Free Essay

Fuel Subsidy Removal

In:

Submitted By jervisko
Words 26167
Pages 105
FUEL SUBSIDY REMOVAL AND THE NIGERIAN ECONOMY
(A CASE STUDY OF ABAKILIKI LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA,
EBONYI STATE)

BY

NKWAGU OLUCHI WINIFRED
PA/2008/182

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
FACULTY OF MANAGEMENT AND SOCIAL SCIENCES
CARITAS UNIVERSITY, AMORJI-NIKE, ENUGU.

ENUGU STATE

AUGUST 2012

1

TITLE PAGE

FUEL SUBSIDY REMOVAL AND THE NIGERIAN ECONOMY
(A CASE STUDY OF ABAKALIKI LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA,
EBONYI STATE)

BY
NKWAGU OLUCHI WINIFRED
PA/2008/182

A RESEARCH PROJECT PRESENTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF
THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE AWARD OF BACHELOR OF SCIENCE
(B.SC.) DEGREE IN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION,

FACULTY OF MANAGEMENT AND SOCIAL SCIENCES,

CARITAS UNIVERSITY, AMORJI-NIKE, ENUGU,

ENUGU STATE.

AUGUST 2012

2

CERTIFICATION

This is to certify that Nkwagu Oluchi Winifired with Registratoin Number
PA/2008/182 has successfully carried out a research work on “Fuel Subsidy
Removal and the Nigerian Economy (A case Study of Abakaliki Local government Area, Ebonyi State.) in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the award of Bachelor of science (B.Sc.) degree in Public Administration

---------------------------------Mr. M. O. Ugada
(Project Supervisor)

-------------------------Date

--------------------------------Mr. M. O. Ugada
(HOD Public Adminstration)

---------------------------Date

-------------------------------External Examiner

---------------------------Date

3

DEDICATION

This research work is dedicated to God Almighty and to my parents Mr. and Mrs.
Wilfred Nkwagu who chose my education and academic carrier as of paramount importance to them.

4

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
In line with the saying the proverb “A tree cannot make a forest”, it will be an exercise in self deception to live under the illusion that this work could have seen the light of the day, without the assistance and contributions of many others who supported me.
I acknowledge the Almighty God first; the giver and source of my wisdom and for making my four years stay in Caritas a successful one.
My sincere gratitude goes to my project Supervisor, Mr. M. O. Ugada, who through his efforts, brought out the best in me, made me committed and hardworking towards the actualization of this work and also whetted my desire for knowledge. The legacy and the indelible foot print he has left in the sand of time is worthy of emulation. And also to my other lectures Mrs. A.U Iloh, Mrs Veronica
Mbah, Mr. O. J. Ndukwe and Mr. Ralph Nwatu who have in one way or the other deployed their resources towards the success of this work. Thanks a lot, I am eternally grateful.
My profound gratitude goes to my indispensable parents, Mr. and Mrs.
Wilfred Nkwagu, who saw my education as their priority and through their financial support, prayers and words of encouragement saw towards the success of this work. And also my siblings Chibuike and Chidimma, I am indebted to you all.
I would not also forget my friends; chigo, Mary, Queen, Enere, Jessica,
Lawrence,Victor(prof),Obinna. Also my awesome roommates, Stella, Uche,
Mama, Joy, Uju, Chioma, Miriam. And also my course mates T-money, Udochi,
5

Uzochi, Elektra, Joshua, Chioma, Princewill, Purity, and most especially Michael who through their contributions and knowledge shared made this work come to reality. And finally I cannot forget Sister Amaka and a close family friend that is dear to me, the family of Mr. and Mrs. Innocent Egbo who through their spiritual and moral support made this work successful. I say a big thank you to you all.

6

TABLE OF CONTENTS pages Title

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Certification -

-

-

-

-

-

-

Dedication

-

i

-

ii

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

iii

Acknowledgment

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

iv

Table of contents

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

vi

Abstract

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

ix

1.1

Background of study -

-

-

-

-

-

-

1

1.2

Statement of problem -

-

-

-

-

-

-

5

1.3

Objectives of the study

-

-

-

-

-

6

1.4

Research questions

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

6

1.5

Scope of the study

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

6

1.6

Limitations of the study

-

-

-

-

-

-

7

1.7

Significance of the study

-

-

-

-

-

-

7

1.8

Definition of terms -

-

-

-

-

-

-

8

Reference

-

-

-

-

-

-

9

-

-

-

-

-

-

10

-

-

-

CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION

-

-

CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1

Subsidy and fuel subsidy

7

2.1.1 Agencies involved in subsidy

-

-

-

-

11

-

-

-

-

13

2.2.1 Petrol prices in selected countries -

-

-

-

-

15

2.3

Deregulation -

-

-

-

-

-

18

2.4

Fuel subsidy removal -

-

-

-

-

-

23

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

31

2.2

-

Origin of fuel price increase in Nigeria

-

-

2.4.1 SURE Programme -

-

-

2.4.2 Objectives of the SURE Programme

-

25

2.5

Rational for the fuel subsidy removal

-

-

-

-

31

2.6

Politics of fuel subsidy removal

-

-

-

-

36

2.7

Impact of fuel subsidy removal in Nigeria

-

-

52

2.8

Concepts of palliative measures by government

-

-

61

2.9

The house of representative report of the ad-hoc committee to
-

63

-

verify and determine the actual subsidy requirements 2.10 Theoretical frame work of analysis
Reference

-

-

-

-

-

-

83

-

-

-

85

CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN
3.1

Research design -

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

87

3.2

Sources of data

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

87

3.3

Location of study

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

88

3.4

Population of the study - -

-

-

-

-

-

88

3.5

Sampling and sampling technique -

-

-

-

-

89

8

3.6

Sample size determination -

-

-

-

89

3.7

Instruments used for data collection -

-

-

-

91

3.8

Administration of instrument

-

-

-

-

-

91

3.9

Validity of the instrument -

-

-

-

-

-

91

3.10 Reliability of the instrument -

-

-

-

-

-

92

3.11 Data collection -

-

-

-

-

-

92

-

-

-

-

-

93

-

-

-

-

-

95

-

-

-

3.12 Instrument of return rate (IRR)
Reference

-

-

-

-

CHAPTER FOUR
DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
4.1

Data Presentation and analysis

-

-

-

-

-

96

4.2

Interpretation of data

-

-

-

-

-

105

-

CHAPTER FIVE: FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATION
5.1

Summary of findings -

-

-

-

-

-

-

106

5.2

Conclusion - -

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

108

5.3

Recommendations

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

109

Bibliography -

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

111

Appendix

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

114

-

-

-

-

-

-

115

-

Questionnaire -

-

9

ABSTRACT
When the researcher chose this topic “fuel subsidy removal and Nigerian economy”-she was inspired on how Nigerians reacted towards the fuel subsidy removal, the strikes, violent demonstrations, high cost of fuel and transportation etc, it was these problems that made the researcher carryout this work. To do this, researcher developed three major questions and other sub/minor questions aimed at prying into fuel subsidy removal and the Nigerian economy. These questions were administered in the form of a questionnaire to 399 respondents who were selected as a sample of the population. Apart from the primary data collected through questionnaire, secondary data were also collected. In organizing and presenting data collected, tables and percentages were used. Data analysis and interpretation revealed the level of impact felt in the sectors of the economy. A high level of impact was felt in health, transportation, education and power sector, a low impact was felt in agriculture, infrastructure and basic amenities, majority of the respondents had no idea of the achieved impact in communicating and no impact was felt at all in tourism. It was therefore recommended that government should pay adequate attention to these sectors of the economy, this should also be supplemented by providing social amenities and infrastructures in the country. If the sectors of the economy are in a very good shape, it will not only go along way in sustaining and reviving other sectors of the economy, it wil also help to hasten growth and development in Nigeria.

10

CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION

1.1BACKGROUND OF STUDY
A subsidy by definition is any measure that keeps prices consumers pay for a good or produce below market level for consumer or for producers. Subsidies take different forms,these include grants, tax reductions and exemptions or price controls. Others affect prices or cost indirectly such as regulations that skew the market price in favour of a particular fuel, government. Sponsored technology, or research and development.(R & O) Alozie (2009).
According to Eyiuche (2012) the federal government operated fuel subsidy with the aim of making petroleum products available to cushion the effect of actual market prices of the product on

the general populace. The federal

government during the military era was of the opinion that the cost of production, transportation of fuel will be so much a heavy burden for the poor masses of
Nigerians to bear alone and therefore decided to pay part of the total amount of fuel cost for every Nigerian in order to make the product available and affordable.
This is actually what is referred to as fuel subsidy, that is the government paying part of the total amount of fuel cost. His intention of cushioning the effect of actual market price of fuel product actually worked for a period of time, say from
1973-1983. On March 31st 1986. Gen. Ibrahim Babangida increased the pump price of petrol form 20k to #39.5k. This was about 97.5% increment.
11

Sources have it that issues worsened with the advent to democracy. On
June 1st, 2000 Chief Olusegun Obasanjo increased the pump price of petrol from
#20 to #30 (50% increment). Gradually, the aim of the military government that introduced fuel subsidy was subdued and defeated.
The benefits of fuel subsidy to the average Nigerian was short lived. The federal government claim to have spent over #1.4 trillion on fuel subsidy in the past five years. It also claimed to be paying heavily to subsidize kerosene which is imported into the country through the Nigerian National Petroleum corporation
(NNPC), the fuel subsidy policy has also bred several unintended consequences and practices such as smuggling of petroleum products out of the country, the federal government also claimed that the fuel subsidy policy has made them unable to tackle problems of our collective infrastructure which are the roads, power, agriculture, fixing the refineries etc.Omoniji (2012).
Given the antecedents that most Nigerians have not benefited from fuel subsidy, several economists view subsidies as highly corrupt, wasteful and bled money from the treasury into the private pockets of rich fuel importers. As a result of this obvious reality, the federal government on January 1st 2012 dramatically announced the end of fuel subsidy. With the intention of using the money accrued from fuel subsidy to develop other sectors of the economy , and also to ensure sustainable develop and wealth generation for the nation. Onanuga (2012).
The removal of fuel subsidy by the nigeian government raises lot of dust. It can be said to be the most talked about issue since the inception of democracy in
12

Nigeria. It can also be said that the subsidy will go down in history as one of the most unpopular policies ever imposed on Nigerians. The protest and war of words that the policy generated pointed out glaringly the mistrust Nigerians, most especially the youths have for the government due to years upon years of failed promises and unaccomplished government polcies/programmes. Nigerians got a shocking new year gift from the federal government on January 1st 2012. They found long queues at the filling stations where petrol was sold above #65 per litre.
Fuel subsidy removal which the federal government under the leadership of
President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan has canvassed and lobbied for since he was sworm in last May 29, 2011 appeared to have finally got to the blast off stage. It was on Monday, December 12, 2011, that the National Economic Council headed by the Vice President Nnmadi Sambo decided that government should finally remove the subsidy come January 2012. The body consists of the vice president, governors, strategic ministers and central bank of Nigeria (CBN) claimed that subsidy removal had become inevitable to avert the collapse of Nigerian economy.
Daily sun (2012:18).
The withdrawal of fuel subsidy by the federal government generated heated debates by Nigerian Labour Congress (NLC) owing to its socio-economic implications on the nations economy. The prices of goods and services rose, the cost of transportation also rose drastically even commercial motorcycle instantly adjusted their fares as roon as the subsidy removal was announced. Many artisan like welders, aluminum window filters, tailors, who cannot afford power
13

generators are today out of work, many Nigerian youths have taken to riding commercial motorcycle and tricycle while others went into street hawtony just to keep body and soul together. The NLC and government workers went on strike which resulted the nation (Nigeria) to loose chose to $617 million daily, translating into about #100 billion, this removal also brought about mass poverty to Nigerians as the prices of goods and services increased while their income still remain constant, and also violent demonstration which distorted peace and tranquility in the country. Following the pronouncement, motorist who were traveling back to their various destinations after the new year and Christmas celebrations were hit by sudden likes on petrol prices. Prices rose dramatically ranging between #140 and #150 per litre and at between #170 to #200 on the black market. Omoniji (2012: 4).
In the words of Kauffmann (2010: 128) subsidy removal as a programme enjoyed relative success with limited social stress, in others cases the exercise was deemed a failure. Elimination of subsidies on essential commodities like fuel has been known to precipitate social disolocation and in the extreme led to street riots and civil strike. Fuel subsidy removal programmes are sensitive to economy structure, level of development of the country, political system and the state of the economy. There is evidence that the more successful countries have taken a phase or gradual approach, have engage in conscientious research prior to implementation and followed a regorious approach to policy making. The effective communication and fair level of trust between citizens and government
14

may be the other critical success factors in such an exercise. We examine
Nigeria‟s proposal for subsidy removal against this back drop.
The stake holders, unions and people made snide comments about the removal of fuel subsidy, they say that the policy is unconstitutional because the policy does not favour the poor masses, and they did not seek the consent of the people and their full support before implementing such policy. They also stated their view saying that subsidy removal is not the only means that the government can accrue or save money to develop other sectors of the economy.

1.2 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
Nigerians did not embrace the new policy of fuel subsidy removal by the federal government. On 1st of January 2012 when president Ebele Goodluck
Jonathan announced the fuel subsidy removal. Nigerians reacted negatively towards such policy. The Nigerian labour congress and government workers went on strike which made the nation (Nigeria) to lose a huge amount of money close to
#100 billion naira. Emeh (2012).
The removal of fuel subsidy by the federal government also generated inflation in the country which bought about a high cost of fuel and other items in the market, not only did it bring about inflation, it was also accompanied with mass poverty because the price of goods and services increased while the income of people still remained constant. Nigerians were also traumatized by the new of the new policy and it also brought about violent demonstrations which disorted the
15

peace and tranquility of the country. It was these problems that prompted the researcher to carry a thorough research on the impact of fuel subsidy removal on the Nigerian economy.

1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The objective of this study is to look into fuel subsidy removal and the
Nigerian economy, to achieve this, the researcher wishes
1. To assess the rational for the removal of fuel subsidy by the federal government. 2. To assess what petrol subsidy removal portend for the Nigerian economy.
3. To assess the failure or success of the oil subsidy regime.

1.4 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
The following shall constitute a question for this research
1. Was the fuel subsidy regime useful to a majority of Nigerians.
2. Was the federal government reasonable in removing the subsidy on fuel.
3. What does the fuel subsidy removal portend for Nigerians.

