that the moment you devalue your currency, foreign investors will come rushing in with tonnes of dollars. That is rather over-optimistic. There are many things that determine forex inflow. Devaluation is just one of them. And there is a limit to what devaluation can achieve in a poorly structured economy such as ours. That is my position.

For instance, while the VP was criticising CBN’s demand management policy, he was loudly silent on the elephant in the room: fuel subsidy. It is estimated that by the end of the year, the subsidy bill will be around N2tr. This is already a very big problem for public finance, but there is another sticky dimension. Ages ago, the NNPC used to sell its share of oil to earn “new dollars” and boost our reserves. However, the corporation now operates a direct sale direct purchase (DSDP) swap system under which we give crude to foreign refineries in exchange for refined products. That means no dollar exchanges hands. And that means billions of “new dollars” will not enter CBN reserves.

To be fair to the VP, arbitrage is serious economic distortion. The difference of N160 between official and parallel rates is huge. The CBN has argued that with the stringent rules in place and the calibre of those now getting forex legitimately — such as government agencies, manufacturers and airlines, etc — the room for arbitrage has shrunk. The parallel market, the CBN insists, accounts for less than 7% of our forex transactions. Nevertheless, eradicating arbitrage is a very simple “procedure”: just devalue the naira from N412/$ to N572/$. If supply issues persist, devalue again. But be assured that if rising cost of living leads to another #EndSARS uprising, our experts will be nowhere to be found.

 

To what do I liken this gospel of devaluation? It is like constantly repainting a commercial bus to make it attractive to passengers, whereas the seats are tattered, the air conditioning is broken and the engine is failing. We can keep devaluing the naira hoping to attract “new dollars” but our fundamental structural problems remain. While the value of the local currency may be a factor in attracting foreign investment, it is neither the sole nor the most important determinant. Capitalists also look critically at country risks. If the value of local currency was the magic pill, Zimbabwe and Venezuela would be the biggest recipients of “new dollars”. There are surely other factors at play.

 

In a country where separatists, kidnappers, herders, bandits and terrorists are having a ball, devaluation cannot be the tonic for “new dollars”. We have a country where there appears to be an official policy to muscle out some investors. The attorney-general just woke up one morning and said he dreamt that MTN evaded tax and immediately slammed a bill of $2bn on them. The information minister has been working overtime trying to chase Multichoice out of Nigeria. Potential foreign investors see all these things. They are aware of the hostile business environment, the frustrating legal system, the chaotic ports and the bureaucracy. But we somehow think devaluation is the cure.

 

Without a doubt, devaluation can temporarily relieve some symptoms and bring some inflow — with “temporarily” being the operative word. As a matter of fact, the CBN has been adjusting the exchange rate since 2016 while throwing even the kitchen sink to save the naira from drowning. The rate was N197/$ six years ago and is now N412/$. But, truth be told, devaluation as a tool of attracting foreign exchange is not sustainable, neither is it a sure pathway to economic development. The larger issue is: how do we attract multiple sources of forex into the economy so that we are not hopelessly tied to oil revenues and devaluation? How can we export more?

 

Advertisement

 

The fundamental flaws of our economy have always been there — papered over by cycles of oil boom. When oil revenues are high, we go binging. When oil revenues are low, we go begging. When oil prices crashed in the early 1980s, we faced our first major challenge in the oil era. It was a mess. Inflation went through the roof. Our reserves were so down we were no longer creditworthy to import essential commodities. We had to queue up to buy rice and tin milk. Civil servants were being owed salaries for up to seven months. Things were so bad that after the military took power, it was a major event on NTA Network News anytime workers were going to receive one-month pay cheque.

 

Under our current circumstances, the CBN has an option: it can actually fold its arms and watch the country go up in flames as government finances plummet and fiscal policies remain in disarray. Civil servants will be owed salaries for months and thousands will be retrenched. Forex demand will keep ballooning. The CBN governor will just be devaluing the naira every Monday to encourage “new dollars” and eliminate arbitrage. Easy-peasy! But by the time we reach N5000/$, our problems will still remain unsolved — because our economic structure is warped and the fundamentals are not solid. Panadol can never treat high blood pressure, no matter the relief it gives for a migraine.

