Connect with us

Feature/OPED

Subsidy Removal: Beyond Tinubu, Kyari’s Personal Interests

Published

on

subsidy removal tinubu kyari's personal interests

By Mohammed Usman

One of the major highlights of the new administration of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has been the suspension of the payment of subsidy for premium motor spirit, PMS, commonly called petrol.

Though there have been so many reforms introduced into the system since its inauguration on May 29, 2023, the removal of fuel subsidies seemed to have been the most daring move ever made by any administration.

Come to think of it, as critical as fuel subsidy removal is to the turnaround of the economy; successive governments have made brick walls in their attempts to end the subsidy regime.

And, ever since that May 29th, 2023 pronouncement, a lot of dust has been raised from different quarters, either from the uninformed or from the camp of those who benefited, albeit criminally or otherwise, while the subsidy regime held sway. And a lot of water has passed under the bridge, too, including threats of strike.

However, it is pertinent to dig deep into this matter. Was removing the oil subsidy the right step in the right direction, or was it another government’s way to punish the masses?

Some say it is a wicked act by the president, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, aimed at impoverishing the masses further. Others say it is the handiwork of the group chief executive officer, GCEO, of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation, Mallam Mele Kolo Kyari. In this regard, the two top government functionaries have been the objects of attacks and accusations both in beer parlour discussions and in the press.

However, to the informed, this remains the most courageous move to place the country on the strongest path to its economic recovery.

The concept of fuel subsidy is not new to our national discourse. In fact, the subsidy has been in place in Nigeria since the promulgation of the Price Control Act in 1977. It was put in place to cushion the effects of the global inflation of the 1970s.

In recent years, rather than being a blessing, subsidy payments have placed a huge economic burden on the government. The sectors that were affected negatively were the educational and health, and housing sectors.

In justifying the subsidy removal, the government said subsidy removal would free up public funds for more meaningful infrastructure and developmental programs that stimulate industrialisation and create jobs, economic growth and social prosperity.

For example: Almost N12 trillion spent on subsidy in the last four years is more than sufficient to develop any of the following projects: 2,400, hospitals of 1000 bed capacity across 774 local government areas; or 500,000 new houses to provide shelter to over 3.5 million Nigerians; or 27GW of electricity generation; or skill up and provide education up to tertiary levels for over 2 million Nigerians.

It also said it would create a market reflective downstream, which invariably stimulates more downstream investments, especially in the domestic refining space, thereby creating more jobs, prosperity, and growth.

The removal, according to the government, would eliminate the unhealthy price arbitrage with neighbouring countries, thereby preventing the diversion and smuggling of gasoline outside the nation’s borders, which bleeds our economy, as well as reduce corruption surrounding internal product diversion as many marketers procure gasoline at subsidised, regulated wholesale prices but still sell at deregulated retail prices.

It stated that the rich benefit more from the subsidy than the poor as they have a higher number and capacity of vehicles to buy more gasoline; removal of the subsidy creates an opportunity to redistribute this benefit directly to those who need it more.

Subsidy removal also enables responsible gasoline consumption, which reduces waste as the prices are more market reflective, and the demand for the product will rebalance itself with the new price realities.

It equally allows the full recovery of upstream revenues, which enables reinvestment required to grow our national petroleum production and reserves and overall forex earnings.

The removal also would strengthen the naira as the growth of our foreign exchange earnings combined with a reduction in product consumption reduces pressure on forex, thereby strengthening the naira.

It would also reduce product scarcity, opening market reflective prices to bring in more players, and create a more efficient market, thereby reducing fuel scarcity and its adverse effects on the economy.

The removal is also expected to reduce the growing and unsustainable budget deficit and, consequently, the debt burden, creating a more robust economic and sustainable future.

Successive governments had sunk trillions of naira into the subsidy payments. In 2006, the Obasanjo regime earmarked N1.9 trillion for these payments. Do not forget that during the period under review, the naira exchanged at N130 to a dollar, making the amount $14.6 billion. This amount was to spike in 2007 when the same government spent N2.3trn, or $17.96bn, with naira exchanging for N128 to a dollar.

The above amount either tripled or quadrupled under the Yaradua/Jonathan administration as well as the Buhari administration. Now that the dollar is hovering around N800 in the exchange rate, one wonders what would be the fate of the economy in the next six months had the subsidy stayed.