1.5 SCOPE OF STUDY
Because of the vast nature of Nigeria, the researcher limited its study to
Abakaliki local government area and its environs

16

1.6 LIMITATION OF THE STUDY
In this research work like every other purposeful act, it was met with many obstacles in the gathering of information the major problem encountered by the researcher is the limited time given within which to gather and analyse data because this topic is based on current issues in our society. Also the researcher was faced with the problem of finance as well as the negative attitude and noncoperation of the respondents to give information to the researcher. Also, there is the problem of transportation from one place to another. Other problems include physical problems such as energy used in carrying out this work and it was carried out when normal school activities were on, the researcher devoted more time in order to meet up with the time limit for the submission of this work. Another problem the researcher encountered was lack of textbooks because this research work is a current issue in Nigeria, people have not written any text books on it, the researcher had to reach on journal, magazines, newspaper and the internet.

1.7 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
The findings of this study will be very useful to the government and stakeholders to be able to adopt a bottom-up approach to that will be beneficial to ngieria both the ordinary masses and the elites. The result of the study will also be useful to Nigerian citizens as they will comprehend and be enlightened on the use fullness or other wise of fuel subsidy removal. The finding will also be useful to students, staff and researchers looking for reference materials on fuel subsidy
17

(removal). The public, private sectors and public affair analyst will learn a lot from the findings and recommendations made in this work

DEFINITION OF TERMS
Impact – consequences, outcome, reparations
Fuel subsidy –

The amount of money that the government pay to the cabals or fuel importers while importing fuel so the price of fuel will be cheaper for the people to purchase

Removal –

Elimination, withdrawal or taking away

Nigerian economy – The wealth, resources financial system of Nigeria
Subsidy –

Any measure that keep prices consumer pay for a good or produce below market price for consumer or for producer

Regime -

A period of existence of something

18

REFERENCE
Alozie, E. (2009, October 26). The Lies About Deregulation. Nigerian Newsword.
Vol. 3, P.15.
Bell, J. (1993). Doing Your Research Project. (2nd Edition). Buckingham: Open
University Press.
Emeh, O.I. (2011). Deregulation of the Downstream Oil Sector in Nigeria:History and Fallacies, Journal of Public Administration and Policy Research Vol. 3
(11), P. 128-139.
Eyiuche, A. C. (2012, January 5). Socio-Economic Implication of Fuel Subsidy
Removal. Vanguard, P. 21.

19

CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 SUBSIDY AND FUEL SUBSIDY
Subsidy can be defined as a financial assistance to certain products or category of industry so that the price will be low and hopefully continue to provide jobs and spin off economic activity. Subsidies have been around for ages and it comes in many forms such as cash, labour form, export, consumption, education, housing etc. According to sun news papers May 5, 2012, the idea of subsidizing petroleum products to Nigerians was born following the collapse of the nation‟s four refineries, which had forced the country, form being a massive producer of refined product to becoming a net improper of petroleum products notably, petrol, kerosene and diesel for domestic users. In the mid 1990‟s, Nigerians refineries –
Kaduna, Port Harcourt and Warri, had collapsed due to the negligence of its management to carry out a routine turn around maintenance (TAM). As the refineries collapsed, it created a short-fall in the system, as the supply of petroleum products could not match the demand by local consumers. Therefore the next option left for the government was a resort to importation through the NNPC importation had become inevitable to curb the embarrassing scarcity of products and the attendant soaring high prices experienced in all nooks and crannies of the country. However it was not only the refineries that collapsed due to the alleged graft in the system, key infrastructure in the down steam end of the business also went down the refineries. The various petroleum products storage and distribution
20

pipelines ferrying fuel from the refineries primarily from Lagos, Port Harcourt, and Warri to other parts of the country had all aged, rotten, obsolete, bursting and non-functional. Indeed, importation poses a serious economic challenge in the country, the challenge came in and government had to opt to ferry the products via trucks (rather than pipelines) to the various part of the country. The trucks had to be hired and owners paidd for. Another economic challenge was that imported products had more templates (importers had to approach banks for credit facilities, which came with huge interest rates, they had to hire and pay for vessels, pay port change, dutyy to customs and other taxes), which normally shot up the landing cost of products, far above what would have been obtainable had the products been refined in the country.

2.1.1 AGENCIES INVOLVED IN SUBSIDY
Some analysts have pointed at a price variation that is above 50 percent products are refined locally. To cope with these challenges, the petroleum equalization fund
(PEF) and petroleum support programme (PSP) were both launched by the government with budgetary provisions to accommodate them. The equalization fund handled what government called the “bridging cost” – the logistics of carrying products from Lagos to other parts of the country, while the PSP was mandated to pay marketers the extra sum incurred in bringing in products into the country and selling at a uniform price. For e.g. as at today, it is estimated that the landing and selling cost of imported products would be in the region of #140 and
21

#141 a litre in Lagos state and very nearly states. So if the government wants importers and marketers to stay on a #97 per litreprice,and marketers import and land should sell at #141per liter to stay afloat as profitable businesses, it means government had to refund the extra cost of #14 borne by the marketers in that deal.
The government to pay marketers cost of taking the products from Lagos to other parts of the country via trucks.
On the other hand, the petroleum products pricing regulatory agency
(PPPRA), manages the petroleum product support fund (PSF) scheme. The
PPPRA quarterly grants approval or permits to oil firms to import products into the country. The oil firms have to apply, but the PPRA will grant the volume that each oil firm can bring in per quarter – all in an attempt to ensure that a glut or scarcity is not experienced in the system. The PPRA also fixes the price that marketers will have to sell products to consumers. The PPPRA through the PSF scheme, refines the extra-cost (as we later calculated the #14) borne by marketers who import and land production in the country.
It will be also instructive to note that most of the marketers who import do so on behalf of the NNPC. And one marketer can import at a given period on behalf of the NNPC and thereafter share the product to other marketers. The PPRA originally reports to the president but in the last two years, that had been altered, as it now reports to the minister of petroleum resources.
Another regulator is the Department of petroleum resources (DPR). This agency is statutory responsible for the regulatory of all aspects of the industry – up
22

stream, middle steam and down stream industry. DPR ensures that the right quality and quality of products is imported into the country by each marketers approved by the PPPRA.

2.2 ORIGIN OF FUEL PRICE INCREASE IN NIGERIA
The history of the fuel price increase in Nigeria dates back to 1973 when
Gowon increased fuel from 6k to 8.45k (about 40.8% increase). Murtala
Mohammed also increased it in 1976 from 8.45 to 9k (about 0.59% increase).
Obasanjo also increased it again on October 1, 1978 from 9k to 15.3k (about 70% increase). Shehu Shagari also increased it on April 20th from 15.3k to 20k (about
30.71% increase). Ibrahim Babangida also increased the fuel price on March 31st
1986 from 20k to 39.5k (95.5% increase). He also increase it on April 10, 1988 from 39.5k to 42k (6.33% increase). On January 1, 1989, he increased the price from 42k to 60k (although the regime said it was for private vehicle only but the price remained 42k for commercial vehicles). On December 19, 1989, he also moved it to a uniform price of 60k (42.86%). On March 6; 1991, the price of a litre increased from 60k to 70k (16.67% increase) and that was the price when
Babangida Ibrahim stepped aside in August 1993.
Chief Enerst Shonekan increased the price of a litre of fuel from 70k to #5
(614% increase) on November 8, 1993 but a hectic mass protest saw Abacha take over power. The incoming Abacha regime reduced the increment to #3.25 on
November 22 1993. On October 2nd 1994 the Abacha Junted increased the price of
23

fuel to #15 from #3.25 (361.54% increase). But after massive street protest, the regime reduced the increment to #11 on October 4, 1994. That was the price until
Abacha passed on 8th of June 1998 and the Abdul Salami Abubakar caretaker regime raised the price from #11 to #25 (127.27% increase) on Dec 20, 1998 and after days of sustained protest, it was forced to reduce the increment to #20 on
January 6th, 1999.
The Obasanjor presidency adopted fuel subsidy as the bedrock of its economic policy, for no sooner than it was sworn in that it affected an increment to #30 (50% increase) on June 1, 2000 but protest and mass rejection forced it to reduce the increment to #25 on June 8, 2000 and further down to #22 (-10%) on
June 13, 2000. The regime was again to increase the price to #26 (18.18%) on
January 1, 2002 and again to #42 (23.08% increase) on June 2003.
On May 29th 2004 Obasanjo increased it from #42 to #50 (19.05% increase). On August 25th 2004 it rose from #50 to #65 (30% increase). On May
27th 2007, it rose again from #65 to #75 (15.38% increase).
Yaradua‟s regime/government reduced it to #65 in June 2007 after general protest against the new price regime. Although the Yaradua government made effort to increase the price of petroleum products it could not scale through following increased mass disapproval for such act.
The Goodluck Jonathan administration has said it is fuel subsidy removal or nothing else, when he increased it from #65 to #141 on January 1, 2012 and after much violent demonstrations by Nigerians, he later reduced it to #97.
24

2.2.1 PETROL PRICES IN SELECTED COUNTRIES
It must however be observed that at even at #65 per litre of petrol,
Nigerians were buying fuel at he costliest price among the oil producing nations in the world and in some of them fuel is almost free yet the federal government had to increase the prices further. This fact is buttressed by the table of selected countries below.
COUNTRIES

US $

-

Algeria

0.14

-

Batirain

0.27

-

Brunei

0.39

-

Egypt

0.31

-

Iraq

0.38

-

Kuwait

0.22

-

Libya

0.17

-

Nigeria

0.87

-

Oman

0.31

-

Qatar

0.22

-

Saudi Arabia

0.16

-

Vanenuala

0.023

(nations news paper Jan. 4, page 5, 2012)
The table above showing the price petrol in some selected countries speaks volume by exposing how Nigerian masses have been exploited by constant
25

increase of price of petrol. The fact is that while poor neighbouring countries are building new refineries, Nigeria cannot maintain the ones we inherited from past military governments, instead the present government is desperate to protect its concept cronies and punish Nigerians in the process. Former minister of interior captain Emmanuel Iheanacho said during the inauguration of the executive council of the maritime reporters association of Nigeria maintained that #3.4 million oil subsidy was in wrong hands. He noted that the beneficiaries for the subsidy were not the poor masses as it was envisaged but the so-called politicians within the corridor of power and the cabals. This statement was corroborated by an official of the Nigerian maritime administration and safety agency (NIMASA) who said that the country was losing $1 billion to oil theft monthly. He went further to reveal that the officials of NNPC, collude with thieves saying that oil is siphoned into the barges. Eyiuche (2012)

The table below shows the various petrol adjustment in Nigeria since 1973
1

Gowon,

1973:6k to 8.45k

(40.8% increase

2

Murtala

1976:8.45 to 9k

(0.59% increase

3

Obasanjo

Oct. 1, 1978:9k to 15.3k

(70% increase

4

Shagari

April 20th 1982:15.3k to 20k

(30.71% increase

5

Babangida

March 31st 1986:20k to 39k.4k

(6.33% increase

6

Babangida

April 10th 1988:39.5k to 42k

(6.33% increase

7

Babangida

January 1st 1989: 42k to 60k

(6.33% increase

26

8

Babangia

Dec. 1989: moved to uniform Price of

(42.86%)

60k
9

Babangida

March. 6, 1991: 60k to 70k

(16.67% increase

10

Shonekan,

Nov. 8th 1993: 70k to #5

(614% increase

11

Abacha

Nov. 22nd 1993:drops from #5 to
#3.25k

12

Abacha

Oct. 2nd 1994: #3.25k to #15

13

Abacha

Oct. 4th 1994: price drops from #15 to 14

(361.54%)

#11
14

Abujbakar

Dec. 20th 1998: #11 to #25

(127.27% ncrease)

15

Abubakar

Jan 6th 1999: #25 to #20

(.20%)

16

Obasanjo,

June 1, 2000: #20 to #30

(50% increase)

17

Obasanjo

Jan 1,2000: #30 reduced price to #22

(-10%)

18

Obasanjo

Jan1, 2002: #22 to #26

(18.18% increase)

19

Obasanjo

June to Oct. 2003: #26 to #42

(23.08% increase)

20

Obasanjo,

May 29th 2004: #42 to #50

(19.05%)

21

Obasanjo,

August 25th 2004: #50 to #65

(30% increase)

22

Obasanjo,

May 27th: #65 to #75

(15.38% increase)

23

Yar‟Adua,

June 2007, #75 to #65

(-15.38%

24

Jonathan,

Jan 1st 2012: #75 to #65

(-15.38%)

25

Jonathan

Jan 2012: #141 to #97

(socio-economic implications of the fuel subsidy removal. Egiuche, 2012)

27

2.3

DEREGULATION
Deregulation is an act by which the government regulation of a particular

industry is reduced or eliminated in order to create or foster a more efficient market place. This is in enacted to weaken government influence and force greater competition. This can also be said as the removal or relaxation of government regulation of economic activities. In a popular parlance, to deregulate means to do away with the regulations concerning financial markets and trades. Ernest and young (1988) post that deregulation and privatization are elements of economic reforms programmes charged with the ultimate goal of improving the overall economy through properly spelt out ways. For eg, freeing government from the bondage of continuous financing of extensive projects which are best private investments by the sale of such enterprise, encouraging efficiency and affectiveness in resources utilization, reducing government borrowing while raising revenue, improving returns from investment and broadening enterprise share ownership 1zibili and Aiya( 2007: 228).
According to Akinwumi (2005), deregulation is the removal of government interference on the running of a system this means that government rule‟s and regulations governing the operations of the system are relaxed or held constant in order for the system to decide its own optimum level through the forces of supply and demand.
According to Ojo (1999), it is a way of liberating the economy, removing impediments to trade, the movement of goods and services thereby allowing for
28

the interplay of the forces of demand and supply in the determination of the prices of commodity.
According to Bankole (2001)deregulation entails the following elements privatization, removal of price control, to a large extent elimination of barrier to participate in all aspects of production, supply and distribution of goods and service by private business men. He believes that a regulated market can lead to shortage in supply which will give rise to hoarding and the existence of black market in the economy. Deregulation as accepted is sometimes interchangeably with liberalization which has been defined as follows by the British council programme and sector that promotes policy and institutional change designed to free internal and external markets for good and services, improving efficient operations of markets, correcting markets, distortion, restructuring enterprise and institutions in public sector, and strengthening public revenue and expenditure planning and management.
(http://www.britishcouncil.org/government/ectin/liberal.htm.1999).
Deregulation implies the absence of control or regulation of the prices of petroleum products of government leaving the determination of prices to the interaction of forces of demand and supply which also rule out subsidy and encouerage competition, efficiency and increase output in the petroleum industries
Umoru (2001). Deregulation pre-supposes market forces as the determination of prices rather than a decision to fix price by administrative fiat, it is also a way of

