Any discerning Nigerian would know that the current campaign of the Federal Government on the removal of fuel subsidy was a natural sequence of the inclusion of Professor Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala in President Jonathan's cabinet. Going by her antecedents, the removal of oil subsidy was one of the conditions for her acceptance of the ministerial appointment. The President's open campaign that Nigerians should go along with his decision to remove the subsidy appears to be in consonance with the democratic setting of today. Is this actually true' The democratic posturing may turn out to be a ruse as the decision on the removal of subsidy may be forced down the throats of Nigerians. Nevertheless his posturing is a marked departure from the style of former President Olusegun Obasanjo during his days in office. Obasanjo's posture was imperial as he gave an impression that his decisions were infallible. Moreover he was the only patriotic Nigerian who wanted the best for the country. He never bothered to present to Nigerians any figures of expenditure on oil subsidy. I must hasten to point out that the figures being bandied today by the Ministry of Finance may be cooked up because governments in this country never believed in transparency.Since Nigerians have been denied the opportunity of knowing the full figures dating back to 1999 when importation of fuel was given full reign, the current campaign by the federal government can only be seen as a cosmetic attempt to convince Nigerians to swallow the bitter decision. But I am still perturbed that sugar-coating the bitter pill has left many questions unanswered.The figures released by the federal government showed that in 2006 oil subsidy gulped N261.1 Billion. The price of crude oil was $67.03 per barrel. In 2007, the amount spent on subsidy was N278.86 billion when crude sold for $74.68 per barrel. In 2008, oil subsidy consumed N630.57billion when crude sold for $101.78 per barrel. In 2009 when crude oil was sold for $63.02 oil subsidy went down by 25 percent to N463.59 billion. Yet the fall in the price of crude was about 40 percent. In 2010, oil subsidy gulped N672.84 billion when crude oil sold for $81.25 per barrel. For the period January to October 2011, the amount spent on oil subsidy doubled to N1.3 trillion while the price of crude oil had an increase of less than 40%These figures released by the Federal Ministry of Finance did not tell the full story of the fuel subsidy. Except for 2009 when the price of crude oil declined by about 40 percent the amount spent on oil subsidy recorded a negative growth of 25 percent. The 126 percent growth in oil subsidy expenditure in 2008 did not reflect the less than 50 percent increase in the price of crude oil. The 100 percent growth in the oil subsidy expenditure within a period of 10 months in 2011 is simply scandalous. This occurred at a time the increase in the price of crude oil was a mere 35 percent.The Ministry of Finance did not explain the disparity between the low percentage increase in the price of crude oil and the high percentage increase in oil subsidy expenditure. The only explanation for the huge increase in expenditure can only be attributed to increased consumption. Yet, the federal government did not say that it advised the importers to increase the volume imported when the price of crude was low.For these figures to be credible, the federal government must publish the consumption figure for each year. It must also publish the landing cost of each litre of fuelNigerians would thus be able to establish how much profit accrued to the importers on every litre of petrol. If they made no profit as the government seems to be suggesting, it must tell the nation how much subsidy it paid on each litre of petrol. Subsidy would be meaningful if the oil marketers selling price of N65 per litre is lower than the landing cost of a litre of fuel.The federal government must also disclose how much tax it places on every litre of petrol. Could a reduction in government tax not bring about a reduction in the pump price of fuel'Above all, the federal government seems to be giving the impression that fuel subsidy surfaced when it started importing refined fuel. It could stop fuel subsidy by building more refineries and stopping importation entirely. But it cannot choose that option because of the deceit implicit in its constant quest to raise the pump price of fuel.In the years that the country's four refineries were functioning efficiently, the federal government did not say that it was importing fuel. Yet, it mischievously talked about fuel subsidy. When that argument was punctured it talked about appropriate pricing of fuel. That was the swansong in the days of the Babangida regime. Campaign to remove the phantom fuel subsidy predated the Structural Adjustment Programme [SAP] of his regime.It is thus clear that the federal government has to explain what constitutes fuel subsidy. For now, fuel subsidy is not more than a mirage.
Click here to read full news..
