Tag: Fuel subsidy

  • Fuel subsidy removal, a gift to Nigerians, says group

    Fuel subsidy removal, a gift to Nigerians, says group

    The Centre for Social Justice, Equity and Transparency has commended President Muhammadu Buhari’s resolve to remove the controversial subsidy on fuel.

    The centre described the decision as a gift to Nigerians, adding that the president’s decision to remove the controversial fuel ‎subsidy had the approval of all.

    In a statement issued by CESJET’s Executive Secretary, Comrade Ikpa Isaac, in Abuja, on Thursday, the centre said that the removal of the subsidy would put a lasting end to the incessant fuel crisis which had put the nation and innocent citizens at the mercy of certain cabals.

    The statement reads: “Different revelations have emerged of massive fraud in the fuel subsidy process, trillions of naira are alleged to have been fraudulently stolen from the government purse in the name of fuel subsidy payments.

    “It is heart wrenching to discover that the country is being bleed on the side despite its already anemic financial status.

    Ikpa, said that the deregulation of the downstream sector would open up the sector to private investors who hitherto developed cold feet to investing in the sector due to heavy government interference.

    According to him, the removal of subsidy wouldn’t only break the cabal but also encourage  those who have had refining licenses approved several years ago to go ahead to build their refineries.

    On the benefits of subsidy removal, Ikpa added that this would tackle the incessant scarcity of petrol due to importation and also the spring up of petrochemical industries alongside local refining to create jobs.

    The move, he said, would save the economy the unnecessary pressure put on the naira due to the heavy demand for forex to fund the importation of petroleum products, adding: “rather we will be exporting refined petroleum products thereby earning foreign currencies to shore up our reserves.”

    He however likened the subsidy removal to the telecom revolution which according to him had freed the sector of unwarranted setbacks.

    “It is time we do the next big thing after the great telecoms revolution that came with the liberalization of the sector in the early 2000s. We predict that the boom economy will experience with the deregulation of the downstream oil sector will make the telecoms experience a child’s play,” he said.

     

  • NLC vows to resist ‘backdoor’ removal of fuel subsidy

    NLC vows to resist ‘backdoor’ removal of fuel subsidy

    The Nigeria Labour Congress on Tuesday warned the Federal Government against removing subsidy on petroleum products through the back door, saying organised labour will resist such move by government.

    In a statement signed by its General Secretary, Dr. Peter Ozo-Eson, the NLC also asked the government to immediately constitute the board of the Petroleum Products Prices Regulatory Agency (PPPRA) which has the sole legal responsibility to fix prices of petroleum products.

    The Minister of State for Petroleum, Ibe Kachukwu was quoted as saying that the government will stop paying subsidy on petroleum product in 2016, while prices of petrol will be fixed at N85 per liter.

    The congress said what the government was planning was to remove subsidy through the back door, adding that any price fixed for the products now by the minister will be illegal since only the PPPRA has the right to fix prices.

    In the statement titled: “We will resist removal of fuel subsidy through the back door,” the NLC said: “In the past few weeks, we have heard discordant tunes from government officials and chieftains of the ruling APC on what the future portends for the prices of petroleum products and the management of the subsidy scheme.

    “Party chieftains who supported and encouraged the massive protests against subsidy removal in 2012 are now preaching the inevitability of subsidy removal. The honourable Minister of State for Petroleum first announced that come next year the price of petrol will revert to ₦97 per litre and that subsidy will be phased out.

    “Two days thereafter, he denied this and stated that what he said was that the price will operate within a band of ₦87 to ₦97 and that this did not mean removing the subsidy. The same minister now said that the price of petrol will now be ₦85 in January signifying the deregulation of the sector.

    “These vacillations and flip flops are, in our view, designed to confuse Nigerians and pave the way for deregulation of petrol prices through the back door. The fact of the matter is that as long as we continue to depend on imported refined products, deregulation and the abandonment of a subsidy scheme will unleash hardship on Nigerians.

    “In any case, according to our laws, the determination of the recommended prices of petroleum products is the responsibility of the Petroleum Products Prices Regulatory Agency (PPPRA). By law, the board of PPPRA is made up of stakeholders.

    “None of the contradictory prices the minister is throwing up is a product of the agency. Indeed, the board of the PPPRA has not operated for over two years, although we have made repeated demands for the convening of the board.”