29

freeing government of the concurrent control and involvement in the business of refining, importation, and distribution of refined petroleum products in Nigerian market. Deregulation allows services and enterprises to be restricted as little as possible. For our purpose, deregulation means either the partial or total withdrawal of government control in the allocation and production of goods and services. This question that should be asked at this junture is, what are the gains of deregulation in Nigeria? This question cannot be convincingly answered in isolation of the theoretical foundation of deregulation. The most contentious issues in Nigeria is arguably the question of deregulation of the oil sector which has been generating heated debates from its protagonists and antagonist.
The protagonist posit that the liberalization and deregulation of the down stream sector of the petroleum industry would finally actualize the objectives of ending perennial fuel scarcity and maintaining sustainable fuel supply across the polity. It also added that liberalization and deregulation would enable either stakeholders, including major and independent markets, to import and market products. As the NNPC lacks the capacity to import enough petroleum for the country, couple with the perennial malfunctioning of the refineries, the governments introduction for the petroleum support fund (PSF) from which it draws money to pay the excess expenditure incurred by the marketers for importing and selling petrol at regulated price and distributing it to every part of the country, should be stopped the thesis concludes. The major proponents of this
30

thesis include the federal government, the presidential steering committee on the global financial crisis, the Nigerian economic summit group (NESG).
The antagonist believes that the Nigeria petroleum industry must not be liberalized, or deregulated, or privatized completely, for whatever reason and that the status quo should remain, may be with minor fine tuning “here and there” to improve efficiency, “in the overall national interest”. This thesis also posits that the low capacity utilization of Nigeria‟s state-owned refineries and petrochemical plants in Kaduna, warri and port Harcourt, the sorry state of despair, neglect and repeated vandalization of the state-run petroleum product pipeelnes and oil movement infrascture nationwide, the collateral damage of institutionalized corruption, the insatiably corrupt task force operatives that assist diversions of both crude oil and petroleum products, large scale cross-border smuggling of petroleum products, of all of

which are the root causes of the protracted and

seemingly intractable fuel cries that have bedeviled the polity relentlessly for close to a decade now, are all predictable outcome of government involvement in the down stream sectors of the Nigerian petroleum industry. Finally, they posit that deregulation helps increase profit margin for the importers. Essentially, this extreme is the implied position of the Nigerian labour congress (NLC) and the organized civil society.
Between this extreme is the third class thesis that that believes that deregulation is desirable in freeing government of its concurrent control and involvement in the business of refining, importation and distribution of refined
31

petroleum products in the Nigerian market. In the opinion of this proponent, the deregulation of the petroleum industry in Nigeria should be implemented in phases, so as to enable the state-owned monopolies to regain efficiency, before full privatization. This deregulation dance is the one Nigeria has been dancing since 1999.
The dancers are the same, and the music is also the same- the state is the same and the musical instruments continue to remain the same. The only difference is the fact that new drummers are handing the drums and they may be doing a remix of the old beat, which may sound monotonously awful. The rent hike in fuel price and deregulation of downstream petroleum sector or, more precisely, the full scale deregulation of fuel prices and labour‟s retreat from unwillingness to organize mass actions, including strike to fight this anti poor, anti-growth policy is one sure process that a least, in the short and medium terms will worsen the socio-economic plights of the vast majority of the working class people Otaigbe (2009:24).
Deregulation of economic activities is generally an acceptable economic policy in a well balanced economy and not in a junk-mal-functioning economy as in Nigeria. Deregulation in Nigeria is usually bastardised by economic saboteurs.
A test case is the deregulation of the foreign exchange in Nigeria in 1986 during the structural Adjustment programme. That singular deregulation which was pooly and comply implemented destroyed the economy because it brought in economic tribalism which was the worst type of economy. The Nigerian economy has never been the same since then, as such the confidence of the people has been eroded.
32

All the policy measures of the past regimes ended up, traumatizing and impoverishing the poor masses. Eyiuche( 2012).

2.4 FUEL SUBSIDY REMOVAL
Fuel subsidy is a government progrmame created to reduce how much
Nigerians have to pay for petroleum motor spirit (PMS), automotive Gas Oil
(Diesel), and to protect the citizens from crude oil volatility on the international market. Fuel subsidy is particularly popular in oil producing countries a such as
Venezuela, Kuwait, china, Taiwan, south Korea, Trinidad, Tobago, Brunei,
Nigeria etc. It can also be referred to the effort by the government to pay for the difference between the price of fuel in the pump and the actual cost of the product.
So by paying the difference, the government enables fuel to be sold at a lower price so that it will help alleviate the burden on its people especially the lower income group. Fuel subsidy was before the coming of the Jonathan‟s administration, a policy of federal government meant to assist the people of
Nigeria to cushion the effects of their economic hardship. Conceptually, fuel subsidy seeks to enhance financial capacity but also to accept the implied financial losses by it in the spint of its national responsibility to ensure the well being of the populace. In other words, if is product, like duel is to sell for #141 per litre, but for some considerations. It cannot be sold at that rate but at #97, this simply means that there is a subsidy to the tune of #85 fir every litre purchased at the filling stations. Emeh (2012).
33

This is not the first time Nigeria is hearing of subsidy removal by the government and the promises by government when subsidy was removed from diesel and kerosene did not come afterwards. Today diesel which sell for #170 per liter and kerosene at the cost of #140 per liter are unavailable despite the high cost after subsidy removal. The people are angry that the revenue that was realized was embezzled by the cables and whosoever was in authority, hence there is continued scarcity of kerosene and diesel. Vanguard (2012).
Before a government began implementing a new policy on either reducing or increasing the fuel subsidy, it had to gauge the public response towards the policy, whether it is a gradual reduction or a sudden removal on the subsidy, it will have an impact on the people and the economy. A case in point will be the sudden removal of subsidy of fuel in Nigeria this year(2012). The government of Jonathan has been keeping the price of fuel down at $0.45llitre. However on 1st January
2012, president abandoned the subsidy for fuel and resulted in a price increase to
$0.94/liter.The aftermath is the inflation of more than 100% in food and transportation, violent demonstrations and strikes which eventually reduced it to about $0.69/liter. Another example will be the recent Indonesian government attempt to reduce fuel subsidy by another 30% on 1st April 2012, had been met with a road block. Due to intense public demonstration the government hat to give its demand and delayed it for another six months.
Fuel in Nigeria is an inelastic product both from the demand and supply side which means that it is very difficult for consumers to find alternatives to the
34

use of gasoline, kerosine and petrol in their daily lives. In a country like Nigeria where private and group influences policy making, where the prizes are few and the stakes so high, the fight for the booty or “national cake”, the manipulation of the “game board” is inevitable. The question for who gains and who loses in the
Nigerian policy area is rarely an accident. Thus understanding the political economy at play in the fuel subsidy is expedient Elekwa (2004)

2.4.1THE SUBSIDY RE-INVESTMENT EMPOWERMENT PROGRAMME
(SURE)
The president of the federal republic of Nigeria. Mr. Ebelechukwu goodluck
Jonathan has set up a subsidy reinvestment empowerment programme board and appointed Dr. Christopher Kolade as the chairman. Similary he has named a highpowered committee headed by a former chief justice of Nigeria, justice Alfa belgore, to meet with the organized labour and all other states holders with a view to resolving issues that may arise from the removal of the subsidy on petrol. The
Kolade committee is to oversea and ensure the effective and timely implementation of projects to be funded with the savings accrued to the federal government from subsidy removal, major Gen. Mamman Kontagora (retd) will serve as the deputy chairman of the organized labour. The programme is basically designed to mitigate the removal of fuel subsidy and accelerate economic growth through investments in critically needed infrastructure.

35

The sure also includes two representatives of the organized labour, on representative of the national union of road transport worker (NURTW), one representative of the Nigeria union of journalist, one representatives of the Nigeria women group,one representative of Nigeria women youths,one representative of civil society organization, the coordinating minister of the economy, minister of finance, minister of national planning, minister of petroleum, minister of state for health, special adviser to the president on technical matters and six reputable individuals from the six geographical zones in the country, three of whom will be women. The mandate of the board shall be to oversee the fund in the petroleum subsidy savings account, and the programmes specifically initiated to improve the quality of life of Nigerians in line with the transformation agenda of the president.
The board will have the following responsibilities
a) Determine in licision with the minister of finance and minister of petroleum resource, the subsidy savings estimates for each preceding month and ensure that such funds are transferred to the funds special account with the central bank of Nigeria (CBN)
b) Approve the annual work plan and cash budgets of the various project implementation units (PIUS) within the ministries department of funds by the
(PIUS) in other to certify and execute projects.
c)

Monitor and evaluate execution of the funded projects, including period poverty and social impact analysis

d) Update the president regularly on the programme
36

e) Periodically brief the executive council of the federation on the progress of the council f) Appoint consulting firms with international regulation to provide technical assistance to the board in financial and project management.
It is not worthy that while the 2012 budget allocated the best possible amounts of these critical projects, additional resources are allocated to the same project in the
SURE programme to ensure that they are completed at faster rates. Some of these projects and allocations are as follows
-

WORKS

N11billion is allocated to the Abuja-Lokoja road in the 2012 budget, with an additional N14bn from the (SURE) programme. N6million is allocated to be
Benin-ore-shagamu, with an additional N16.5bn to be financed through
SURE.#36billion is allocated to portharcourt-onitsha road with an additional N5bn from SURE. N18.5bn is allocated to Kano-Maidugri road with an additional
N1.5bn from SURE. Another provision is made in the 2012 budget for construction of the second Niger bridge. Provision of N23.5bn is made for maintenance of roads and bridges across the country through
FERMA(FEDERAL ROAD MAINTENANCE AGENCY)
POWER
The total amount allocated to the power sector is N248 billion. A sum of N392 mullion allocated to Nigeria electricity liability management company and N650

37

million for bulk trader. N155billion will be spent on power projects through the
SURE programme over the period 2012-2015
HEALTH
N4.6billion

is allocated to the polio eradication programme. N3.5billion is

allocated to the procurement of HIV/AIDS drugs
-

N174 million is allocated to integrated material new born and child helath strategy, including capacity building and promoting school helath initiative.

-

N8.42 billion is allocated to federal university teaching hospitals

-

N6 billion and N3.6billion are allocated to the procurement of vaccines and mid wifery services scheme respectively.

-

N73.8billion will be spent on material and child helath from SURE

AVIATION
N22.2billion is allocated for the, modernization of airport terminals and upgrading of facilities in the six geopolitical zones of the country

F.C.T ADMINISTRATION
N3.1 billion is allocated to the construction of a 20,000m3 /hr lower usuma dam water treatment plants.
N2.5billion is allocated to the construction of cultural and millenum power
N1.25 billion is allocated to the development of idu industrial area.
Various road project including the competition of roads BC, Bix and circle road
(N4billion) rehabilitation and expansion of airport express way (N7.53billion)
38

NIGER DELTA
-

East-west road (section I-V) the 2012 budget allocated N22.2billion to this road. In other to accelerate its completion, an additional N21.7bllion is allocated in 2012 from SURE PROGRAMME.

WATER RESORUCES
N1.2 Billion is allocated to the construction of central ogbiu regional water project. Total of N4billion was allocated to the construction of dams.
Rehabilitation of water basin authorities N13.91billion.
-

N205.5billion will be invested in rural water shceme, water supply scheme, irriguation scheme and other water related project from subsidy re-investmetn and empowerment programmes. This projects will not only signifcantly improve the country‟s infrastructure, but will also create millions of jobs for
Nigerians (www.nigeriafirst.org/sure.shtml).

The SURE PROGRAMME also consist of programmes which the government pledged to implement within 3-4 years. Some of these programems are
1. Maternal and child health services
2. Public work woman youth employment programme designed to provide temporal employment to youths in labour intensive public works
3. Urban mass transit scheme: the objective of this scheme is to increase mass transit availability, this will also involve the provision of zero-interest loans to establishes transport operators
39

4. Vocational training schemes: there will be vocational training centers in all the states in the country and federal capital territory
5. Road infrastructure projects
6. Rail transport project: this component of the programme will entail the rehabilitation and restoration of our abandoned rail way infrastructure and the construction of new standard guage railway lines, therereby providing alternative means of transportation of people and goods across the country
7. Water and agricutlrue projects: the programme component will hamess nigerian‟s abundant water resources through sustainable food production and water conservation
8. Irriguation projects: this will increase local production of rice by over 400,000 tuns per year and other food crops, thereereby reducing importation of food into Nigeria rural
9. Urban water supply projects; the rural and urban water supply project will upon completion increase the level of water supply available to about 10 billion people or 70% of the population. It will also increase the nationals, likes to water supply from the rural levels of 58% to about 75%
10. Petroleum/NNPC project: the main objective of this component is to restore and improve domestic refining capacity and prevent short falls in supply of petroleum products. Three new refineries, will be built under counter part funding arrangement with the private sectors in bayelsa, Kogi and Lagos.