Probably, this would have been the basis of the constant warning from international agencies of the dangers of accommodating this burden called a subsidy. Prior to the removal of the subsidy, there were damning reports from the International Monetary Fund, IMF, and the World Bank concerning oil subsidy.

In its report titled, “Macro Poverty Outlook for Nigeria: April 2023” the World Bank said macroeconomic stability had weakened amidst declining oil production, costly fuel subsidies and other factors, further pushing millions of Nigeria into poverty, and that might become worse if the subsidy stayed up to June on 2023.

The report further said: “With Nigeria’s population growth continuing to outpace poverty reduction and persistent high inflation ratio, the number of Nigerians living below the national poverty line will rise by 13 million between 2019 and 2025 in the baseline projection.”

The bottom line is that in the last two decades, the fuel subsidy has cost the nation several trillions of naira. Even if it is narrowed down to between 2005 and now, the government spent approximately N21 trillion on subsidy payments alone.

The last regime of President Muhammadu Buhari, having realized the dangers ahead, stopped making provisions for the payment in June 2023 when his government would have expired. It was, therefore, incumbent on the incoming administration to pick up the gauntlet and do the needful.

From the onset of the existence of the subsidy, a certain set of individuals had smiled to the bank with each payment. It turned out that something that was done to assuage the suffering of the masses became an avenue for people with greedy and unscrupulous oil marketing companies to divert money into their pockets by sheer unconscionable criminality,

Speaking in a nationwide broadcast last Monday, President Tinubu reiterated on the benefit of the subsidy removal to Nigerians. He said in a little over two months, his government had over a trillion naira “that would have been squandered on the unproductive fuel subsidy, which only benefitted smugglers and fraudsters. That money will now be used more directly and more beneficial for you and your families.

“For several years, I have consistently maintained the position that the fuel subsidy had to go. This once beneficial measure outlived its usefulness.

“The subsidy cost us trillions of Naira yearly. Such a vast sum of money would have been better spent on public transportation, healthcare, schools, housing, and even national security. Instead, it was being funnelled into the deep pockets and lavish bank accounts of a select group of individuals.

“To be blunt, Nigeria could never become the society it was intended to be as long as such small, powerful, yet unelected groups hold enormous influence over our political economy and the institutions that govern it.

“The whims of the few should never hold dominant sway over the hopes and aspirations of the many. If we are to be a democracy, the people and not the power of money must be sovereign.”

However, notwithstanding the president’s speech, the organized labour ordered workers to resume strike on Wednesday after talks with the government failed to yield positive results.

This is in spite of palliatives proposed by the federal government to ameliorate the perceived suffering the fuel subsidy removal would throw up.

This raises the question as to what Nigerian labour is up to. Is labour truly yearning for the progress of Nigeria, or is it being sponsored by enemies of Nigeria?

At this critical period of our nation, we urge Nigerians to come together to support the good vision of the president to make the nation great because, from all indications, both President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and Mallam Mele Kyari, the NNPC GCEO mean well for Nigeria.

Usman, a public commentator, wrote in from FCT, Abuja.

Feature/OPED

Dangote, Monopoly Power, and Political Economy of Failure

Published

on

Dangote monopoly Political Economy of Failure

By Blaise Udunze

Nigeria’s refining crisis is one of the country’s most enduring economic contradictions. Africa’s largest crude oil producer, strategically located on the Atlantic coast and home to over 200 million people, has for decades depended on imported refined petroleum products. This illogicality has drained foreign exchange, weakened the naira, distorted investment incentives, and hollowed out state institutions. Instead of catalysing industrialisation, Nigeria’s oil wealth became a mechanism for capital flight, rent-seeking, and institutional decay.

With the challenges surrounding the refining of crude oil, the establishment of Dangote Refinery signifies an important historic moment. The refinery promises to reduce fuel imports to a bare minimum, sustain foreign exchange growth, ensure there is constant fuel domestically, and strategically position Nigeria as a regional exporter of refined oil products if functioned at full capacity. Dangote Refinery symbolises what private capital, technology, and ambition can achieve in Africa following years of fuel queues, subsidy scandals, and global embarrassment.