 

I would love to be CBN governor if oil price is $80/barrel, production is over 2mb/d, revenues are in excess of $4bn monthly, reserves are $60bn, forex demand is $2bn, and the fiscal authorities are playing their part. I would just be sleeping and snoring. The real challenge comes when revenues are low and fiscal policies are all over the place. That is when everybody begins to see our nakedness. That is when it becomes more obvious that the foundations of our economy are fickle and feeble. There is no way devaluation can take the place of a proper restructuring of the economy. We need law and order, infrastructure and security for a conducive and productive investment climate.

 

We say we want to diversify exports to attract more non-oil forex inflow, but it is easier for a Nigerian entrepreneur to go to the moon than to export a bag of garlic through our shambolic ports. These are issues obstructing our progress. Osinbajo oversees the presidential committee on ease of doing business and should help tackle these hinderances. Really, devaluation is the easiest thing for any CBN governor to do. But with our structural and infrastructural deficiencies, it will not guarantee capital inflows. Instead, it can lead to more misery for an economy that relies heavily on imports, including food and intermediate goods. We cannot devalue our way to economic prosperity.

 

Advertisement

AND FOUR OTHER THINGS

TAX ATTACK

 

Every time, we say we want more investments in the Nigeria. Every time, we do something that promotes the exactly opposite. According to Order 3 Rule 6 of the Tax Appeal Tribunal (Procedure) rules approved by the ministry of finance in June 2021, if you disagree with a tax assessment by the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS), you have to first pay 50% of the amount before you can dispute it. This is directly in conflict with Paragraph 15(7) of the FIRS Act which allows the appellant to pay the lower amount between 50% of tax paid the previous year and the current assessment. The new rule opens up tax payers to blackmail and extortion and will hurt businesses. Dissonance.

 

CIVIL CASE

 

The federal government has given two options to its workers: be vaccinated against COVID-19 or come with a negative test result, otherwise you can’t go to office from December 1. This comes with many dangers. Some will buy vaccination cards just to obey the directive. The anti-vax propaganda will grow more wings as every new death will be blamed on the vaccine. More so, government machinery may grind to a halt if unvaccinated key officers can’t come to work. Even though I am double-vaccinated, I am not in support of the new rule. Vaccination is an emotional issue for millions of people, most of whom have been brainwashed, so I prefer persuasion to coercion. Caution.

ELECTRONIC SHOCK

There has been excitement everywhere over the decision of the senate to allow electronic transmission of election results as well as direct primaries in which every member of a party will vote to pick candidates. However, I am sorry to say this: didn’t we say PVC would finally put an end to rigging in Nigeria? Why are we still worried about rigging six years after? You see, we always think the problem is the system. I keep saying the problem is the operators of the system. The problem is Nigerians. If Nigerians don’t change, Nigeria won’t change. I must admit, though, that I am enjoying the extremely optimistic public reaction. Unfortunately, it is these expectations that kill us. Gullible.

 

OIL DOOM

 

Crude oil price hit a three-year high of $85/barrel on Friday. Bad news for Nigeria. For one, our subsidy bill just went up, yet again. So, expect more deductions for “under recovery” by the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) as we continue to use our forex to import millions of petrol for the rest of West Africa. Also, we are currently producing 1.25mb/d, way below our export quota — we are short by 360,000b/d. That is a lot of money we are losing every day. Our gain from price rise will, therefore, be marginal. What’s more, businesses that depend on diesel will now pay higher costs. Don’t say I am unpatriotic but I now prefer crude oil at $50/barrel or less. Beneficial.

Loading

Opinion

2027: Tinubu May Get Less Than 10% of Northern Votes — Ard

Published

on

2027: Tinubu May Get Less Than 10% of Northern Votes — Ard

President Bola Tinubu could suffer a dramatic collapse in his Northern support in the 2027 presidential election, securing less than 10 per cent of votes from the region if the poll is free and credible, Convener of the League of Northern Democrats and key promoter of the All-Democratic Alliance (ADA), Dr Umar Ardo, has predicted.