40

Thousand of workers will be employed at each of these locations. Punch
(2012)
2.4.2 OBJECTIVES OF SURE
1. To mitigate the impact of the petroleum subsidy discontinuation on the population but particularly for the poor and vulnerable segments.
2. To accelerate economic transformation through investment in critical infrastructure projects
3. To lay a foundation for the successful development of a national safely net programme, that is better targeted at the poor and most vulnerable on a countinency basis.
4. A tool for ensuring transparency
2.5 RATIONAL FOR THE FUEL SUBSIDY REMOVAL
The federal government contended that it had spent billions on fuel subsidy, depriving other sectors of the economy such as education, employment, infrastructure. Nigeria fuel subsidy continues to crowd out other development spending. By comparism, Nigerian‟s total allocation for education is about $2.2 billion and it is not much higher for health care.Infact mortality in Nigeria remains unacceptably high at 90.4 per 1000 live births.In 2004,it was estimated that only
15% of the county‟s road were paved.The billions from the fuel subsidy could help to address some of these issues. Corroborating the view of the senate, the National
Economic council (NEC), the highest economic policy organ of the Nigerian

41

government, in its analysis state that it costs the country‟s treasury one trillion naira yearly to subsidize petroleum products in Nigeria. NEC stated therefore that it would be better if the huge sum of money spent on subsidy is used in smoothing pothhles roads, providing hospitals, rehabilitant and building health facilities and schools or supplying portable drinking water and other basic amenities and infrastructures (Daily sun newspaper, Jan, 7th 2012).
According to Ajumogobia (2008) the initial budget for the PSF was #150 billion. This has since grown to over #1.5 trillion in 2007; clearly, subsidizing prices over the years has not only led to unacceptable high fiscal burden on government, imposes high economic cost, but also bred several unintended consequences and practiced including: smuggling of petroleum products out of the country, generating rents that must likely accrue to upper income groups.
Petroleum subsidies largely benefited the consumption of upper income groups.
Substantial evidence indicated that the poor and the near poor consume only a small fraction of these product. In debating the merits of Nigerians fuel subsidy, it is impotent to understand who benefits, the most form the programme. Contrary to popular belief, it is the rich and the cabals not the poor, who disproportionably benefits from Nigerian‟s fuel subsidy. With the government subsiding the market to keep domestic fuel prices artificially low, it is those who consume the most that have a greater benefit from the subsidy. Nigerians poor rely primarily on public transportation as such their per capital fuel consumption is significantly less than the country‟s rich who generally use private vehicle. Some Nigerians wanted the
42

government to checkmate the oil cabal but the government saw removal of fuel subsidy as the easiest and most effective means to address the issue.The table below shows oil cabals/beneficiary and their promoters.
S/N
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35

COMPANY NAME
Oando Nigeria Plc
Mrs. Oil
Pinnacle construction
Enak oil and gas
Conoil
Bonvas and Co.Nig. Ltd
Obat
Folawiyo oil
IPMAN Investment ltd
ACON
ATIO oil
AMP
Honey well
EMAC Oil
De Jone Oil
Capital oil
AZ oil
Eternal oil
Dozil oil
Fort oil
Integrated oil and Gas
African petroleum
A. RANO
A.S.B
Annon PLC
Aminul Resources
Avante guard
Avido
Bottas and Energy
Brilla Energy
Daunstream Energy
In coy Ray
AS CON oil
Channel oil
First Deep water

PROMOTERS
Wale Timubu
Sayyu Dantata
Peter mbah
Mike Adenugu
Banidele. O. Samson
F.E.O. Akinnuntan
Yinka Folawiyo
Aliko Gwadebe

Nino Ozara

Ifeanyi P. Uba
Muhamud Bamanga Tukur
Zira Malagadi
Capt. Iheanacho Emmanuel
Jimbo Ibrahim

Barr. Grace Enemoh

ALLOCATION
(#BILLIONS)
228.506
224.818
300.000
19.684
37.960
5.685
85.000
113.300
10.900
24.100
64.400
11.400
12.200
19.200
14.800
22.400
18.613
5.570
3.375
8.582
30.777
104.58
1.140
3.160
24.116
2.300
1.140
3.640
3.670
0.9603
0.7897
1.988
1.308
5.271
257.396

Source: (Internet, nation on Sunday newspaper January, 5th 2012).

43

The cost of fuel subsidy has continued to grow exponentially. This is partly due to the rising cost of fuel which means that the government has to spend even more to keep domestic prices low and also due to Nigerians increasingly population which resulted in increased fuel consumption, together these pressure made the cost of fuel subsidy unsustainable. The price of crude oil increased from30.4 dollar per barrel in 2000 to 94.9 in 2010 over the same period Nigerians population increased from about 123 million to 158 millions. By 2011, the fuel subsidy accouted for 30% of the Nigerians government expenditure and it was about 4% to GDP and 118% of the capital budget. In addition, keeping the domestic price of soil artificially low with the fuel subsidy has discouraged additional investment in Nigerians oil sector. This is especially problematic given that the oil sector is the lifeblood of the Nigerian economy. Since 2000, Nigerians has issued at least 20 refineries licenses to private companies, however not one refineries licensees to private companies, however not one refinery has been built because investors could not recoup their investment under the artificial low price structure (Daily sun newspaper.January 7th 2012).
Fuel subsidy removal is a contribution of government resolution to deregulate and liberalize the petroleum sector, it will also allow for government to increase revenue economy by saving at least $ 8billoin. Fuel subsidy removal open up the petroleum sector to competition, higher profits for marketers and possibly attracts greater investments, it also opens up the petroleum sector to local and foreign investments (similar to the telecommunication sector) which in turn will
44

create more jobs for Nigerians directly and indirectly, it also reduces government interference and allow the federal government to focus more on the business of governance, improving social services delivery and building infrastructure. This is important as Nigerian‟s economy system sifts more to a private led (open market) economy. Fuel subsidy have always been a policy to help a country‟s under privileged to ease their burden. However the problem with fuel subsidy is that it had benefited the rich more than the poor, there are many cases where subsidized fuel are sold at 3-5 times the original price and instead of helping the lower income, it further burdens them. Subsidies become enriched, once subsidies are given to any sector of the economy, it is very difficult to revolve. Research have shown that the main beneficiaries of subsidies are the politically connected cronies and cabals. In other world, subsidy on fuel encourages crony capitalism and corruption. Another reason for the removal of fuel subsidy is that it distorts markets. The signaling effect of the price of the good or service is somewhat compromised leading to be wasteful in the purchasing and selling of such a product. It is believed that the target beneficiaries of such subsidies would be better served if the subsidies are removed (wwe.nigeriapolitico.com/subsidy.html).
The minister of petroleum resources Mrs. Diezani Allison Madueke, has outlined the benefits of subsidy removal to Nigerians and the economy. The minister who spoke at a town hall meeting recently in Lagos, said, “the discontinuation of fuel subsidy important because it posed a huge financial burden on the government, disproportionately benefits the wealthy, encourages
45

inefficiency, corruption and diversion of scarce public resources away from investment in critical infrastructure”. She was of the opinion that subsidy removal would save additional resources for programmes targeted at mitigating poverty and spurning economic growth. She noted that since 2000, the government had issued 20 licenses to build new private refineries and none of them had resulted in construction of new refineries. She claimed that deregulation of the down stream sector of the petroleum industry would lead to rapid private sector investments in refineries and petro-chemicals which will generate millions of jobs and increase the property for Nigerians. The minister said that a robust programmes structure has been developed to ensure adequate oversight, accountability and implementation of the various projects which accruals from subsidy removal would be used for to mitigate the subsidy removal impact.

2.6 POLITICS OF FUEL SUBSIDY REMOVAL
As the debate on subsidy removal became the most contentious issue most
Nigerians spoke against and in favour of the removal. Prominent among them were two important people that is former minister of petroleum, Prof. Tam David west and a prominent eradiate economist, late Prof. Sam Aluko. Prof. I am David west and a prominent erudite economist, late Prof. Sam Aluko. Prof. I David west described the idea of subsidy as a fraud and believes that Nigeria is not paying any subsidy for oil we consume. These two among many Nigerians who should know and who shortly resisted the present move to impose hardship on Nigerians
46

through the so called subsidy. (most other Nigerians have equally spoken to warn date given our experience in the past. Subsidy removal will end up as another play to impoverish the masses and raise more money for leaders and their cronies to loot. International monetary fund (IMF) has commented the transformation programme of president Good luck Ebelechukwu Jonathan on the removal of subsidy to create job and agriculture.
Mr. president says “we are totally committed to changing things in Nigeria, our vision is that by the year 2010, Nigeria will have become a much bigger player in the global economy. We also said that his emphasis is on poverty alleviation and job creation, we are also looking at ways of improving education and health centre delivery. The managing director of IMF, Mrs. Christine Layarde told
Jonathan that IMF team which recently reviewed the federal government‟s economic programes of fuel subsidy removal was positive, she said she is impressed with the government proritatoin of job creation, agriculture, poor supply, education, transportation, communication, health-care.
The federal government has explained why removal of subsidy on fuel was imperative and how the money that would accrue from its removal would be spent to ameliorate the suffering of the Nigerian people. The government position was made known by the minister of information, Labaran Maku when he paid a visit to the sun publishing newspaper in Lagos.
The minister alleged the fears of Nigerian by assuring them that the money gotten from the removal would not be taken away but would rather be transferred
47

into a common basket where it would be applied directly to ameliorate the impact of the deregulation of down stream oil sector which is continuous and emotional, and if the government don‟t do this, the country and the people will not progress.
The minister Labaran maku regretted that Nigerian which started exporting petroleum since 1958, was still exporting crude 53 years after with no value added to it, a situation which he said really shameful and sad. He was on the strong conviction that “visionary leadership and correct economic policies would have made Nigerian today, the hob of petro-chemical nation exporting petrochemical to
Africa and the rest of the world regretting that this has not happened. In his word
“we export crude to Malaysia, they add value to it and export to the rest of the world, make money and provide job for their people. A barrel of crude oil is sold for $100. It has aviation fuel, it has kerosene, it has diesel and bitumen. And we are content to do just this as a nation. But you can never be an oil producing country by exporting oil, it is with the refined ones that jobs are created.
He spoke further that in the last 10 years, we issued license for new refineries to twenty (20) different organizations. None of them has taken off becauseof price control of fuel. They have to go to the banks to get credit and so on. The refineries that the government built have not been functioning because of incept government management. So what are we planning to do?
The government intended to open up to achieve the sound result we have achieved in other sectors. These private refineries will come on board if deregulation takes place. We have also entered into concrete agreement with
48

builders of public refineries who gave us assurance that within 18 months, they will return our refineries to full capacity. So with the existing four refineries, with the 3 new ones we are planning that in 3 years, Nigeria would be able to export oil products to the rest of the world. With this, we will be sure a true oil producing nation, not by selling crude. But by selling finished products and earning more money which will use to subsidize the life of Nigerians.
He also said that if we continue to borrow in order to subsidize fuel, we will mortgage the future. He also said that Mr. president has decided that, if they take the money gotten from subsidy and put it into the federal budget, the people will not feel the impact and also what the government is doing with it, so a special base has been established in the central bank of Nigeria. This money that will accrue from deregulation will go into that account. The money will be administered by a board of trustee made up of people outside government who are creditable and who are to be drawn from the media, civil society, the labour and other stake holders to manage the funds.
Mr. Maku went further to conclude that the funds would be utilized to further generate additional money to generate power to help in agriculture and serve as an intervention in other sectors of the economy. He also says that with the removal of fuel subsidy, we believe by the time it is done, we believe that it will have impact on the propel and we intend the programe to be completed by the end of this administration he informed and also appealed for people‟s understanding.

49

The General secretary of the conference of Nigeria political parties (NPP)
Mr. Willy Ezugwu said the honourable way out for president Jonathan is to hands off the removal and focus on how to beak the subsidy cartel. in his words, „we are not surprised that the president who claimed to having risen to the top from poor background has joined the oppressing elites by planning to visit hardship on the people he promised to carter for what is however surprising is that it is too early in the day for him to abandon on the people in favour of the rich‟.
Senator Ali Ndume in his words advised president Goodluck to allow
Nigerians to decide through a state holders meetings whether fuel subsidy should be sustained or removed. Senator Ndume said in his words “I do not see the removal as government policy. If you are taking a major general decision like this and you did not involve the people through the national assemble then it is not government policy. We are the representatives of the people then how come we re not being carried along? Even the constitution provides that the people must have a say in government decision and then includes issues such as fuel subsidy, so such policy is unconstitutional. The Nigerian labour congress has called the federal government to all unnecessary expenses and allowances and concentrate funds on areas of basic responsibility to Nigerians instead of insisting on the removal of fuel subsidy. The acting general sectary of Nigeria labour congress Mr.
Owei Lakemfu who spoke and said that expenditure on health care, education, transportation, other critical sectors cannot be reduced as they are basic responsibility of the government to all Nigerians.
50

Owei Lakemfu said the removal of subsidy is a “dictation” of the international monetary fund and is also as a result of pressure from the governors on the presidency accompanied by depreciation of the naira, all these would cause more poverty among Nigerians widely and deeply. Already we make trillions from oil and we have nothing to show for it. How can we give the governors more money to spend when we cannot be guaranteed that these would be results?
The Nigerian labour congress also made a statement to “This Day” newspaper in Abuja on 17th of October 2011, that he lamented that the removal of subsidy would cause more hardship for Nigerians and would only be enjoyed by those who benefit from government largesse. Lakamefu also concluded by saying that federal government should face this reality and address growing poverty, hungry and anger among the masses.
President Goodluck Jonathan says in his words that the proceeds from subsidy removal would be invested in realizing the ambiguous targets of the new agricultural strategy which is focused on job creation and boosting the contribution of sector of the entire economy. Apart from focusing on new refineries, execution of social programmes and job creation, a key priority is to ensure that all aspects of the subsidy removal are managed in a transparent and accountable manner.
The finance minister Ngozi Okonjo –Iweala in her words says “why must the government not remove the subsidy if the subsidy is relatively speaking not benefiting the majority of Nigerian? One of the questions is, who really benefits
51

the most? Everybody in the population benefits, the poor, rich and middle class but the issue is, who benefits the most? The elites, financially buoyant and the average citizens in the society tend to benefit the most by a simple fact.If you are poor,you welk,take okada (commercial motorcycle) or take bus, you consume less of the product. If you are middle class, you own a car, you take at least 60cities a week, if you have a motor cycle you take about 20 litres, if you have luxury fourwell drive, you take about 80 litre, all we are saying is that by the sheer anthmetic of it, the better off that benefit are not the poor, the poor benefit but not as much as well-off people. Smugglers divert the product to neighbouring countries, all the policy makers in nieghbouring countries are very happy. They are quite happy.
They are quite happy with the subsidy, they don‟t want Nigeria to phase it out.
Then you have to ask yourself are we here to trans-subsidize nieghouring countries? Are we here to use the resources in a way that does not deliver to the poor in the rural areas? How many of them are enjoying this? Wouldn‟t we better off to look for smarter ways to use these resources to benefit those who are less well off in the society?
Mr. Tolu Ogunlesi a citizen of Nigerian made his opinion known to guardian newspaper on Wednesday 11 January 2012 said “I remember watching
Goodluck Jonathan speech at the start of

this re-election campaign on 18

September 2010, he promised change. “let the world go out from this eagle square that Jonathan as president in 2011 will herald a new era of transformation of our country “The canoe-carver‟s son who became deputy governor, vice-president
52