Nigerians must have a rethink in the cause of celebration. Nigeria’s refining problem is not simply about capacity; it is about systems. Without addressing the policy failures and institutional weaknesses that made Dangote an exception rather than the rule, the country risks replacing one failure with another, this time cloaked in private-sector success.

For a fact, Nigeria desperately needs the emergence of Dangote refinery, and its success is in the national interest. Hence, this is not an argument against the Dangote Refinery. But history warns that structural failures are not solved by scale alone. Over the year, situations have shown that without competition and strong institutions, concentrated market power, whether public or private, can undermine price stability, energy security, and consumer welfare.

The Long Silence of Refinery Investments

Perhaps the most troubling question in Nigeria’s oil history is why none of the global oil majors like Shell, ExxonMobil, Chevron, Total, or Agip has built a major refinery in Nigeria for over four decades. These companies operated profitably in Nigeria, extracted their crude, and sold refined products back to the country, yet never committed capital to domestic refining.

Over the period, it has been shown that policy incoherence has been the cause, not a matter of technical incapacity, such as price controls, resistant licensing processes, subsidy arrears, frequent regulatory changes, and political interference, which made refining an unattractive investment. Importation, by contrast, offered quick returns, lower political risk, and guaranteed margins, often backed by government subsidies.

Nigeria carelessly designed a system that rather rewarded importers and punished refiners. Dangote did not succeed because the system improved; he succeeded despite it. His refinery exists largely because of the concessions from the government, exceptional financial capacity, political access, and a willingness to absorb risks that institutions should ordinarily mitigate. This raises a deeper concern; when institutions fail, progress becomes dependent on extraordinary individuals rather than predictable systems.

The Tragedy of NNPC Refineries

If private investors stayed away, Nigeria’s state-owned refineries should have filled the gap. Instead, the Port Harcourt, Warri, and Kaduna refineries became monuments to mismanagement. Records have shown that between 2010 and 2025, Nigeria reportedly wasted between $18 billion and $25 billion, over N11 trillion, just for Turn Around Maintenance and rehabilitation. Kaduna Refinery alone is estimated to have consumed over N2.2 trillion in a decade.

Despite these expenditures, output remained negligible. This was not merely a technical failure but a governance one. Contracts were poorly monitored, accountability was absent, and consequences were nonexistent. In functional systems, such outcomes trigger investigations, sanctions, and reforms. In Nigeria, the cycle simply repeated itself, eroding public trust and deepening dependence on imports.

Where Is BUA?

Dangote is not the only Nigerian conglomerate to announce refinery ambitions. In 2020, BUA Group unveiled plans for a 200,000-barrels-per-day refinery. Years later, progress remains unclear, timelines have shifted, and execution appears stalled.

This pattern is revealing. When multiple large investors struggle to translate plans into reality, the issue is not ambition but environment. Refinery projects in Nigeria appear viable only at a massive scale and with extraordinary political leverage. Smaller or mid-sized players are effectively crowded out, not by market forces, but by systemic dysfunction.

Policy Failure and the Singapore Comparison

Nigeria often aspires to emulate Singapore’s refining and petrochemical success. The comparison is instructive. Singapore has no crude oil, yet built one of the world’s most sophisticated refining hubs through consistent policy, investor protection, infrastructure planning, and regulatory certainty.

Nigeria chose a different path: price controls, subsidies, weak contract enforcement, and politically motivated policy reversals. Refineries became tools of patronage rather than productivity. Capital exited, infrastructure decayed, and import dependence deepened. The outcome was predictable.

The Cost of Import Dependence

For years, Nigeria spent billions of dollars annually importing petrol, diesel, and aviation fuel. This placed constant pressure on foreign reserves and the naira. Petrol subsidies alone were estimated at N4-N6 trillion per year, often exceeding national spending on health, education, or infrastructure.

Even after subsidy removal, legacy costs remain: distorted consumption patterns, weakened public finances, and entrenched interests built around importation. These interests did not disappear quietly.

Who Really Benefited from the Subsidy?

Although framed as pro-poor, fuel subsidies disproportionately benefited importers, traders, shipping firms, depot owners, financiers, and politically connected intermediaries. Smuggling across borders meant Nigerians subsidised fuel consumption in neighbouring countries.