Ardo made the prediction on Monday in an interview on Frontline, a current affairs programme on Eagle 102.5 FM, Ilese-Ijebu, Ogun State, arguing that the outcome would largely reflect how Northern voters assess the Tinubu administration’s performance.

He identified insecurity, worsening poverty, economic hardship and the rising cost of living as major issues likely to influence voting decisions in the region.

According to him, the persistent insecurity affecting communities, farmers, traders and businesses remains one of the administration’s biggest challenges.

READ ALSO:

“You can solve the issue of insecurity and insurgency in one year,” he said, insisting that the Federal Government could significantly reduce the crisis with the right strategy and sufficient political will.

Ardo also faulted the administration’s economic reforms, particularly the removal of fuel subsidy, questioning whether ordinary Nigerians had experienced corresponding benefits.

“Subsidy removal, is it a benefit?” he asked, arguing that the reforms had eroded purchasing power and made basic necessities increasingly unaffordable.

He said the impact had been particularly severe in Northern Nigeria, where a large proportion of the population is economically vulnerable.

“The economic reform has pushed from the state of poverty to destitution,” he said.

The political commentator also raised concerns about political representation under the Tinubu administration, arguing that the composition of government could shape public perception of its commitment to different regions.

Ardo said Northern voters should not be assumed to be permanently aligned with the voting pattern recorded in 2023, stressing that prevailing economic and security conditions would determine their choices in 2027.

“If a free, fair and credible election is conducted in Nigeria, Tinubu can’t get 10 percent of the Northern part,” he declared.

His prediction puts the spotlight on the opposition’s capacity to exploit any erosion of Tinubu’s Northern support, with former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and other opposition figures potentially positioned to benefit from any major electoral realignment.

 

2027: Tinubu May Get Less Than 10% of Northern Votes — Ard

Loading

Continue Reading

Opinion

Beyond the Ballot: Shaping a Bar That Works for All

Published

on

Beyond the Ballot: Shaping a Bar That Works for All

By Asiwaju Kunle Kalejaye, SAN

 

The inaugural address of Mrs. Oyinkansola Badejo-Okusanya, SAN, titled “From the Call to the Cause,” marks a historic turning point for the legal community as she officially assumes office as the 33rd President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) as she wa sworn in by her predecessor, Afam Osigwe, SAN, at the High Court complex in Port Harcourt, Rivers State.

Her leadership, the hiccup of her emergence notwithstanding, represents a historic milestone as the first woman elected to the NBA presidency through a competitive, though highly disputed, national ballot. Her address presents a powerful vision for a “bolder Bar” that actively confronts internal fractures, deep professional disconnects, and economic vulnerabilities. Central to her message is the core understanding that an association tasked with safeguarding judicial independence and speaking truth to power cannot effectively fulfill its national mandate if it remains internally fragmented. By focusing on the professional survival of young lawyers and vowing to act decisively against public misconduct, Badejo-Okusanya highlights an urgent reality: institutional strength requires collective solidarity and institutional determination. Fostering lasting unity within the NBA under this administration demands a deliberate shift from performative governance to deeply institutionalized, structural changes that build bridges across classes, factions, generations, and geographical divides.

To bring the NBA together, the new administration must incorporate proactive mechanisms for post-election reconciliation directly into its governance framework. The leadership must deliberately distance itself from divisive rhetoric and provocative nuances. The competitive nature of Bar elections often leaves behind lingering bitter factions that can stunt long-term cooperation and slow down progressive policies. By building an “olive branch” initiative that integrates runner-up contestants and their core campaign stakeholders into strategic national committees, the leadership can transform former rivals into active co-creators of the Bar’s future. Indeed this strategy which I dubbed the Abraham Lincoln strategy remains an eternal clincher.