without hustling for power, waved us all with stones of his humble and his seeming accessibility. Today he seems best on recreating all those decades age, eager to ensure that as many Nigerians as possible study with lanterns and survive on a single meal a day. How is he doing that? By hurting the most vulnerable, using one of the most ubiquitous items in the land. Petrol. A fuel price increase and the associate increase in the price of commodities, has sparked nation wide protest. Nigeria is a crude-oil producing and exporting country full of poor people.
70% of the population survives on less than $2 a day. These citizens consume more petrol than is necessary because Nigeria has consistently failed to provide enough electricity for its one hundred and thirty (130) million citizens.
Mr. Tony Navah Okonmah wrote from London,in his sayings “The reason for the removal of the fuel subsidy does not make sense at all. It is not the solution to economic recovery. Removal of subsidy at this time is wrong and not the first step in any directions towards opening up the economy. It will only impose more hardship on the already seriously economically down trodden masses. It will cripple further a seriously ill economy; it will spook a fragile financial system and send shook throughout a volatile industry. The removal of fuel subsidy at this time is very bad. The government failed to establish a structure for a sustainable fuel subsidy removal. The structure should first address the issue of spiraling youth unemployment, the structure must also address the high cost of living and cost of food products – the structure should address the problem of poor infrastructure – lack of electricity no good roads, lack of potable water, shortage of quality
53

inhabitable accommodations etc. the removal of subsidy does not in any way at this time impact positively on the economy. I think it is a good policy but poorly executed. Bob Majiri Oghene, author of deep sighs and tears for a birthday, in his words. “I have read a lot of rubbish flying ground as arguments in favour of the fuel subsidy removal. Of all of these are just half-truths and dubious plot to take us
Nigerians for a ride once more. If the government would be a little sincere, it should own up, that during the last election jaundiced by the zoning debate,from the north to the south, from east to west, one prominent contestant doled out money in sum that were incredible to believe ever existed. What occupations were these people involved that made them so rich as to finance those elections with all that money? Where did they get this money from, it not that they were drawing freely from our common patrimony? Mr. President himself admitted this in his maiden media chat when he was trying to defend his single tenure argument for elected civilians. According to him, the April elections cost something close to
$11 billion. How do we then explain it to recoup this money if not by cutting off the cabal it recently named, and getting all the money for itself? Telling us you want to checkmate the cabals through the removal of subsidy in fuel is equivalent to cutting our nose to spite our face. The government knows who these cabals are, don‟t they? If they know them, then they are a million and one ways to checkmate the cabals.

54

In the words of Gbenga Badejo a publisher of post card from Lagos “I have spend some time to educate myself on the matter of fuel subsidy and its recent removal by the government. I felt it was only right that I have an informed view in order to take a position on the matter. I have read the government‟s position paper on the intended use of the proceeds of fuel subsidy removal and have listened to many commentators both for and against, I have tried to develop a simple, hopefully, logical, and analysis of long we are in trouble, what could be done and why the protest we are witnessing is beyond the removal of fuel subsidy. For me therefore the struggle we are engaging in is much more than of the oil subsidy removal. It goes further to the wider problem of corruption.
In the words of Seun Anikulopo Kuti, a Nigerian musician and son of legendary afrobeat innovation Fela Tuti Seun has been leading demonstration in
Lagos state against the fuel subsidy removal in Nigeria. Below he wrote for CNN.
It is not the first time subsides have been removed in Nigeria. Former president
Olusegun Obasanjo reduced it eight times during his tenure, with cost of gasoline increasing from 20 to 70 naira, each time Nigerian‟s were promised better infrastructure and investment. Recently all subsidies was removed from diesel, fuel and during this time, ordinary Nigerians have not seen any impact of the savings in their lives. In fact, life had become worse for them with life expectancy now at an average 45 years. This subsidy removal is the latest in a long line of foreign concepts and ideologies that are being forced down the people‟s throat.

55

What the government has failed to realize is that we cannot continue to model our economics in foreign blue prints.
The petroleum minister Mrs. Allison Diesani Mmadueke also said that if we borrow to subsidize today, it is our children that are subsidizing us, let us take a difficult decision today and make tomorrow better by supporting the removal of subsidy. Governor Obi of Anambra state however lamented that what had made the current situation most difficult for government was the fact that Nigerians no longer trust government on issues; a situation which he said could be traced to the disappointments they suffer under past and present government. Corroboratory
Obi‟s thesis, the fiancé minister Dr Okonji-iweala Ngozi while speaking at the town Hall meeting of the newspaper proprietors Association of Nigeria, (NPAN) in Lagos December 20, 2011 adds that there is a lot of cynicism about everything government says and does, what we are saying is give us a chance to rebuild that confidence, we have a programme that is correcting this. Countering the minister‟s thesis, I. F stone wrote that every government is run by liars and nothing they say should be believed. One need not to go as far as stone but our national history since independence is strewn with until filled government promises. For instance
Jonathan was a vice president in a government which reached an agreement with the Academic staff union of universities in 2009, Government has failed to fulfill its part of the agreement.

56

The President of Nigeria Goodluck Jonathan had told civil society organization that this mind was made up and that without removing the subsidy, the polity would be broke before two years. He therefore said, “even if we deregulate and I am shamed, prosperity will be there to judge me, that i did the right thing, and I will be vindicated when Nigerians start enjoying the benefits of my decision.Again,president Jonathan told Nigerians to embrace up for a tough year. He also spoke at the first Baptist church Garki, Abuja where he attended the
New Year service at he church, he said “the journey will be tough, but it is not going to be too painful. Any way I know that leaders who inflicted pains on the people always end up badly, leaders who think they are so powerful always end up badly and no leader will want to be reckoned with as one who inflicted pain on the people. We are all writing our history whatever you saw as a leader, even if you are dead and gone, the story will be told on how you brought pain on the people. So, nobody will bring pains on Nigerians.
The finance minister Okonjo Iweala Ngozi spoke on a radio Nigeria current affairs progrmame on jobs, infrastructure, health, in her opening remarks, she said the petrol subsidy removal was to adequate the future of Nigeria and her children.
According to her, if Nigeria did not take this measure, the country would be force to experience such hardship that would frustrate the future our children and we will be like some countries like Greece which kept on borrowing until they got to the crisis situation they have found themselves. Mrs. Ngozi said that if Nigerians continued to borrow to run government, their crisis was imminent and the best
57

thing was to begin to arrest the situation. The minister asked Nigerians to understand that the withdrawal of oil subsidy was just one aspect of deregulation of the industry. She spoke on her aspects of the nations economy. Firstly she spoke on “Job”. She said that the exercise of subsidy removal on petrol will help create about 370,000 jobs and this will help alleviate the problem of unemployment. On
“infrastructure” she said that increase of fuel prices is not the only cause of increase in transportation costs, bad roads are part of the problems because vehicle get easily damaged on bad roads and the cost are forced down on commuters. This withdrawal will help government source more money to put our roads in better shape and therefore reduce transport fares. The railways will also benefit and this will further reduce costs. The trains are generally cheaper means of transportation and something will be done in this aspect.
On “health”, she says that Nigeria is one of the worst cases in maternal health care. Nigerian women record deaths in maternal cases more than many other countries and this sector will benefit from the money that will accrue from this withdrawal.
On “Mistrust”, she says “I understand the pains

Nigerians are going

through. I personally do and so do other colleagues of mine. We plead for patience. The impact of this will begin to show soon, we intend to start publishing the amount we are saving from this withdrawal of oil subsidy monthly and also where we are directing them. Nigerians will be participants in this process, and in few months, prices will begin to come down depending on market forces.
58

According to Akin Olowore, who is based in Lagos adds, more people will desire to join mass transit and perhaps pooling of vehicle will become of greater relevance. No doubt house prices will go up where there is vibrant market school as the middle and low, but there may be prolonged void at the high end.
Abuja based environmentalist, Ochuko Odibo, believes that situation will create a behavioural change in the way Nigerians consume fuel.In his words
“many Nigeria will rather walk to the corner shop than drive there, Nigerians will now prefer to share car rides with friends or use the public transport service therefore reduce emission of carbon dioxide (co2) in the atmosphere, he also says that it will drive Nigerians to adopt alternative source of fuel that is cheap, renewable, affordable and available.
According to Professor Babajide Alo, he notes that the development will reduce the emission of green house gases (GHG‟s) into the atmosphere. He says that people would begin to rationalize how they use their vehicle now because of the new fuel regime, rather one person using a car, thirty more people will occupy that car. I foresee a situation whereby mass transportation will be encouraged. He also emphasizes that the nations contribution to GBG‟s emission will reduce.
Green house gas would reduce under the new regime, adding one good part of the deregulation is that the environment will be better off for it. Professor Babajide described the former fuel regime as not cost effective, resulting in wasteful use of vehicles,he also states that if this becomes one of the resolutions of petroleum deregulations, people will rethink before embarking on single journey. This will
59

be good for the environment and national economy, he contends that the timing of the policy‟s implementation is questionable.
According to Chiamaka an Onitsha resident removal of fuel subsidy by the government of Nigeria might not be a bad thing after all. Although the argument against removal might remind us of what Americans refer to as paradoxical situation” in which an individual cannot avoid a problem because of some
,. contradictory constraints or rules, it may not be as absurd as it has been portrayed. Ambassador Ayogu speaks on the benefit Nigerians stand to derive from the removal of fuel subsidy. He also speaks on his experience in Uganda and in roads Nigerians companies are making in the east African country, in his words he said “I know that the removal of fuel subsidy is critical and a bit harsh but I align my self with the government 100% for many countries that I have traveled where they don‟t have fuel subsidy. The goods there are cheaper than what we have in
Nigerian. In Uganda for instance, it takes three times the money we use to fill the tanks of our cars here to fill the tank of the car of same make and capacity in
Uganda. But shock, ugly a bag of cement for instance is equivalent #1,400 and a loaf of the best bread is about #150. A full chicken for instance gives for #600.
The cost of fuel there is determined by market cost and not by government regulation. Secondly in Nigeria, fuel subsidy is paid on the quantity of fuel that comes into Nigeria, brought by the dealers. When the subsidy money is paid to the dealers after taking the stock at the parts, the fuel is now emptied into the storage
60

facilities from where Nigerians are expected to pick fuel at subsidized rate to outlets. But in most cases, a sizeable % of this fuel that comes into Nigeria do not go to our filling stations but go into neighbouring countries. Government is trying to ensure that there is no fuel scarcity as we used to have in the past and the cartel in charge of t his subsidy and the dealers are taking the fuel to our neighbouring countries. If you go to Cameroon, Niger Republic, Chad and Benin republic, it is the subsidized Nigeria fuel that they use who is now paying for this? Is it the
Nigerians masses. It is not these people who have the money. The fear that the removal of fuel subsidy will lead to prices of food stuff is unnecessary when the government brings a road map on the improvement in power supply, and the rail starts working and the inland water ways start opening, Nigerians will now realize that the removal of the subsidy will really benefit the masses. Those creating fear in the mind of the people are those who are benefiting from the subsidy. Most of then have filling stations around the boundaries of neighbouring countries once the fuel is discharged, they have their under the cover of darkness to these neighbouring countries. Government should educate the people on the benefit of the removal of fuel subsidy rather than be intimidated by the few people who are benefiting from the subsidy. There is no way we can sustain the economy with the subsidy in place we must think beyond where we are. No country spends 70% of its budget on expenditure and moves forward.

61

.

2.7 THE IMPACT OF FUEL SUBSIDY REMOVAL ON NIGERIAN

ECONOMY
Owing to this policy, reports across Nigeria had it that motorist bought between
N138 and N250 per liter of petrol on Monday, January 2, 2012. In Kano state, black market operators sold at N250 per liter. Nigeria national petroleum corporation (NNPC) stations had a uniform price of N138 across the country but for other marketers, prices were varied. The table below captures pump prices in some major cities

Prices of fuel across Nigerian cities after subsidy removal
City
Benin
Ibadan
Ilorin
Kano
Kaduna
Oyo
Osogbo
Abakaliki
Lagos
Umuahia
Jos
Warri
Akure

Prices per litre
N140-N150
N140
N140
N140-N175
N140-N150
N150
N145
N200
N141-N158
N150
N150
N160
150-N170

(deregulation and anti-removal strike in Nigeria)Ugwu and Emeh.

62

The increase would provoke hyper inflation of prices in the consumer products market and thus compounded poverty-for instance, according to daily nation, the fare from illorin-Abuja ranged between N3,500-N4,000, for buses and N5,000 for cars, the old price was N2,000. Illorin to Lagos cost N8,500 as against the old
N5,500 Kano to Ibadan rose from N4,500 to N7,750 Kano to Bayelsa which was
N8,500 is now N17,000.
The removal of the fuel subsidy has equally affected the cost of commodities at various markets in the metropolis, even commercial motorcyclists instantly adjusted their fares as soon as the subsidy removal was announced.The prices of goods and services rose,there is no assurance that the landlords will not increase rents when they have families to feed too. PHCN, schools, hospitals, organizations and other employers might want to pay their workers more to enable them cope with the even higher cost of living.Owing to this policy, they also experienced the increase of school fees, electrical tariff, hospital bills etc this means that more children will drop out of school owning to their parents inability to pay their tuition fees, more of the sick will die in the hospital or home because they are unable to afford the hospital bills or medicines as food takes priority causing untold hardship for the citizens (www.sundaytribune.com)
Many journalist may have to work without pay or become too big a burden on their proprietors. Needless to say, circulation which is already at a miserable level would drop even more drastically because the disposable income of the citizens will have shunk to the point where only basic needs such as garri and kerosene can
63

be afforded. Another possible implication of the subsidy removal will be on the security of Nigerians. Its awkward timing when Nigerians are divided along religious and ethnic lines does not bode well for peace and security of the country.
The morale and the mass protest that followed the subsidy removal would provide a condusive conditions for Boko Haram to carryout more attacks, recruit and radicalize more youths, particularly those that will be that direct victims of the subsidy removal. The removal further isolated the government from the people and caused so much agitation, violent demonstration in Nigeria that may in turn provide more support for Boko Haram, particularly by those seeking reverge or to hit back at the government. To worsen the situation the salaries and wags of workers have remained constant not even the so-called minimum wage of N18,000 for workers has been implemented at least to alleviate the plight of inflation for the ordinary citizens vanguard (2012).
The Kano chapter of (MAN)manufactures association of Nigeria, said 86 inudstires have closed down in the country due to unfriendly government policies the branch chairman, Alhaji Sami Umar lamented that thusands of workers have lost their jobs, saying we Eunsider it necessary to associate the current problems bedeviling the development of industries in Kano to absence of clear government‟s industrial policy (saladden 2011:6) put differently that Nigerians have lost small scale industries that are supposed to serve as the backbone of our economy. Business enterprise with lofty ideas hardly survive in this country because of unconudusive environment in which they operate Ugo( 2011).
64

Artisans and technicians who rely on (PMS)petrol motor spirit to power generators to earn thier daily meal will be forced to pass the cost to customers where this is feasible. Otherwise, they will be forced to close shops, with the consequent implication for uemployment- one of the evils the government says subsidy removal will fight.
Also considered critical to the economy as the fuel subsidy issue is the provision of employment for teeming Nigerian graduates being churned out yearly by tertiary institutions, unemployment has resulted in so much brain-drain that there are so many Nigerians working in and contributing to the development of other countries. But since it is not everybody that has the ability to leave the shores of the country, unemployment has continued to rise in the country. According to saladden (2011:6) the national unemployment rate rose from 4.3% in 19700 t 6.4% in 1980. 40% in 1992 and 41.6% in 2011. The high rate of unemployment recorded last year is attributed largely to depression in the economy. As identified earlier, over the years, hundreds of factories that hitherto provided employment to graduates and artisan have collapse. This is because energy supply which serves as the main engine of production has been comatose, many artisan like welders, aluminum window filters, tailor, who cannot afford power generators are today out of work. In desperation, many Nigerian youths have taken to riding commercial motorcycle and tricycle while others went into street hawking just to keep body and soul together. By gbenja budejo (this day news paper).