Ordinary citizens received marginal relief at the pump but paid far more through inflation, deteriorating infrastructure, and underfunded public services. The subsidy system functioned less as social protection and more as elite redistribution.

The Traders’ Dilemma

Why did major fuel marketers like Oando invest in refineries abroad but not in Nigeria? Again, incentives explain behaviour. Importation offered faster returns, lower capital requirements, and political insulation. Domestic refining demanded long-term investment under unstable rules.

In an irrational system, rational actors optimise accordingly. Importation thrived not because it was efficient, but because policy made it so.

FDI and the Confidence Problem

Sustainable Foreign Direct Investment follows domestic confidence. When local investors, who best understand political and regulatory risks, avoid long-term industrial projects, foreign investors take note. Capital flows to environments with predictable pricing, rule of law, and policy consistency.

Nigeria’s challenge is not attracting speculative capital, but building conditions for patient, productive investment.

Dangote and the Monopoly Question

Dangote Refinery deserves credit. But scale brings power, and power demands oversight. If importers exit and no competing refineries emerge, Dangote could dominate refining, pricing, and supply. Nigeria’s experience with cement, where domestic production rose but prices soared due to limited competition, offers a cautionary tale.

Markets function best with competition. Without it, price manipulation, supply risks, and weakened energy security become real dangers, especially in countries with fragile regulatory institutions.

The Way Forward: Competition, Not Replacement

Nigeria does not need to weaken Dangote; it needs to multiply Dangotes. The goal should be a competitive refining ecosystem, not a replacement of a public monopoly with a private monopoly.

This requires transparent crude allocation, open access to pipelines and storage, fair pricing mechanisms, and strong antitrust enforcement. State refineries must either be professionally concessional or decisively restructured. Stalled projects like BUA’s should be unblocked, and modular refineries should be supported.

The Litmus Test

Nigeria’s refining crisis was decades in the making and cannot be solved by one refinery, however large. Dangote Refinery is a turning point, but only if embedded within systemic reform. Otherwise, Nigeria risks trading one form of dependency for another.

The true test is not whether Nigeria can refine fuel, but whether it can build fair, open, and resilient institutions that serve the public interest. In refining, as in democracy, excessive concentration of power is dangerous. Competition remains the strongest safeguard.

Blaise, a journalist and PR professional, writes from Lagos and can be reached via: [email protected]

Continue Reading

Feature/OPED

How AI Levels the Playing Field for SMEs

Published

on

A! in SMEs

By Linda Saunders

Intro: In many small businesses, the owner often starts out as the bookkeeper, the customer-service desk, the IT technician and the person who steps in when a delivery goes wrong. With so many balls up in the air – and such little room for error – one dropped ball can derail the entire day and trigger a chain of problems that’s hard to recover from. Unlike larger companies that have the luxury of spreading the load across dedicated teams and systems, SMEs carry it all on a few shoulders.

South Africa’s SME sector carries significant weight, contributing around 19% of GDP and a third of formal employment, according to the latest available Trade & Industrial Policy Strategies (TIPS) 2024 review. That is causing persistent constraints, including tight margins, erratic demand, high administrative load, and limited internal capacity.

This is not unique to South Africa. Many smaller businesses across the continent still rely on manual processes. It is common to find sales records kept separately from customer notes, or inventory data that is updated only occasionally. The result is slow turnaround times, duplicated effort and a lack of visibility across the business. Given that SMEs have such a huge influence on national economies, accounting for over 90% of all businesses, between 20-40% of GDP in some African countries, and a major source of employment, providing around 80% of jobs, these operational constraints have a broad impact on economies.

What has changed in recent years is that digital tools once seen as the preserve of larger companies have become more attainable for smaller operators. They do not remove the structural challenges SMEs face, but they can ease the load. Better systems do not replace judgement, experience or customer relationships; they simply give small companies more room to work with.

Cloud-based systems, automation and integrated customer-management tools have become more affordable and easier to deploy. They do not remove the structural pressures facing small businesses, but they can ease the operational load and create more space for productive work.

Doing more with the teams SMEs already have

Small teams often end up wearing several hats. One person might take customer calls, update stock records, handle service issues and manage follow-ups. When demand rises, these manual processes become harder to sustain. Local surveys regularly point to this strain, showing that smaller companies spend significant portions of the week on paperwork, compliance and routine administrative tasks – work that adds little value but cannot be ignored.