Abraham Lincoln won the 1860 presidential election and famously appointed his chief Republican nomination rivals to key cabinet positions. Lincoln believed the country faced extreme peril during the crisis leading into the Civil War l. He wanted the most capable and influential leaders in his administration regardless of past personal competition. He valued robust debate over agreement, using differing viewpoints to make better decisions. This inclusivity must simultaneously bridge the widening economic and generational gap between senior practitioners and younger advocates. Enforcing standardized minimum remuneration and welfare requirements across all local branches will help reduce the economic alienation felt by younger members. To make this sustainable, the administration should establish joint mentorship hubs where senior legal practitioners collaborate with tech-savvy young lawyers on modern areas of practice, such as artificial intelligence, data privacy, and digital commerce, turning a generational divide into a symbiotic avenue for mutual professional empowerment.

True unity also requires restoring civil digital discourse through a comprehensive Digital Ethics Enforcement framework, fulfilling the President’s explicit warning against the breakdown of professional etiquette on social media. The profession has lost some vast mileage due to the digital posture of some members. To achieve this, the NBA can look to established global precedents where foreign bar associations have successfully navigated the complexities of digital misconduct. For instance, the American Bar Association (ABA) successfully integrated technological expectations into its framework via the Ethics 20/20 Commission, explicitly modifying its Model Rules of Professional Conduct such as Rules 1.6 and 8.4 to govern online confidentiality, misleading public statements, and deceptive digital behaviour. Similarly, the Law Society of England and Wales updated its practice note and compliance frameworks to penalize offensive online remarks, reinforcing that comments made by a lawyer in a personal capacity can still be actively disciplined as professional misconduct if public trust is damaged. By adopting a similar structure, the NBA can expand its own Rules of Professional Conduct into a clear code for online behaviour, utilizing its network of regional Ethics and Disciplinary Committees to monitor digital spaces and safely review flagged misconduct via secure portals.

Backing this framework with public disciplinary actions and a tiered system of sanctions will allow the NBA to decisively penalize cyberbullying, transitioning professional disputes into mediated internal forums rather than chaotic public platforms. This digital accountability should be reinforced by introducing mandatory continuing legal education (CLE) modules in digital etiquette, ensuring that practitioners maintain technological and behavioral competence.

Immediately, the NBA must dismantle the persistent perception that it is a “Lagos-Abuja centric” organization. Actively decentralizing national activities, rotating National Executive Council (NEC) meetings across various geopolitical zones, and providing direct financial and technical resources to smaller, rural branches will make every lawyer feel valued regardless of geography. Ultimately, by integrating these targeted, practical strategies and internationally proven ethical standards into the foundational ideals of her inaugural address, the administration can successfully unite its members and establish a cohesive, resilient front capable of defending the rule of law across Nigeria.

The new administration must pursue a deliberate policy towards attracting many docile members back into its fold.
If the new administration must know, the opaque electoral processes that had dogged the association in recent history has adversely affected the morale of a significant number but silent members of the Association. Chief Yomi Alliyu graphically stated the disturbing position when he posited in an opinion piece that: “The NBA has been hijacked by political lawyers to the disaffection of real practitioners of law. “Elections from 2016 or so vide e-voting had been manipulated to favour members of this class.”

The new administration must therefore consciously pursue reconciliatory steps that rein in all members. As at now, the silent class war must end for NBA to achieve its full potential.

I was sorely tempted to headline this peice: Nigerian Bar Association: the road to Kigali. I refrained because I still saw a silver lining which this new administration can latch on to save the NBA from itself!

The “road to Kigali” serves as a grim warning about the risk of total institutional fracture, polarization, and potential irrelevance. If proactive steps are not taken to unify and reform the body, it faces the danger of fracturing into competing, ethnicized, or regionalized professional factions, effectively ending the era of a single, unified voice for the Nigerian Bar.

The 1992 Port Harcourt Conference Crisis, was a definitive moment that brought the NBA to the brink of permanent destruction. Today, unless we play the ostrich, the cries of war are abroad but the present leadership could etch their names in gold if the NBA is consciously, deliberately and clinically steered from self implosion. Their job is cut out for them.Failure to seize the moment may end up placing us all on the road to Kigali.