  • CNPP to FG: Clarify fuel subsidy, price modulation

    CNPP to FG: Clarify fuel subsidy, price modulation

    The Conference of Nigeria Political Parties (CNPP) Sunday urged Federal Government to be more open about its decision on fuel subsidy.

    CNPP said that recent pronouncements by the Minister of State for Petroleum, Dr. Ibe Kachikwu have only served to create more confusion that profiteers would explore to unleash hardship on Nigerians.

    It said the explanation by Kachikwu on how government wants to modulate price without removing subsidy to achieve the proposed N85 pump price sounded questionable given that he has been oscillating between how subsidy is not being removed and how the same subsidy is not sustainable in view of economic realities on ground.

    A statement issued by CNPP’s Secretary General, Chief Willy Ezugwu warned that the group will not sit by and watch Nigerians suffer on account of: “a government that failed to properly articulate and think its policy through,”pointing out that the latest move by the government was reminiscent of the New Year subsidy removal gift under former President Goodluck Jonathan, which Nigerians vehemently rejected.

    It said the position announced by the Minister of State for Petroleum in recent days tended towards removal of subsidy despite the denials.

    The statement reads in part: “What we found most worrisome is that the Federal Government is tactically implementing fully deregulation of the sector beginning January 1, 2016 without announcing modalities for containing exploitative cabals that could sell petroleum products for four times the global average on account of the concept of free market.

    “It is on record that only Abuja and Lagos enjoyed the N87 price while the subsidy lasted as other towns and cities bought petrol for as high as N180 per litre. We have not heard the minister said anything about remedying this anomaly that would be further compounded by a deregulated oil industry.

    “The template announced by the minster implies a market driven pricing, which is potentially volatile, given the peculiarities of Nigeria and uncertainties on the international scene. But we have not also heard how the deregulation would be managed in a way that small and medium businesses that generate their own electricity would be insulated to prevent widespread collapse of businesses.

    “CNPP is concerned that low income earners could soon be faced with life threatening choices as they are forced to make decisions between spending all their earnings on transportation and going without food to keep their jobs or to make take other desperate options.”

    The conference condemned the inability of the government to bring closure to the fraudulent subsidy issue, which it has continued to pay out even as its senior officials acknowledge that there was no need for subsidies.

    “For the government to have paid out over N1 trillion this year and for Kachikwu to have emphatically stressed that there was no need to pay subsidy means that there is a level of collusion going on between the government and the subsidy cabal. This government has simply continued the subsidy corruption from where its predecessor handed off. Nigerians therefore want a probe of the subsidies paid under the present government.

    “The Federal Government must also immediately present plans of how it will protect Nigerians from the fuel cabal since they will naturally shift their attention to extorting the populace once there are no more subsidies,” the conference demanded.

  • FG pays oil marketers N407bn to end fuel scarcity 

    FG pays oil marketers N407bn to end fuel scarcity 

    The Federal Government has paid N407, 076,805,386.30 subsidy claims to oil marketers to end the lingering fuel crisis.

    A statement from the federal ministry of finance signed by Mr. Marshall Gundu, Director, Press of the ministry said the Minister of finance Mrs. Kemi Adeosun has confirmed the payment to the oil marketers.

    Adeosun noted that President Muhammadu Buhari had directed that the payments should be “made immediately in order to bring to a quick end the lingering fuel crisis which has caused great suffering to Nigerian families and businesses.”

    The minister of finance also said that “despite dwindling revenues, the government is committed to ensuring continuous availability of fuel to Nigerians.”

    Wednesday’s payments to oil marketers she said “include arrears from the 2014 financial year as well as payments for the current year.”

    With this payment, the federal government she said expects the recipients to “ensure adequate supply of fuel to end the persistent fuel shortage in the nation.”

    By making this payment to oil marketers, the federal government said it has shown its full commitment “to meeting its financial obligations in respect of fuel subsidy.”

    The Minister further implored the major oil marketers to reciprocate government’s action by doing all they can to bring the fuel scarcity to an end.

    The statement said details of the approved payments under the subsidy scheme will be published in the national dailies as has been the practice.

     

  • Is fuel subsidy ideologically inevitable?

    Is fuel subsidy ideologically inevitable?

    For example, the federal government can use the money spent on fuel subsidy to pay for such services as free education, free meals for school children, free health for the poor, social welfare checks for the poor, and free adult education for the poor. 