This is where automation is proving useful. Routine tasks such as onboarding new customers, checking documents, routing queries to the right person, logging interactions and sending follow-ups can now run quietly in the background. In larger companies, whole departments handle this work. In small businesses, the same burden has traditionally fallen on one or two people. When these processes run reliably without constant attention, a business with 10 employees can manage busier periods without rushed outsourcing or slipping service standards.

The point is not to replace staff, but to reduce the operational drag that limits what small teams can deliver. Structured workflows give SMEs a level of steadiness they have rarely had the time or money to build themselves.

Using better data to make better decisions

A second constraint facing SMEs is disorganised information. When customer details are lost in email, sales notes in chat groups, stock figures in spreadsheets and queries in separate systems, decisions depend on whatever information happens to be at hand. Forecasting becomes guesswork, and early warning signs are easy to miss.

Putting all this information in a single place changes the quality of decision-making. When sales, service and stock data can be viewed together, patterns become easier to spot: which products are moving, which customers are becoming less active, where delays tend to occur, and which periods consistently drive higher demand.

Importantly, SMEs do not need corporate analytics teams for this. Modern CRM platforms can organise information automatically and surface basic trends. For retailers preparing for 2026, this can help avoid over – or under – stocking. For service businesses, it can highlight customers who may be at risk of leaving, prompting earlier intervention. In competitive markets, having clearer information is a practical advantage.

Building a foundation before the pressure arrives

Rapid growth can be as destabilising for SMEs as an economic downturn. When orders increase, manual processes quickly reach their limit. Errors are more likely, staff become overwhelmed and the customer experience suffers. Many small businesses only upgrade their systems once these problems appear, by which time the cost, both financial and reputational, is already significant.

Putting basic workflow tools and a unified customer record in place early provides a useful buffer. Tasks follow the same steps every time, reducing inconsistency. Customers reach the right person more quickly. Staff spend less time checking or re-entering information and more time on work that matters. These small operational gains compound over time, especially during busy periods.

This is not about chasing every new technology. It is about avoiding a common pattern in the SME sector: when demand rises, systems buckle, and growth becomes more difficult.

Confidence matters as much as capability

Smaller companies understandably worry about risk when adopting new systems. Data protection, monitoring, and compliance can feel daunting without an IT department. The advantage of modern platforms is that many of these protections, like encryption, audit trails, and event monitoring, are built in. Transparent design also helps SMEs understand how automated decisions are made and how customer data is handled.

This reassurance is important because SMEs should not have to choose between improving their operations and protecting their customers’ information.

2026 will reward readiness

Technology will not replace the qualities that give SMEs their edge: personal service, flexibility, and the ability to respond quickly to customer needs. What it can do is relieve the administrative load that prevents those strengths from being fully used.

SMEs that invest in simple automation and better data practices now will enter 2026 with greater capacity and clearer insight. They won’t be competing with larger companies by matching their resources, but by removing the disadvantages that have traditionally held them back.

In the year ahead, the most competitive businesses will not be the biggest; they’ll be the ones that prepared early for the year ahead.

Linda Saunders is the Country Manager & Senior Director Solution Engineering for Africa at Salesforce

Continue Reading

Feature/OPED

Why Africa Requires Homegrown Trade Finance to Boost Economic Integration

Published

on

Cyprian Rono Ecobank Kenya

By Cyprian Rono

Africa’s quest to trade with itself has never been more urgent. With the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) gaining momentum, governments are working to deepen intra-African commerce. The idea of “One African Market” is no longer aspirational; it is emerging as a strategic pathway for economic growth, job creation, and industrial competitiveness. Yet even as infrastructure and regulatory reforms advance, one fundamental question remains; how will Africa finance its cross-border trade, across markets with diverse currencies, regulations, and standards?

Today, only 15 to 18 percent of Africa’s internal trade happens within the continent, compared to 68 percent in Europe and 59 percent in Asia. Closing this gap is essential if AfCFTA is to deliver prosperity to Africa’s 1.3 billion people.