Asiwaju Kunle Kalejaye SAN
Eagle102.5 FM Ilese-Ijebu

Loading

Continue Reading

Opinion

Why Atiku’s subsidy gambit rattles Tinubu, By Farooq Kperogi

Published

on

Kperogi is a renowned columnist and United States-based professor of journalism.
Farooq Kperogi

Why Atiku’s subsidy gambit rattles Tinubu, By Farooq Kperogi

Atiku Abubakar may finally have discovered the issue that can draw political blood from President Bola Ahmed Tinubu. And I am enjoying seeing the president and his inner circle squirm in discomfort like cats stranded on a hot zinc roof.

On Thursday, barely a day after official campaigns began for the 2027 presidential election, Atiku pledged to restore petrol subsidies if Nigerians elect him president. That pledge, more than anything he has done lately to dislodge Tinubu, is the clearest signal yet that he is prepared to wrest power from the president.

Before now, Atiku expended money, time and energy excavating Tinubu’s past, much of which Nigerians already know. Tinubu’s 1993 civil forfeiture of $460,000 to the US government in a case that grew out of a heroin-trafficking investigation has been public knowledge for years. It was Sahara Reporters that first reported it on September 15, 2008. Fresh FBI or DEA papers are unlikely to suddenly alter electoral attitudes.

The Chicago State University expedition was even less politically useful. Tinubu genuinely attended and graduated from CSU in 1979. Caleb Westberg, the university’s registrar, said so under oath. He agreed that the photocopy Tinubu submitted to INEC did not look like the 1979 samples shown to him, but CSU’s diploma templates changed over the years and the BBC found that Tinubu’s copy resembled replacement diplomas from the 1990s. Westberg also said the missing portion of the university logo could have been cut off during photocopying because American diplomas are unusually large and aren’t intended to be photocopied.

In America, diplomas are largely ceremonial documents that people frame and hang on walls. Transcripts are the official records routinely used to verify attendance and graduation. Atiku’s legal expedition ironically helped establish that Tinubu has a CSU transcript and graduated with honors.

The BBC Global Disinformation Team found no evidence for the claim that Tinubu forged the CSU diploma he submitted to INEC. The report, in fact, won “Fact-Check of the Year by a Working Journalist” at the 2024 African Fact-Checking Awards in Accra. In other words, Atiku spent enormous political energy helping to settle a question whose answer was electorally barren.

Tinubu understood this and mostly ignored the attacks. More importantly, Atiku offered little policy distance from Tinubu on the economic question that has tormented Nigerians since May 2023. He had promised during the last election to remove petrol subsidies within his first 100 days in office. On the most consequential economic policy of the Tinubu presidency, Atiku was traveling on the same ideological road.

READ ALSO:

That changed this week. Atiku asked the question millions of Nigerians have been asking: where is the money supposedly saved from subsidy removal? He then promised a new subsidy structure that would privilege locally refined petrol, give qualifying Nigerian refineries crude at preferential prices, impose a fixed annual spending ceiling, trace subsidized crude to actual domestic production and punish diversion. His formulation is that “the subsidy will follow the barrel.”

That is a more serious proposal than the Presidency’s caricature of it. And Tinubu suddenly found his voice. He personally dismissed Atiku’s pledge as a demonstration of “serious ignorance” of governance and the economy. Atiku’s previous assaults on Tinubu’s character produced studied presidential indifference. But his challenge to the economic orthodoxy that has pauperized Nigerians produced presidential irritation. That means he struck a raw nerve.

If Atiku’s proposal demonstrates ignorance, what does Tinubu’s policy demonstrate? Any honest person knows the answer: cruelty. Between ignorance and cruelty, which is more benign? You be the judge.

The anti-subsidy theology that Tinubu and his neoliberal choristers recite has always rested on a false premise. Subsidy simply means government assistance. Every functional society subsidizes something its people need for survival and economic productivity. Governments subsidize food, agriculture, housing, healthcare, transportation or energy according to the peculiarities of their societies.

For Nigeria, petrol occupies a uniquely central place because it doubles as an infrastructural substitute. People buy petrol because public electricity is unreliable. Small businesses generate their own power. Goods move mostly by road. Workers commute in vehicles powered by fuel. Farmers, artisans, traders and manufacturers absorb fuel costs and pass them on through prices.