65

Another impact of this policy was the anti-subsidy protest which will weaken the already fragile Nigerian economy. Employers of labour have warned of the implication of protest over the planned removal of fuel subsidy. According to director general of the Nigerian employers consultative association (NECA). Mr
Olusegun Osinowo: any crisis will worsen the economic situation. You know that salaries are paid from the daily income of the companies the manufactures-and it will be difficult for the employer to honour his salary obligations if business are put on hold due to labour protest Oladesin(2011:1) for instance, Nigeria lost about
4.75million man-days to strike. According to Eyiuche (2012) the strike affected both the high and low and the pinch was felt in virtually all sectors of the economy as business activity were grounded while it lasted.The coordinating minister of the economy and minister of finance, Ngozi Okonjo –Iweala, said that based on the
GDP estimate,week-long strike coct the country about #500 billion for the period the strike lasted. The central bank governor Mr. Lamido sanusi, said for every day of the strike the country was loosing N100billion

66

Table II: history of fuel subsidy strike actions in Nigeria between 2000 and 2012
Date

Causes of strike

Duration

Resolution

June1, 2000

Prices of petrol Increased to
N30/litrefrom #11 per litre

Eight days

Price reduced #20 per litre

June 16,2002
June 30-july 8,2003
June 9, 2004

Price increase from N20/litre to N26/litre
Price increase from N26/litre to N40/litre
Price increase from N34/litre to N50/litre

Two days
Eight days
Three days

October 11, 2004

Price increase from N42/litre to N52/litre

Three days

September 2005

Price increase from N52/litre to N65/litre

No strike

June 20,2007
January 1, 2012

Price increase from N65/litre to N70/litre
Price increase from N65/litre to N141/litre

Four days
Eight days

Price retained at N26 per litre
Price reduced to N34/litre
Governemtn and NLC agreed to a new price of N42 per litre. Government appointed the
19-member sen. Ibrahim
Mantu
committee on palliatives.
Protest by NLC and civil society groups led to a cut in price Price reduced to N65/litre
Price reduced to N97/litre

By Prof.okaga,Prof Ugwu and Prof Emeh
(deregulation and anti-subsidy removal strikes in Nigeria)
According to Michael simre, the past couple of weeks have not been the best of times for the average Nigerians who has been battling to contend with an unsavoury new year gift from the government. Industry stakeholders say that because of the new price regime, the environment will be better off as less fuel will be burnt and this resulting in minimal population.Already people have started re-bordering their profiles,generators are now working fewer hours in residential areas, during the sit-at-home, most afternoons are devoid of generators noise and fumes. Abuja based environmentalist, Ochuko Odibo, believes that the situation will create a behavioral change in the way Nigerians consume fuel. His words “many

67

Nigeria will rather walk to the comer shop than drive there. Nigerians will now prefare to share car rides with friends or use the public transport service therefore reduceing emission of carbon dioxide (co2) in the atmosphere, he also says that it will drive Nigerians to adopt alternative source of fuel that is cheap, affordable and available.

68

The table below shows a scenario building impact of subsidy removal on identified inome segments
Income class

Monthly salary Band(N)
0-18,000

7,200
@240/day

500-1000

Car/ transporti on
4,500

18,00040,000

High
N15,000
@ 500/day

Medium
N5,000

High
N6,000

Medium
N1,000, no insurance Impact
Lower Middle class 40,000120,000

High
N30,000
@ N1000/day

Medium
N12,500

High
N11,000
@ 1 car/1 fill per week Impact
Upper Middle class 120,00500,000

medium
N60,000
@ N2000/day

Medium
N25,000

High
N22,000
@2 cars/3 fills per week

Medium
N120,00
@ N4,000/day

Medium
0(owner
occupier)

High
N55k000
@3 cars/2 fill per week Low

Not
Applicable

High

Medium
N5,510 @
Zenith Smarth health Family insurance shceme
Low
N10,O80 @
Zenith Classic health Family insurance scheme
Low
N15,330 @
Zenith
Super Health
Family
insurance
Scheme
Low

Poor

Impact
Working Class

Impact
High
income/Upper class Impact

500,000++

Food

Rent

Health

N500,no insurance Generator/ cooking/other domestic uses
N500 @ 4 bottles of kerosene and charcoal (no generator) Low
5,000 @ 1 small generator and 2 gallons of kerosene High
N9,750 uses cooking gas

Education

N691 @4 kids in public school

Low
N1,382 @ 4 kids in public Low
N15,000 @ 4 kids in public/private school High
N19,500
Uses cooking gas

Medium
N40k,000 @ 4 kids in mission private school High
Generator runs on diesel and uses cooking gas

Medium
N500,000 @ 4 kids in private school

Not applicable

Low

The table shows that the monthly income expenditure pattern nationally shows variations across income groups. Across all income groups, the impact will be most felt on transportation. Though each group experiences some impact, the outlays show that the middle class would be most nominally affected if energy prices rises. Studies conducted by Freund and Wallich in Poland reported by

69

UNEP (2003) observes that “the welfare loss of higher energy prices is greater for the non-poor than the poor among different socio-economic groups considered, formers and families are hurt the least by higher energy prices, largely because they do not consume energy for which the prices, increases the most. (169). This seems applicable to the rural poor in Nigeria and partially to the urban poor. The rural poor use more of charcoal and firewood, use less transportation, and live in their own homes and source food from their immediate locales and farms.
However the urban poor will have to pay for transportation, rents and incure other living expenses. The above submission by Freund and Wallich also points to the fact that the effects of removal of subsidies would be felt mostly in the urban centres where petrol is largely consumed.
The table also shows that the middle class would be the most directly affected given that their consumption of petrol represents the largest as a percentage of income they spend substantially on fuel, small back up generating electricity, generating sets and cars.
The wealthiest quintile of the population will feel the impact many in fueling cars. The impact will be least on this class since price increase will not be significant as a percentage of their income moreover, the use of grassland cooking gas whose prices are already market rates is prevalent in this group, the inflationary impacts on rents may not be substantial.

70

2.8 CONCEPT OF PALLIATIVE MEASURES BY GOVERNMENT
The introduction of a subsidy removal in the manner as proposed by government would be a hard-shell. Besides the fact that there are some measures of distrust by the civilian populace in response of the pronouncement made by the government in respect of its proposed palliatives in response to the untoward shock of a price increase. The governments argument has been that savings made from the removal of the subsidy would be channeled to sectors that would navigate the effect of the removal.
So far, government plan have only been discernable from press statements or interviews given by officials. Interviews and statements attributed to some government officials and the president. This day(23rd October 2011) suggest a number of plans and projects including.
1. Setting up a fund from the withdrawn subsidy to be managed by a committee of highly-respected Nigerians
2. Infrastructural and social services projects involving road constructions, major public maintenance work, and improving on the progress made in power generation and distribution through additional investment.
3. Facilitation of a comprehensive mass transportation system, schemes for skilled and unskilled youth, social programmes targeted at pregnant women, children and the elderly
4. Public private partnership to establish refineries and increase domestic fuel production and supply
71

According to Adebiyi (2011) however, the federal government is yet to present a detailed plan with specific projects that will cushion the initial shocks of the economy and difficulties that may be suffered by the poor and vulnerable groups in society. The withdrawal of subsidies on fuel is expected to have some major impact on the economy and particulary on the poor and vulnerable groups in socity. Cost of consumer items, food, transportation and the other living expenses are likely to rise diminishing the income of the poor. This would also imply that gians made by the low income workers from the newly approved minimum wage will be substantially eroded. In this regard, the federal government has consistently argued of its recognition of and readiness to alleviate some of these apparent impacts.
The first of the plans by government is to create a fund to be managemed by eminent and respected Nigerians special funds in Nigeria are not new and have been created previously for targeted developmental purposes such as the petroleum trust fund PTF) and the education trust fund(ETF). Such funds have only recorded limited success. However, the low level of trust in government by citizens, poor track record of keeping promises by government and the high level of corruption in government leave huge doubts in the minds of the public. Another fund created by government, responsible for managing the money gotten from the subsidy removal is the subsidy re-investment empowerment programme (SURE).
This programme will be latter discussed fully in this chapter.

72

The second aspect involves infrastructural projects and social services programems. This programems are important in alleviating poverty but are long term in nature. For such projects to have substantial relief effects, they would have started before the removal of the subsidy.Besides the programme are more general,seem more targeted at tackling overall poverty rather than alleviating the immediate shock effects.
Third is the building of new refineries to increase domestic production and supply producing locally would mean the elimination of much of the cost subsidized by government.
According toEyiuche (2012) the federal government had said that cost of living
i.e food prices would remain constant because trucks and trailers that hauled foods from the north use diesel gas which however was not deregulated as such the price of food stuff would not be affected. This is a most absurd way of thinking because it forgets that food stuff is being distributed domestically by vehicles that use petrol which is bought very costly even at black market price of N160 per litre due to hoarding.

2.9 THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVE REPORT OF THE AD-HOC
COMMITTEE TO VERIFY AND DETERMINING THE ACTUAL
SUBSIDY REQUIREMENTS
The following shows a glimps of the representative report of the Ad-hoc committee to verify and determine the actual subsidy requirements

73

PRINCIPLES OF THE PETROLEUM SUBSIDY FUND
-

Under-recovery shall apply when the Landry cost of products based on import parity principle is in excess of the approved petroleum products pricing regulating agency (PPPRA) ex-depot prince for the product

-

Over-recovery, which implies payment from marketers into the fund shall apply when the landing cost of the product based on import parity principle is below the approved ex-depot prince for the product.

-

The central bank of Nigeria (CBN) small be the custodian of the fund, while the PPPRA shall be vested with the authority to administer the fund as spelt out in the guidelines

-

PPPRA shall determine the volume required for imports based on national demand/supply gap and taking cognizance of local production in line with its statutory mandate

-

The PPPRA shall constantly liase with the oil trading/marketing companies and other relevant stakeholders/operators for the purpose of data collection verification, certification and updating of the downstream information data bank -

Submission of PSF claims closes on the 20th of every month. All claims received after the 20th of th4 month shall be treated in the next batch for the successive month

74

-

On receipt of verified documents from the operators, payment shall be due no later than 45 days.

RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE STAKEHOLDERS/OPERATORS
The PSF guidelines have provided for the roles which the various stakeholders in the downstream petroleum sectors are to play in order to actualize the efficient implementation of the PSF, as follows
-

Department of petroleum resources (DPR) is to:

-

Verify and certification of the quantity of petroleum products imported or supplied by the marketers

-

Analysis of the quality specification of the products

-

Enforcement of the price set by government

-

Provide the PPPRA with necessary information and data relating to products procurement, supply and distribution (both import and local productions)

-

Collaborate with the PPPRA and PEF (M)B or intelligence monitoring check malpractices B. INDEPENDENT INSPECTORS WERE TO CARRY OUT THE
FOLLOWING FUNCTION
- measurement and certification of the quantity imported (both on the vessel and in the shore tank at the jethy) – products allaging

75

Ascertain the quantity of bunker fuel in the vessel to avoid adultration and volume distortions.
C. FEDERAL MINISTRY OF FINANCE/OFFICE OF THE ACCOUNTANT
GENERAL OF THE FEDERATION are involved in the PSF follows
- Processing and approval of payment due to the marketers
- Issuing of payment mandate through the office of the accountant general of the federation to the central bank of Nigeria
D FEDERAL MINISTRY OF FINANCE AUDIT CONSULTANTS were appointed by the ministry to assist with its responsibilities under psf scheme by undertaking the followings:
-

Witness and confirm the quantity imported by the marketer at the jetties and shore tanks

-

Provide products statistics (supply and distribution) form jetties to depots and to the retail cutlets
E PETROLEUM PRODUCTS PRICING REGULATORY AUTHORITY
(PPPRA)
Shall perform the following responsibilities in line with its mandate under the psf scheme

-

Plan and programme the receipt and distribution of petroleum products to ensure uninterrupted products availability in the country based on determined petroleum products supply gaps

76

-

Demand from refineries monthly production volume on products basis and from the operators, data on products supply and distribution

-

Embark on wide publicity and enlightenment programmes to educate stakeholders and the public at large on the benefits of the initiative (i.e the petroleum support fund)

-

Perform conciliatory and mediatory roles among stakeholders/operators

-

Monitoring of prices at the depot and retail outlets levels

-

Ensure security of supply – this is achieved by collaborating with the NNPC and other marketers to release their reserved stocks into the market in time of amertgencies and supply gaps arising from the inability of the marketers in fulfilling their obligation on products procurement and short tall in refinery production F NIGERIAN NAVY

-

Issuance of clearance for vessels carrying imported products to enter the
Nigerian waters.
G NIGERIAN CUSTOM SERVICE

-

Issuance of clearance to discharge or authority to unload petroleum products with the quantified stated