A major constraint is the continent’s huge trade finance deficit, which exceeds USD 81 billion annually, according to the African Development Bank. Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), which provide more than 80 percent of the continent’s jobs, are the most affected. Many struggle with insufficient collateral, stringent risk profiling and compliance requirements that mirror international banking standards rather than the realities of African business.

To build integrated value chains, exporters and importers must operate within trusted, predictable, and interconnected financial systems. This requires strong pan-African financial institutions with both local knowledge and continental reach.

Homegrown trade finance is therefore indispensable. Pan-African banks combine deep domestic roots with extensive regional reach, making them the most credible engines for financing trade integration. By retaining financial activity within the continent, homegrown lenders reduce exposure to external shocks and keep liquidity circulating locally. They also strengthen existing regional payment infrastructure such as the Pan-African Payment and Settlement System (PAPSS), developed by the Africa Export-Import Bank (Afreximbank) and backed by the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) Secretariat, enabling faster, cheaper and seamless cross-border payments across the continent.

Digital transformation amplifies this advantage. Real-time payments, seamless Know-Your-Customer (KYC) verification, automated credit scoring and consistent service delivery across markets are essential for intra-African trade. Institutions such as Ecobank, operating in 34 African countries with integrated core banking systems, demonstrate how such digital ecosystems can enable continent-wide commerce.

Platforms such as Ecobank’s Omni, Rapidtransfer and RapidCollect, together with digital account-opening services, make it much easier for traders to operate across borders. Rapidtransfer enables instant, secure payments across Ecobank’s 34-country network, reducing delays in regional trade, while RapidCollect gives cross-border enterprises the ability to receive payments from multiple African countries into a single account with real-time confirmation and automated reconciliation. Together, these solutions create an integrated digital ecosystem that lowers friction, accelerates payments, and strengthens intra-African commerce.

Trust, however, remains a significant barrier. Cross-border commerce depends on the confidence that partners will honour contracts, deliver goods as promised, pay on time, and present authentic documentation. Traders often lack reliable information on potential partners, operate under different regulatory regimes, and exchange documents that are difficult to verify across borders. This heightens the risk of fraud, non-payment, and contractual disputes, discouraging businesss from expanding beyond familiar markets.

Technology is closing this trust gap. Artificial Intelligence enables lenders to assess risk using alternative data for SMEs without formal credit histories. Distributed ledger tools make shipping documents, certificates of origin, and inspection reports tamper-proof. In addition, supply-chain visibility platforms enable real-time tracking of goods and cross-border digital KYC ensures that both buyers and sellers are verified before any transaction occurs.

Ecobank’s Single Trade Hub embodies this trust infrastructure by offering a secure digital marketplace where buyers and sellers can trade with confidence, even in markets where no prior relationships exist. The platform’s Trade Intelligence suite provides customers instant access to market data from customs information and product classification tools across 133 countries.

Through its unique features such as the classification of best import/export markets, over 25,000 market and industry reports, customs duty calculators, and local and universal customs classification codes, businesses can accurately assess market opportunities, anticipate trends, reduce compliance risks, and optimise supply chains, ultimately helping them compete and grow in regional and global markets.

SMEs need more than financing. Many operate in cash-heavy cycles where suppliers and logistics providers require upfront payment. Lenders can support these businesses with advisory services, business intelligence, compliance guidance, and platforms for secure partner verification, contract negotiation, and secure settlement of payments. Trade fairs, industry forums, and partnerships with chambers of commerce further build the trust networks needed for cross-border trade.

Ultimately, Africa’s path toward meaningful trade integration begins with financial integration. AfCFTA’s promise will only be realised when enterprises can trade with confidence, knowing that payments will be honoured, partners verified, and disputes resolved. This requires collaboration between banks, regulators, and trade institutions, alongside harmonised financial regulations, interoperable payment systems, and continent-wide verification networks.

Africa can no longer rely on external actors to finance its trade. Its economic transformation depends on strong, trusted, and digitally enabled African financial institutions that understand Africa’s unique risks and opportunities. By building an African-led trade finance ecosystem, the continent can unlock liquidity, reduce dependence on external currencies, empower SMEs, and retain more value locally. Africa’s trade revolution will accelerate when its financing is driven by African institutions, African systems, and African ambition.

Cyprian Rono is the Director of Corporate and Investment Banking for Kenya and EAC at Ecobank Kenya

Continue Reading

Trending