    Ade Alabi was sick in a village near Ibadan during the first fuel scarcity this year. His neighbour had a car and was willing to take Ade to the nearest primary health centre. Unfortunately for Ade, the raging fuel scarcity at the time prevented his neighbour from having petrol to buy, even though he was ready to pay the prohibitive price of N150 per litre charged by Black Market sellers of petrol in the village.  All efforts to take Ade to the hospital on his own okada proved futile. There was no rubber hose to transfer petrol from Ade’s okada into the car of his neighbour. Even though Ade had a brother who could ride okada, his brother was just as big as Ade. It was not possible to have both brothers on the okada with a third person to prop Ade up on the way to the clinic. While the entire village was thinking about how to get Ade to the hospital, the poor man slumped and died, leaving behind a wife and three children.

    The story above illustrates the danger (to the poor in particular) inherent in the insistence of self-defined socialist ideologues (in and outside the trade unions) on the religiosity of keeping fuel subsidy on account of protecting the poor and workers from avoidable exploitation by a government that is hardly capitalist but palpably thievish.

    Many cases being made in the traditional press and the social media in support of cancelation of fuel subsidy in the country. Some pundits base their position on evidence of corruption in the handling of the subsidy scheme, citing examples of revelation of irregularities in various reports of committees established to probe the country’s subsidy scheme. Examples of financial irregularity are drawn from Farouk Lawan Committee’s Probe in 2012. This report claims that N232 billion on subsidy was paid to marketers for PMS in 2011 for fuel that was not supplied. The same committee also established that, contrary to the claims of marketers that 60 million litres was imported for each day in 2011, only 31 million litres per day was accounted for.

    Some commentators focus on the Nuhu Ribadu Probe in 2012 to argue for cessation of subsidy on the ground of lack of transparency. They draw attention to the report that NNPC deducted subsidy-related expenses before payment to the Federation Account in 2011. This group argues that NEITI’s audits from 1999 to 2011 also confirmed that NNPC deducted a total of N1.40 trillion for subsidy. Similarly, the Presidential Committee on Verification and Reconciliation of Fuel Subsidy (2012) is cited by anti-subsidy commentators to illustrate that 197 subsidy transactions worth N229 billion were illegitimate and that actual expenditure on subsidy was higher in the same year than appropriated sums for fuel subsidy.

    Economic thinkers of the free market persuasion also argue that natural resources are finite and attract largely time-limited revenues, more so if such resources are sold in the international market where the exporting country has no control over price stability. This group posits that it is not rational for any government to prefer fuel subsidy for citizens across the social spectrum to promoting sustained inclusive economic development through investments that can have multiplier effects on sustainable empowerment schemes for the underprivileged. This group calls for an end to fuel subsidy which its spokespersons believe to be a non-sustainable way of allocating natural resource revenues.

    On the other hand, trade union leaders and self-defined advocates of the poor argue passionately in favour of continuing with fuel subsidy. The trade union’s claim includes the need to view fuel subsidy as a non-negotiable poverty-alleviating policy. This school of thought calls on government to accept the need to make every Nigerian enjoy the fruits of a natural resource that under a unitary system of government is viewed to belong to the entire country, regardless of the damage the exploitation of such natural resource does to the economy and ecology of the communities in which such resources are located.

    Another line of thinking within this group is that underpaid workers, poor, and unemployed citizens need fuel subsidy to mitigate the knock-on effect of their poverty. The same group also argues that it is unfair for the federal government to stop fuel subsidy until the government is able to create the type of transportation infrastructure that exists in more developed countries, where fuel subsidy is discouraged as a policy. They add that the government must repair existing refineries and construct more to bring the price of refined petrol for domestic consumption down to the point of making fuel subsidy unnecessary. The Jonathan government accepted the thinking of labour leaders by creating another bureaucracy, Sure-P, to pacify workers and labour leaders, after agreeing to peg the price of petrol at N97 per litre. Just like the subsidy scheme itself, it did not take a long time for Sure-P to become another trick to occlude financial mismanagement by the country’s venal political elite.