77

H NIGERIAN PORT AUTHORITY (NPA)
-

Issuance of clearance to allow the vessel to berth at the lethy after necessary payment I CENTRAL BANK OF NIGERIA

-

The central bank as the financial regulatory authority shall

-

Be the custodian of the psf fund

-

Issue statement of account of the fund to the PPPRA on monthly basis

-

Manage the ideal funds for security and maximum returns

-

Confirmation of the payment to the importers from the psf
J DEBT MANAGEMENT OFFICE (DMO)
Arising from problems encountered by delays in payment to importers of petroleum products, the payment system was improved through the introduction of the use of the Sovereign Debt Note (SDN) in the year 2010 administered by the DMO whose responsibility became as follows:

-

Guarantee importers payment within 45 days of the issuance of the Sovereign
Debt Note

78

K INDEPENDENT CARGO INSPECTORS
-

Ascertain arrival volumes, discharge and truck-outS from jetties and depots
(the names of independent cargo inspectors include saybolt, GMO, inspectorate, SGS, vibrant, and intertek)

OBSERVATION AND FINDINGS
This embodies the committee specific findings of facts in respect of the entire subsidy regime. While section A focuses on findings in respect of government agencies that were the manager or regulators of the process, section B relates to marketers, while section C relates to forences on issue of finances.
SECTION A
Government Agencies
-

1 Petroleum products pricing regulatory authority authority (PPPRA) findings:

-

Making payments to itself: the psf account was registered in the CBN with the name of PPPRA. After all verifications and final authorization given to it, CBN effected payment to beneficiary marketers from the account. However, we discovered that some payment were make to PPPRA as ultimate beneficiary.
These payments were higher than what should have accrued to the agency as administrative fee, when weighed against any figure of total of products discharged within a given period

-

Failure of monitoring and verification

79

-

Deliberate non-reversal of devastating policy of marketer proliferation: despite the noticeable non-viability of the policy of proliferation of oil marketers and the unbearable pressure of the ensuring corrupt practices on the economy, the
PPPRA never deemed it fit to modify or reconsider its decision for the betterment of the system

-

Non compliance with guidelines
RECOMMENDATIONS

-

All the payments PPPRA made to itself from the psf in excess of approved administrative charges for the sum of NGN #156.455 billion in 2009, and for the sum of NGN 155.824 billion in 2010, should be further investigat4ed and officials found culpable prosecuted by the relevant Anti-Corruption Agencies

-

All staff of PPPRA involved in the processing of applications by importers and verification, confirmation and payment of imported products by importers and
NNPC should be investigated/prosecuted by the relevant Anti-corruption agencies for criminal negligence, collusion and fraud.

-

Marketers without storage facilities and retail outlets must be excluded from participating in the scheme

-

It is strongly recommended that PPPRA should publish the psf accounts on a quarterly basis to ensure transparency and openness of the scheme

80

-

2. FEDERAL MINISTRY OF FINANCE
Findings

-

Acquiescence to direct deductions by NNPC

-

Troubled budget management

-

Out sourcing the ministry‟s responsibilities

RECOMMENDATIONS
-

All those involved in the federal ministry of finance, director-general budget, office and the office of the accountant general of the federation in the extra budgetary expenditure under the psf scheme (2009-2011) should be sanctioned in accordance with the civil service rules and the code of conduct bureau

-

The national assembly should enact an act to criminalize extra budgetary expenditure -

CENTRAL BANK OF NIGERIA

-

Findings

-

Financial Reporting: CBN discharged its responsibility well under the scheme and it is evident that its financial reporting was highly commendable.

-

CBN import documentation requirements: CBN also raised some alarm publicly on the escalation of the subsidy claim to the consternation of agencies in the petroleum industry.
81

RECOMMENDATION
-

CBN should critically examine its policy especially with regards to the PSF scheme in the light of these abuses and review the policy guiding payment for importation of petroleum products.

-

3.NIGERIA NATIONAL PETROLEUM CORPORATION(NNPC)

-

Findings

-

Inapplicability of guidelines to NNPC

-

Payment of subsidy on kerosene contrary to presidential directive

-

Over deductions: it was further established that NNPC deducted the total sum of NGN 844.988 billion as against the sum of NGN 540.419 billion

recommended by the PPRA.
-

Demurage: NNPC operated a very inefficient system of importation of petroleum products that led to filing up of demurrage payments

-

Lack of transparency in its operations.

RECOMMENDATIONS
-

NNPC should stop direct deductions and subject its transactions to the operational guidelines of the subsidy scheme.

82

-

NNPC should refund to the Nigerian treasury, the sum of #310, 414, 963, 613 paid to it illegally as subsidy for kerosene contrary to presidential directive.

-

NNPC should conform to all guidelines applicable to importation under the
PSF scheme.

-

All those in the management and Board of the NNPC directly involved in all the infractions identified for the years 2009-20011 should be investigated and prosecuted for abuse of office by the code of conduct Bureau.

-

The committee recommends that NNPC be unbundled to make its operations‟ more efficient and transparent and this we believe can be achieved through the passage of a well drafted and comprehensive PIB bill.

4 Pipelines and products marketing company limited
Findings
-

The committee recognized that pipeline vandalism was a major threat to effective product distribution across the country.

-

The committee established that the PPMC played a direct role in encouraging a very inefficient system of distribution and supply of kerosene products which led to products scarcity and high cost to the consumer.

-

The management of PPMC appeared not be alive to its responsibilities and ontop of its duties.

83

RECOMMENDATION
- The committee recommends that the PPMC management be overhauled.
-

Distribution of products, especially kerosene, should be done through NNPC retail; independent petroleum marketed Associated of Nigeria. (IPMAN) and major oil marketers Associations of Nigeria (MOMAN) to ensure availability and affordability of the products to Nigerians.

-

The PPMC should deploy modern state of the art device to protect its facilities and pipelines to eliminate wastages arising from vandalism.

5. Department of petroleum resources (DPR)
Findings
- Failure in quantity certification
-

Non imposition of sanctions for selling kerosene above subsidy price

-

Failure to provide PPRA with information relating to products supply and distribution for both imports and local productions and collaborate on intelligence monitoring to check malpractices.

-

Lack of monitoring led to diversion and smuggling of petroleum products.

RECOMMENDATION
- All staff involved in the verification and confirmation of production importation should be transferred out and sanctioned for incompetence collusion and possibly investigated and persecuted for fraud by the relevant anti-corruption agencies.

84

6. MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM RESOURCES
FINDINGS
- Direct deductions at source by NNPC: The ministry played a supervisory role over its agencies and carried out its functions through NNPC and other agencies under its ambit. NNPC deducted what it considered its own share of subsidy claims confirmed that the ministry was well aware and even approved this practice. Even though the practice predated the period under investigation
(2009-2011) efforts should have been made to discourage it.
-

Lack of grasp of the PSF scheme: the expectation that the ministry should have the most comprehensive overview of the scheme was not met. It failed to exercise the measured grip on the PSF scheme expected of an apex authority.

-

Lack of statistics (accounts)

-

Poor supervisory role over the agencies under the ministry

RECOMMENDATIONS:
- It is hereby recommended that Mr. President should reorganize the ministry of petroleum resources to make it more effective in carrying out the much needed reforms in the oil and gas sector.
-

The committee recommends that two ministers should be appointed to take charge of upstream and sown stream sector.

85

7. Nigeria Navy
FINDINGS
-

Under the PSF guideline, it evident that the Nigerian Navy is assigned the role of issuing clearance certificate for the vessels entering Nigeria with imported petroleum products.

-

The statement by the Navy that it had data only on vessels and importercompanies that came forward to the Navy offices seeking its clearance showed that like the

case with the Nigerian customs, impediments were placed

limiting the participation of the navy in the PSF process.
RECOMMENDATIONS
- The PPRA msut provide the Nigerian Navy advance copies of allocation and vessel arrival notifications documents to enable the Navy monitor, track and interdict vessels seeking to avoid naval certification.
SECTION B
Marketers
1. Facility/deposit owners
Findings
-

The absence Of modern facilities like temper proof meters at these facilities and depots compounded the challenges of securing an accurate recording of products movements and statistical data needed of monitoring, planning and development. 86

-

It was established that faculties/deposits‟ owner and the NNPC/PPRA were the worst culprits in this regard.

RECOMMENDATION
- The DPR must brace up to its role of regulation and compel the NNPC/PPMC to comply with all the regulations issued to ensure transparency and accountability. -

This AD-HOC committee shall carryout a forensic investigation to determine the capacity of the facilities/Depots vis-à-vis the claims for volumes offloaded, even based on the non-credible records being paraded by some of the owners/operators. SECTOIN C
FINANCIAL FORENSICS
FINANCIAL INFRACTIONS
Markets that obtained forex but not found to have utilized some for petroleum importation:
Some marketers were found to have obtained forex for petroleum products importation in the relevant years of 2009, 2010 and 2011, but could not be found to have utilized same for the purposes they were meant. The table here under is intended to expose those who may have exploited the subsidy regime to engage in money laundering activities.

87

RECOMMENDATIONS:
The marketers identified under this category should be referred to relevant anti-corruption Agencies for further investigation with a view to establishing what they utilized the forex obtained for. The marketers are:
Those who obtained forex but did not import petroleum products s/n Names of marketers

1

2010$

2011$

Business ilenture Nigeria

22,927,339.96

2011 $

20,7335,910.81

3
4

Limited
2

East horizon gas Co. limited

3

Emadeb energy

6,606,094.30

4

Pokate Nigeria ltd

3,147,956.19

5

Synopisis enterprise ltd

51,449,977,47

6

Zenon pet & gas lted

232,975,385.13

7

Carnival energy oil lted

-

51,089,57

8

Crownlines

-

4,756,274.94

9

Ice energy petroleum trading ltd

-

2,131,166.32

10

Index petroleum Africa

-

6,438,849.64

11

Ronad oil and gas w/a

-

4,813,272.00

12

Serenf greenfild ltd

-

4,813,360.75

13

Supreme and mitchelles

-

16,947,000.00

14

Iridax energy ltd

-

15,900,000.00

15

Zamson global res.

-

8,916,750.00

88

MARKETERS THAT DID NOT OBTAIN FOREX BUT WERE FOUND TO
HAVE SUPPLIED AND COLLECTED SUBSIDY ON PETROLEUM
PRODUCTS
Some other marketers who did not obtain forex were found to have supplied petroleum products and collected subsidy thereon. The implication of this finding is that some persons may hide under the cover of the subsidy regime to launder illict funds in to the country.

RECOMMENDATIONS
To separate the wheat from the chaff , the committee recommends that relevant anti-corruption agencies further investigate the transactions of this category of marketers listed below with a view to establishing their source of funds used for the importation of petroleum products in the year 2010 and 2011.

89

MARKETERS THAT DID NOT OBTAIN FOREX, BUT CLAIMED TO
HAVE IMPORTED PETROLEUM PRODUCTS BASED ON WHICH THEY
HAVE COLLECTED SUBSIDY
S/N

NAMES OF MARKETERS

2010subsidy.
As
accountant general #

1

Bonvas and company

-

10,992,583,784.50

2

Brila energy ltd

-

963,796,199.85

3

Ceoti ltd

-

2,944,681,700.17

4

Eco-reyen ltd

-

1,988,141,091.10

5

Eurafic oil and coastal service ltd

-

3,189,069,707.43

6

First deep water discovery

257,396,183,68

4,061,148,533.35

7

Knight bridge

1,685,869,439.29

2,706m273m858.82

8

Mobil oil Nigeria plc

3,991, 754,441.53

3,060,232m335.26

9

Nababo energy ltd

247,184,147,50

2,660,902,801,58

10

Ocean energy tradry & service ltd

-

1,778,180,051.20

11

Origin oil and gas ltd

-

2,703,454,122.11

12

Someoest energy services

959,012,939.72

2,056,208,548.22

13

Sulphur-steam ltd

-

4,758,693,052.00

14

Swift oil

-

5,062,403,548,18

15

Frapro international ltd

-

1,486,837,448.90

16

Fradro international ltd

-

1,148,792,391.50

17

Vivendi energy Nigeria ltd

-

1,095,790,255.02

Total

7,141,217,151.72

55,019,978,401.14

90

per

2011 subsidy as per general accountant #

MARKETERS NOT REGISTERED WITH PPPRA BEFORE THEY GOT
FIRST ALLOCATION FOR PRODUCT SUPPLIES
S/N

NAMES OF MARKETERS

DATE OF REGISTRATION
WITH PPRA

DATE OF 1ST
ALLOCATION

1

Anosyke group of companies

24th Jan 2011

18th Jan 2011

2

Brila energy ltd

15th Oct. 2010

8th Oct 2010

3

Cades oil and gas ltd

8th April 2011

9th feb 2011

4

Ceoti ltd

26th Jan 2011

18th Jan 2011

5

Downstream energy source

15th Oct. 2010

8th Oct 2010

6

Duport ltd

5th Nov. 2010

18th Jan 2010

7

Fradro

20th Jan 2011

18th Jan 2010

8

Fradro

20th Jan 2011

18th Jan 2011

9

Fresh engery ltd

5th August 2011

2nd August 2011

10

Linterale

1st Feb. 2011

30th Dec 2010

11

Lingo oil and gas caompany

15th Oct 2010

8th Dec 2010

12

Lottos oil and gas ltd

12th August 2011

18th Dec. 2009

13

Menol oil and gas ltd

28th Jan 2011

10th August 2010

14

Naticel petroleum ltd

10th Dec 2010

10th August 2010

15

Oakfieild synergy network lted

5th August 2011

2nd August 2011

16

Oil bath Nigeria ltd

4th August , 2011

2nd August 2011

17

Rocky energy ltd

27th Jan. 2011

1st Jan 2011

18

Prudent energy and service ltd

12th August 2011

2nd August 2011

19

Spoy Petrochemicals ltd

23rd June 2010

4th June 2010

20

Yanaty Petrochemicals nig ltd

15th Oct. 2010

8th Oct 2010

RECOMMENDATIONS
The management is hereby reprimanded for awarding contracts to companies not registered with it at the time of award in contravention of its guidelines.