A petrol subsidy therefore travels through the economy. Its removal travels through the economy too, only in the opposite direction. It raises transportation costs, production costs, food prices and the cost of nearly everything that depends on movement or power.

READ ALSO:

I warned about this exactly one month before Tinubu was inaugurated. In my April 29, 2023 column titled “Six Agenda Items for Tinubu’s Success,” I warned that any policy that caused an arbitrary and unbearable increase in petrol prices without a corresponding improvement in incomes and living conditions would sink Tinubu. That warning was elementary commonsense.

The subsidy removal has since wreaked havoc on the economy, deepened poverty, killed businesses, murdered hope, hollowed out the middle class and democratized misery. Reuters now describes the aftermath of Tinubu’s reforms as the worst cost-of-living crisis in a generation. Nearly 80 percent of Nigerians in a recent voter tracker said the country was headed in the wrong direction.

The government’s answer is always the same sterile, tired, intentionally dishonest incantation: temporary pains will yield permanent gains. But we have heard that sermon before.

Ibrahim Babangida’s Structural Adjustment Program came with the same vocabulary of sacrifice, deregulation, currency devaluation, subsidy withdrawal and deferred prosperity. Nigerians were told to endure pain today for abundance tomorrow. By the time Babangida left in 1993, manufacturing had been battered, purchasing power had collapsed and social misery had spread. The promised gains vanished into the ether.

Only living people can enjoy future gains. A government that starves people in installments cannot redeem itself with a hypothetical prosperity scheduled for an undefined tomorrow.

Tinubu’s most frequently advertised dividend of subsidy removal is that states now receive more money and can pay salaries and pensions. That is useful to salary earners, pensioners and the relatives who depend on them. Every Nigerian with a functioning brain cell knows that formal salary and pension earners constitute only a small fraction of Nigeria’s population. The wellbeing of state treasuries is a poor substitute for the wellbeing of the vast majority of citizens.

What kind of economic triumph makes governors more solvent while making citizens poorer? Government has improved the liquidity of public treasuries by draining the liquidity of household economies.

Atiku has finally opened a policy flank that Tinubu cannot wave away with moral insults, ethnic mobilization or tales of macroeconomic “reform.”

Nonetheless, Atiku’s conversion deserves scrutiny. He promised in 2023 to remove the same subsidy he now wants to restore in a redesigned form. I disagreed with him then. A politician who changes his mind after observing the destructive consequences of a policy can reasonably plead that evidence changed his assumptions. Nigerians also have abundant reasons to distrust politicians who discover compassion during campaigns.

They campaign in poetry and govern in prose. Tinubu, after all, told Nigerians during the 2023 campaign that if he failed to give them electricity and returned for a second term, they should not vote for him, although he inserted an escape clause about giving “adequate reasons” for failure. Muhammadu Buhari promised a paradise of security, prosperity and integrity before power exposed the hollowness of his promises.

Atiku therefore has work to do. He must keep explaining the cost of his subsidy plan, its funding source, its legal path under the Petroleum Industry Act, its anti-corruption safeguards and the mechanisms that will ensure cheaper energy reaches households and industries. He should put these commitments in language that can be measured and used against him if he wins.

In spite of my well-justified distrust of the promises of politicians, including Atiku who supervised a ruinous privation program when he was vice president, I can’t help but concede that this is the first truly useful political argument of the 2027 campaign.

Policy contrast is finally replacing pointless and unproductive character assassination. Nigerians already know that Tinubu has a morally complicated past, but they live every day with something more immediate: the extortionate price of food, transport, electricity, medicine and survival.

Atiku has finally moved the contest from Tinubu’s old files in America to Nigerian kitchens, markets, factories and motor parks. That is where Tinubu is most vulnerable. Tinubu can survive old scandals, but the mass hunger his “reforms” have created is a more formidable opponent than impotent darts thrown at his character.

Kperogi is a renowned columnist and United States-based professor of journalism.

Loading

Continue Reading

Trending