    The position of trade union leaders and believers in social democracy appears unassailable. In a country where there are not many social assistance programmes for citizens at the bottom of the economic ladder, there should be nothing wrong with calls for special assistance to the unemployed and underpaid workers. In terms of fine ideological thinking, trade union leaders and their social democratic supporters are making respectable arguments. But the hard question that needs to be asked and answered by radical social and economic thinkers is whether fuel subsidy is the best way to assist the poor in our country.

    Despite the social democratic credentials of this author for over half a century, I do not believe that there are no better ways to assist the poor than the current fuel subsidy that is as enmeshed in the culture of political and bureaucratic corruption as it can ever be in any human space. In a country in which political parties do not openly embrace any noticeable form of social democracy, just as in countries such as Canada, Denmark, Finland, Ireland, Netherlands, New Zealand, Sweden and Norway, where social democracy is a fact of life, there are hundreds of ways to assist the poor without having to attempt to pay some of the cost of fuel for them. In these social democratic systems, the line between the middle-class or middle-income and low-income groups is made clear when policies of social assistance are being crafted. It is not so in the case of Nigeria’s fuel subsidy scheme, which allows upper-middle class professionals to enjoy fuel subsidy that should have been reserved for the underprivileged.

    The argument that fuel subsidy in Nigeria is to protect the poor is spurious. Out of the 145 vehicles per 1,000 citizens in Nigeria, 85 of them are cars belonging to middle-class members of the society. It is not an exaggeration to say that it is the car-owning middle-class citizens that benefit largely from fuel subsidy. If indeed fuel subsidy assists the low-income and the unemployed, it is not to the extent that it benefits the middle-class. Definitely, there are better ways to assist the poor and the under-paid.

    For example, the federal government can use the money spent on fuel subsidy to pay for such services as free education, free meals for school children, free health for the poor, social welfare checks for the poor, and free adult education for the poor. In addition, poor citizens can be given social welfare support that they can use to pay for market price of petrol. Furthermore, trade unions can insist that the existing refineries be sold to workers for one dollar each so that workers’ cooperatives can manage the refineries. The federal government can put the matter of removal of subsidy to a referendum to determine what majority of citizens want, as opposed to what paid representatives of labour prefer. Without doubt, if Ade Alabi, referred to at the beginning of this piece and his relations, had been given a chance to vote Yes or No in a referendum on removal of fuel subsidy, all of them would have voted Yes, in hopes that the Ade Alabis of Nigeria can be taken to the hospital before it is too late.

    President Buhari and his team should pluck the courage to address this albatross around the neck of the nation.  They should take time to conduct rigorous research on the number of citizens who are poor and thus need social assistance. Even if such people need to get more than N5,000 a month, the federal government should plan to assist such people, so as to free the country from the chains of fuel subsidy barons in and outside government. In addition to initiating many direct social assistance programmes for the poor, the federal government should use the money from the federation account (currently used to pay subsidy charges) to assist the poor in ways that those assisted can use the social assistance funds to solve the problems most important to them.

  • Govt to ‘remodel’ fuel  subsidy, says Kachikwu

    Govt to ‘remodel’ fuel subsidy, says Kachikwu

    A major shift in policy in the fuel scarcity regime and the arrangement  of the pipelines is slated for next year, the Federal Government has said.

    The payment of petrol subsidy will be ‘remodelled’, minister of state, Petroleum Resources, Dr Ibe  Kachickwu, said yesterday in Lagos.

    The ministers was in Lagos to meet with oil marketers is a bid to end petrol shortage.

    The minister also turned offer of marketers – major and independent – to solicit their support to a hitcfree supply of petrol during the yuletide.

    Yesterday the National Assembly approved over N500b for subsidy in the supplementary budget sent to it by President Buhari.

    In term of whether  subsidy would go or not , I in my capacity as the State Minister of Petroleum Resources is working  seriously with President Muhammad Buhari on the issue. Mr President is committed to the issue.. We are looking at all kinds of options to remodel the subsidy come January 2016.  We are going to look at options where we can remodel subsidy; and sell fuel at a more flexible price regime without absolutely removing the subsidy.  We would see the result of that in the new year.

    He said: ‘’ The distribution logistics problem is not the real problem in the industry. There is nothing that is happening that has never happened before.  Before the majors and independents were bringing fuel and sell it to consumers. But now, there is nothing like that. The  problem is that the some major players are no longer bringing in fuel into the country, for obvious reasons.’’

    According to him, the government will review the management of  pipelines with regards to their privatisation in January. He said when the pipelines are privatised and their managements looked into by the government, the perennial problems posed by pipeline vandalism would reduce  ditto  where will reduced the possibility of fuel scarcity.

    The minister noted that the government has introduced and implemented what it described as regional intervention mechanism with a view to stop the lingering fuel crisis.

     

    He said there was North-West; North –East;  South-West; South-South; and South-East fuel intervention programmes introduced by the Federal Government, arguing that the efforts have paid off as fuel was made available in those regions.

    Kachickwu said despite the problems posed by pipeline breakages, the government has tried its best to distribute fuel by collaborating specifically with some marketers.

    He said the Federal Government is expecting 26 cargoes, with each cargo bringing in 33,000milltion litres of  fuel.

     

  • Federal Govt, MOMAN disagree on N413b fuel subsidy

    Federal Govt, MOMAN disagree on N413b fuel subsidy

    THE last may not have been heard on the fuel subsidy claims by members of the Major Oil Marketers Association of Nigeria (MOMAN).

    A whopping N413 billion was last week approved by the Federal Government for the immediate payment oil marketers’ outstanding claims.

    The approval came in the wake of a brewing fuel shortage and stave off another harrowing experience of fuel scarcity.

    Barely a week after the approval, the Federal Government and MOMAN are not on the same page over the gesture.

    MOMAN, through its Executive Secretary, Mr. Obafemi Olawore, told The Nation on telephone, that foreign exchange differentials and interests on the loans they obtained from banks were not captured in the N413 billion.

    Lauding the government gesture, Olawore said MOMAN members’ subsidy claims have not been fully paid by the government.

    But Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) spokesman Ohi Alegbe disagreed with the MOMAN position.

    President Muhammadu Buhari, he said, approved far above the marketers’ debt portfolio, which he put at about N300 billion.

    According to him, the President magnanimously approved the N300 billion thresholds to take care of the members of the Independent Petroleum Marketers Association (IPMAN) and other importers involved in the chain of oil production.

    Alegbe said: “The total debt was about N300 billion but to take care of the independents and other importers as well as other costs such as foreign exchange differentials and interests on loans, government approved N413 billion for them.

    “Therefore, to say that the amount doesn’t cover the total debts owed the marketers, is just not being fair to the government.”

    An acute fuel scarcity in May almost grounded the economy as blue chip companies in the financial and telecoms sectors served their clients and customers notices on plans to close shop. Several flight schedules were cancelled due to non-availability of aviation fuel.

    Now that the Federal Government has approved more than the N300 billion being owed major marketers and depot owners, will fuel scarcity become a thing of the past in the country?

    In February, Olawore said the Federal Government’s indebtedness to marketers stood at N250 billion as at end of 2014. The amount included the debt owed Depot and Petroleum Products Marketers Association (DAPPMA).

    Mobil, Oando, MRS, Total, Conoil and Forte Oil are the members of MOMAN.

    Olawore said the association had at that time, written several letters and held consultations with the government for payment of their debt. The major marketers also requested for upward review of their distribution margins, which had been fixed at N4.60 per litre since 2007.

    The demand for increase in distribution margins, according to Olawore, was to cushion the effect of operational cost on members.

    He said the margins have become inadequate because the salaries of employees and the cost of building retail outlets have shot up, adding that the demand for increased distribution margins died with the immediate past administration.

    Olawore said: “MOMAN as at end of 2014 was being owed N250 billion in unpaid subsidies. Out of the N250 billion, N95 billion was the cost of foreign exchange (Forex) and interest on loans while the real subsidy for the marketers is N155 billion.

    “We have met with the government and they promised to pay but we have not heard from them since then.”

    DAPPMA’s Executive Secretary Olufemi Adewole identified soaring interest as the direct impact of the debts’ non-payment.

    He noted that the outstanding bill was a little above N200 billion in April when the Federal Government made the last payment, adding that by the end of May, the debt had risen to N291 billion.

    The major marketers and DAPPMA members are jointly owed the subsidy debt. Therefore, with the increasing interest on the loan, the debt will by now be well over N300 billion, he added.

    IPMAN’s President Chinedu Okoronkwo, however, noted that his members will also partake in the subsidy payment.

    The marketers have since May refused to import fuel. They insisted that until the government clears the arrears, they will not import, leaving only the NNPC as the sole importer.

    It (NNPC) has capacity to meet 50 per cent of the national demand of estimated 40 million litres per day of petrol.

    Alegbe said it would amount to an abuse of the President’s magnanimity if the oil marketers make further subsidy demands.

    Besides, he said the disagreement on subsidy had been lingering from the previous government but because the Buhari administration wanted a smooth flow and distribution of fuel, he approved N413 billion.

    According to him, government was verifying the 40 million litres daily consumption claim of the marketers, alleging that the figure would have padded up.

    He said daily consumption should be about 30 million litres or even less.

    NNPC’s Group Managing Director Emmanuel Ibe Kachikwu spoke of plan by the government to pay whatever is due to the marketers every month beginning from next year.

    “From next year, marketers will be paid their dues every month and the issue of payment of interest on loans and undue forex differentials would be eliminated,” Kachikwu said in Lagos last weekend.

    According to him, government’s target was to cut down fuel subsidy to between 15 and 20 per cent.

     

  • Uproar in House over motion on fuel subsidy

    Uproar in House over motion on fuel subsidy

    THERE was uproar yesterday on the floor of House of Representatives over a motion calling on the Federal Government to be cautious on plans to remove fuel subsidy.

    The motion enitled: “Alleged Plan to Remove Fuel Subsidy”, which was brought  by a member, Albert Abiodun Adeogun (PDP Osun), became contentious and divided the House along partisan lines.

    As Adeogun started his debate, a member, Herman Hembe, coming under point of order, noted that the rules of the House does not allow for motions hinged on speculation and hence it should not be entertained.

    The House Majority Leader, Femi Gbajabiamila, opposed the motion, saying it was based on mere allegations.

    He said the government approved payment for subsidy totalling N413 billion.

    Gbajabiamila received applause for his observation.

    But the Minority Leader, Leo Ogor, would hear none of such arguments and insisted that the motion be allowed to go through the legislative process of presentation, debate and adoption or rejection.

    There were shouts of “no! no! no! no! from majority of APC members on the floor.

    At this juncture, the Speaker, Yakubu Dogara, upheld Ogor’s position.

    The PDP members in the chamber applauded the decision.

    But the mover of the motion got jittery at this point and quickly withdrew the motion with shouts of approval from many members on the floor.

  • Sanusi to Buhari: why fuel subsidy must go now

    Sanusi to Buhari: why fuel subsidy must go now

    • Naira should be devalued

    The Emir of Kano, Alhaji Muhammadu Sanusi 11 said yesterday that President Muhammadu Buhari should remove the subsidy  on fuel  if the economy must be saved.

    “This fuel subsidy has to go,” the former Central Bank governor declared at the All Africa Business Leaders Award West Africa held in Lagos.

    Sanusi, who spoke extensively on the state of the economy, said the country can no longer afford the many leakages that have battered the economy over the years.

    Quoting CBN figures,he said: “in the  first two quarters of this year, this country  spent over 500 billion naira on debt servicing. At end of this year, it will be over 1trillion  which is more than the amount of money budgeted for health, education and defence combined.

    “There is no room in the government’s balance sheet for borrowing and spending. We have no option but to block leakages and to stop non-priority expenditures.

    “It is for this reason that we cannot afford to spend all our time talking about the past. It is time to look at what we are doing now and ask ourselves if the fiscal stance and monetary stance are the appropriate stances for the situation we are in.

    “Does it make sense at this time for the government to continue paying petroleum subsidy? It does not, and we must say it.

    “When you need fiscal consolidation, when you cannot borrow, when you are not earning because oil prices are down, you have to shut down, especially those expense lines that have been known historically  to be the sights of those seeking  rent.This fuel subsidy has to go.”

    He also called for the expansion of  the tax base and an increase in VAT.

    “ Our tax base has to expand, VAT  have to go up. We can’t continue having an economy where we collect tax from oil  companies, collect tax, maybe, from the telecoms companies, and then 60, 70 per cent of the GDP does not pay taxes. This is something that has to be looked at.”

    He  expressed disgust at some of the anomalies in the economy, saying: “we are Africa’s biggest oil producer but the biggest export from the United Kingdom to Nigeria is petroleum products. We don’t refine our own crude. We don’t have a petro-chemical industry. We burn our gas and we don’t have enough electricity.

    “We produce cotton and import textiles from China. We have a large tomato belt and we import tomato paste. Everywhere you turn…we produce cassava, we don’t produce starch. And what we don’t have we export. It is so bad that we had a military government that conducted free democratic elections in Liberia. We exported democracy when we had a military government.”

    Speaking on his personal experience as CBN governor, he said: “The biggest challenge I had as Governor of Central Bank  was convincing politicians that there would be a day when we will regret not saving the money when oil price was high. That the leakages in the oil sector could not continue; that oil was a commodity whose price goes up and goes down and when it comes down, if you don’t have the buffers, you are going to suffer.

    “ It is one of these moments where if you were not a Nigerian, you would say well, I told you so. But you can’t, because it is a very sad story. It is very obvious and it has happened over and over again. You have high oil prices, high oil revenues and you blow the money away, and when oil prices crash, you don’t know how to face the situation.

    “In 2009, we had a huge crisis. Oil prices crashed from 140 dollars to less than 40 dollars. That was the time I was coming to the Central Bank. But at that time, the government had a number of advantages. The previous administration had saved a lot. There were physical buffers. The Central Bank and the Ministry of Finance could pursue countless fiscal and monetary policies, even though we had devaluation, even though we had some inflations, even though we dealt with the biggest banking crisis in our history, the economy continued to grow and people continued to be employed.

    “The situation today is different. We spent years deceiving ourselves, calling ourselves the 21st biggest economy in the world based on something called rebasing. We said our debt to GDP ratio was 11 per cent and that the ratio looked very good. Yes we had a debt to GDP ratio of 11 per cent, but we were spending 33 per cent of government revenue servicing debts.”

    Besides,he asked  the federal government  to devalue the naira and warned that Africa’s biggest economy is in danger of a long term slump unless the government confronts slowing growth.

    “Let’s stop being in denial, we cannot artificially hold up the currency,” he said.

    He said President Muhammadu Buhari, who is against a weakening of the naira, “needs help on the economy.”

    Under current Governor Godwin Emefiele, Nigeria’s central bank has virtually fixed the exchange rate since March.

    Rationing dollars and limiting foreign-exchange trading have stabilized the naira, which has remained at about 198-199 per dollar since declining 8 percent in the first quarter.

    The central bank’s moves are hurting the economy, said Sanusi, 54. It expanded 2.35 percent on an annualized basis in the second quarter, the slowest pace since at least 2010.

    “We are depriving certain key industries of imports,” he said. “If we have to make a choice between economic growth and a devaluation, my recommendation is that we protect growth.”

    “The portfolio flows are gone,” he said. “Inflation is already upon us. You have fiscal consolidation. It is time to loosen monetary policy. Otherwise we compound an exchange rate crisis for businesses with high borrowing costs and declining demand.”

    Some portfolio investors have withdrawn from  Nigeria, with foreign holdings of naira government bonds falling to less than 10 percent of the total from 27 percent in 2013, according to Standard Chartered Plc. In September, JPMorgan Chase & Co. kicked Nigeria out of its local currency emerging markets bond indexes, tracked by more than $200 billion of funds, saying exchange controls made it difficult for international investors to buy and sell naira debt.

    Sanusi said ministers acted like “courtiers” under previous administrations and shouldn’t do the same in Buhari’s cabinet.

    “I hope people will have the courage to know that loyalty is about telling your boss the truth,” he said.

    Buhari, who came to power in May, has nominated ministers, although he hasn’t announced their portfolios and the Senate still has to approve them all.

  • Buhari wants palliatives before subsidy removal – Kachikwu

    President Muhammadu Buhari is insisting on putting necessary palliatives in place before any talk of oil subsidy removal, the Group Managing Director (GMD) of the Nigeria National Corporation (NNPC), Dr. Emmanuel Ibe Kachikwu, has said.

    Kachikwu, who is a ministerial nominee from Delta State, stated this during the screening of ministerial nominees by the Senate on Wednesday.

    He noted that if any person from the private sector is asked whether there is need for the removal of oil subsidy, the categorical answer would be yes.

    The nominee noted that when the issue came up before President Buhari, he was particularly concerned about the provision of necessary palliatives especially in the areas of transport, health and education.

    Kachikwu said he agreed with the President that unless necessary palliatives are put in place “you cannot just remove subsidy.”