91

MARKETERS THAT NEVER APPLIED TO PPPRA FOR PRODUCT
SUPPLIES BEFORE THEY GOT THEIR FIRST ALLOCATION
Some marketers were found not to have made any application to PPPRA for supplies of petroleum products before they got their first allocation. For a valid contract, they must be an offer and acceptance. Marketers who were found not to have applied for supplies contract with PPPRA are deemed not to have any offer to PPPRA, based on which PPPRA may have accepted by allocating quantities of petroleum to be supplied by the marketers. The companies are
Date of 1st allocation

Date of 1st allocation to
PPPRA

S/N

Names of marketers

Quantity allocated

1

Cadees oil and gas ltd

9th February 2011

13th June 2011

15, 000MT

2

Lottos oil and Gas ltd

18th Dec. 2009

11th May 2011

10,000MT

3

Mob integrated service ltd

8th Oct. 2008

20th April 2010

15, 000MT

RECOMMENDATIONS
All those officials of PPPRA who aided and abetted the perpetration of these infraction should be sanctioned according to the civil service rules.

92

2.10 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK OF ANALYSIS
The theory to be adopted for this study is the neo-liberalism theory.
Neobileralism is a contemporary forum of economic liberalism that emphasizes the efficiency of private enterprise, liberalized trade and relatively open markets to promote globalization. Neoliberals therefore seek to maximize the role of the private sector in determining the political and economic priorities of the world.
Neoliberalism seeks to transfer control of the economy from public to the private sector Cohen (2007) under the belief that it will produce a more efficient government and improve the economic health of the nation Prasad( 2006).
The main points of neo-liberalism include:
THE RULE OF THE MARKET:
Liberating “free” enterprise or private enterprise from any bonds imposed by the government (the state) no mater how much social damage this causes. Greater opens to international trade and investment, as in international relations. Reduce wages by de-unionizing workers and eliminating worker‟s right that had been won over many years of struggle. No more price control, all in all, total freedom of movement for capital, goods and services. To convince us this is good for us, they say “an unregulated market is the best way to increase economic growth, which will ultimately benefit everyone.

93

CUTTING PUBLIC EXPENDITURE FOR SOCIAL SERVICES:
Like education and health care, reducing he safety-net for the poor, and even maintenance of roads, bridges, water supply.Again in the name of reducing government‟s role of course, they don‟t oppose government‟s subsidies and tax benefits for business.
PRIVATIZATION:
Sell state-owned enterprise, goods and services to private investors. This includes banks, key industries, rail roads, toll highways, electricity, schools, hospitals and even fresh water. Although usually done in the name of efficiency, which is often neede.Privatization has mainly had the effect of concentrating wealth even more in a few hands and making the public pay even more for its needs.
DEREGULATION
Reduce government‟s regulation of everything that could diminish profits, including protecting the environment and safety on the job.

94

REFERENCE
Adebiyi, O. (2011). Fuel Subsidy: the True Story. Retrieved from http:/www.234next.com. Bankole, T. (2012, January 5). Strike Begins on Monday. The Nation, P. 14.
Cohen, J. N. (2007). The Impact of Neoliberalism, Political Institutions and
Financial Autonomy on Economic Development. New York: Princeton
University Press.
Elekwa, N. N. (2004). Nigeria: The Political Economy of the Policy Process,
Policy Choice and Implementation. Retrieved from http://www.idrc.org/em/ev-71263-201-1-v.oi>otci.html. Emeh, O. I. (2011). Deregulation of the Downstream Oil Sector in Nigeria:
History and Fallacies. Journal of Public Administration and Policy
Research, Vol. 3 (11), P.128-139.
Emeh, O.I and Onyishi, A. O. (2012). The Domestic and international
Implications of Fuel Subsidy Removal Crisis in Nigeria. Kuwait Chapter of
Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review, Vol. 1 (6), p. 57-83.
Eyiuche, A. C. (2012). The Socio-Economic Implications of the Fuel subsidy
Removal. Ibadan: Abok Publishers.
Falana Urges EFCC to Probe PPPRA, NNPC. (2012, January 6). The Nation,
P.6.
Fuel Crisis: Will Deregulation roll Away All our Problems? (2012, May 5). The
Sun Newspaper. Retrieved from http://www.nigeriamasterweb.com.

Fuel Subsidy: Employers Arm Government to Avert Crisis. (2011, December 19).
The Nation, P. 1-2.
Gbenga, Budujo. (2012, January 15). Strike: Nigerians Count their Losses. This
Day, P. 24.

Izibili, M,. and Aiya, f. (2007). Deregulation and Corruption in Nigeria: An
Ethical response. Kamal raj Journal of Sciences, vol. 14 (3), P. 229-234.
95

Jonathan: It will be Tough, but not Too Painful. (2012, January 2). The Nation,
P. 4.

Ojo, E. O. (1999). Modern Hyper and High Inflations. Journal of Economic
Literature, Vol. 7 (8), P. 837-880.

Oladesu, E. (2012, January 3). Petrol Prices go Wild. The guardian, P. 1-6.

Omoniji, B. (2012, January 2). Subsidy Removal, Tougher Times Ahead in 2012.
The Nation, P. 2.
Onanuga, A. (2011, December 23). Subsidy Battle in Lagos: labour, government
Forces Clash at Town Hall Meeting. The Nation, P. 13.
Otaigbe, H. (2012, January 5). New Year, New Pains as Fuel Price Hike Bites. The
Nation, P.5.
Prasad, M. (2006). The Politics of Free Markets: The Rise of Neoliberal Economic
Policies in Britain, France, Germany and the United States. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Salaudden, L. (2011, December 19). Concerns over Risen Unemployment. The
Nation, P.6.
Subsidy beneficiaries Financed Jonathan’s Election – el-Fufai.(2012, January 11).
The nation Retrieved from http://www.nigeriansteriweb.com
Subsidy: Labour Accuses Okonjo-Iweala of Lying. (2011, December 22). The
Nation, P. 1-4.
The Lines About Deregulation. (2009, October 26). Nigerian Newsword, P. 15-21.
Ugo, E. (2011, December 18). Fuel Subsidy: Courting the Big Bang. Sunday
Independent, P. 15-17.

96

CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN
Okeke T.C (1980) simply defined research methodology as a plan that specifies how data should be collected and analysed. In this sense, data is not just mere information, it is information gathered by investigation with the aid of their instruments, techniques and means. Since research method has to do with methods adopted by the researcher to collect data, which are relevant to the problem under consideration, the researcher of this project made use of personal interviews and data questionnaire

3.1

RESEARCH DESIGN
The basic research design employed in this study was descriptive design.

The choice of this design was chosen due to the fact that it enriches the data collection. The research design adopted on this study was carefully planned, so as to be able to obtain accurate and complete information about the research project being used.

3.2

SOURCES OF DATA

The major source of data used in this work was mainly through primary and secondary sources of data collection. The primary sources are data collected at first hand from original sources for the users express purpose. Such data are usually collected from oral interview, questionnaires and face to face observation
97

of the respondents. The secondary data are simple data collected on a second hand base. This type of data could be obtained through the use of textbooks, seminar papers, journals, news papers, internet and magazines collected mostly from university, polytechniques, public and specialized libraries

3.3

LOCATION OF STUDY

The policy of the removal of fuel subsidy affects Nigeria as a whole but because of the vast nature of

Nigeria, the researcher covered only Abakaliki local

government area in Ebonyi state.

3.4

POPULATION OF THE STUDY

The population of the study comprises of the population of Abakaliki local government are in Ebonyi state and limited to them alone. The population size is
149, 683. The table below shows the population distribution fo abakaliki local government. Local government: Abakaliki
Population

149,683

Male

72,518

Female

77,165

98

Communities

Population

%of questionnaire distribution
Amagu
32,595
21.77%
Izzi unuhu
6,728
4.49%
Enyigba
31,475
21.02.%
Amachi
7,978
5.32%
Okpuitimo ndiabo
31,704
21.18%
Iggea
9,549
6.37%
Okpuitimo ndi-agu
29,654
19.81%
Source: federal republic of Nigeria official gazette, No2 Abuja- 2nd February 2009 vol.96 legal notice on publication of 2006 census final result.

3.5

SAMPLE AND SAMPLING TECHNIQUE

The sample technique applied in selecting sample for the study is cluster sampling.
This type of sampling involves the initial sampling of groups of elements (called clusters), followed by the selection of elements within each selected clusters. In this form of sampling, the clusters are made up of individual units which constitute mutually exclusive and exhaustive categories from these clausters, the researcher randomly selects two subjects to be included in the smaple.

3.6

SAMPLE SIZE DETERMINATION

The Taro Yameni technique was adopted for this research work
Thus n = N
_________
1+N(e)2
Where N= population of the study

99

n = smaple size
(e) = level of significance
I= unit (a constant)
Note (e) = 0.05
=

149, 683
1 + 149, 683 (0.05)2

=

149, 683
1 + 149, 683 (0.0025)

=

149, 683
1 + 374

=

149, 683
375

=

399

n = 399 sample size.
Below is the table showing questionnaire distribution by percentage determined from population distribution.

Communities

%of questionnaire distribution

% of sample size

Amagu

21.77%

86.86

Izzi unuhu

4.49%

17.91

Enyigba

21.02%

83.86

Amachi

5.32%

21.22

Okpuitimo ndiabo

21.18%

84.50

Iggea

6.37%

25.41

Okpuitimo ndi-agu

19.81%

79.04

100

While the sample size is 399, the researcher distributed 399 questionnaires to the respondents. Out of the 399 respondents only 390 returned their completed questionnaires. Therefore analysis of data was based on the response of the 390 respondents. 3.7

INSTRUMENTS USED FOR DATA COLLECTION

Owing to the area covered by this study, questionnaire was deigned for data collection. Data was collected through relevant newspaper, journals, oral interviews, literature/write up from seminar papers and internet.

3.8

ADMINISTRATION OF INSTRUMENT

The researcher developed the questionnaire which she personally distributed to the target sample size according to the percentages determined for the communities in
Abakaliki local government.

3.9

VALIDITY OF THE INSTRUMENT

According to osondu (2004) validity is the procedure adopted in ensuring that the instrument used has measured what it was designed to measure. The purpose of the exercise is to identify whether the developed instrument really agree with the content of the research questions, so as to determine the strength of the work.
The researcher used a pilot study of validation to ensure the instrument measures what they are expected to measure after distribution and collection was made at the post.

101

3.10

RELIABILITY OF THE INSTRUMENT
The reliability of the study can be traced to the response and results given

by the people interviewed and supportive literatures by authors and corrections made on some ideas about the impact of fuel subsidy removal in Nigeria with particular reference to Abakaliki local government in Ebonyi state.The resrarcher applied a test-retest method in establishing the reliability of the work. Test-retest is a process of repeating an already analyzed data in order to examine the reliability of the data or research.

3.11

DATA COLLECTION
The researcher collected the data for this study through the use of

questionnaire. Three hundred and ninety-nine (399) copies of questionnaire were distributed/administered to the respondents, the researcher went to the location of the study Abakaliki local government to distribute the copies of the questionnaire.
A face to face system of distribution was used.
According to Odo (1999) face to face system of questionnaire distribution is a process whereby the researcher visits the institution, local government or organization that is used as the case study himself/herself to distribute the questionnaire directly by him or by the spot assistants in the place to the same sample group elements. The researcher collected the questionnaire from the respondents personally after 5 (five) days of distributing the copies of the questionnaires. 102

3.12 INSTRUMENT RETURN RATE
The researcher distributed a total of 399 copies of the questionnaire to all respondents in Abakaliki local government area, out of the 399copies of questionnaire, only 390 were returned and 9 were not returned.

The table below shows the questionnaire distribution and the rate of return.
Table of instrument return rate
Communities

Amagu

No of questionnaire shared 86

No questionnaire retured
85

Izzi unuhu

18

18

-

Enyi-gba

83

80

3

Amachi

21

20

1

Okpuitimo ndiabo

85

83

2

Iggea

26

26

-

Okpuitimo ndi-agu

79

78

1

TOTAL

399

390

9

% of questionnaire returned 390
399

x 100= 97.7%
1

% of questionnaires not returned 9 x 100 = 2.2%
399 1

103

of No of questionnaire not returned
2

The table above shows the instrument return rate, from the table, eighty seven (87) questionnaires were distributed to Amagu community, out of the eighty seven only 85 returned their completed questionnaire and two (2) did not return. In izzi unuhu 18 questionnaire were shared, the whole 18 respodnnets returned their questionnaire. In Enyi-gba community, 83 questionnaire were shared only 80 returned and three(3) did not return. In Amachi 21 questionnaire were shared, 20 returned and one was not returned. In Okaputimo-ndiabo 85 questionnaire were shared, 83 returned and two(2) was not returned. In Iggea 26 questionnaire were shared and all were returned and lastly in Okpuitimo ndi agu 79 questionnaire were shared, 78 returned and one was not returned.In conclusion,98% of the questionnaire were returned and 2% of the questionnaire were not returned.

104

REFERENCE
Eileen, Kane. (1987). Doing your own Research. New York: Marion Boyans
Publishers
Odo, M. O. (1992). Guide to Proposal Writing in Social and Behavioural Science.
Enugu: Snap Press Ltd.
Okeke, T. C. (2005). Research Methods: A Guide to Success in Project Writing.
Bauchi: Nigeria Enterprise.
Taro, Yamani. (1964). Statistic: An Introductory Analysis: (3rd Edition).
New York: Hamper and Row Publishing Limited.

105

CHAPTER FOUR
DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
4.1

DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS
In this chapter, data collected will be presented. The response of the

respondents shall be analyzed. The result of the analysis will also be discussed, the researcher administered 399 questionnaires and only 390 respondents were presented and analyzed. The questionnaire was designed to find out fuel subsidy removal and the Nigerian economy in analyzing the data collected, tables were used in the presentation of data.
RESEARCH QUESTION 1
Was the fuel subsidy regime was useful to a majority of Nigerians?
TABLE 4.1.1

Respondents view

Options

Number of respondents

Percentage(%)

Yes

100

25.6

No

290

74.4

Total

390

100

Source: research data 2012
Table 4.1.1 shows that 100 respondents representing 26% of the sample size population were of the view that the fuel subsidy regime was useful to a majority of Nigerians while 290 respondents representing 74% agreed that the fuel subsidy regime was not useful to a majority of Nigerians from the table above, it could be said that fuel subsidy regime was not useful to a majority of Nigerian.

106

RESEARCH QUESTION 1A
Were you in support of the fuel subsidy regime?
Table 4.1.2

Respondents view

Options

Number of respondents

Percentage(%)

Yes

205

52.6

No

185

47.4

Total

390

100

Source: research data 2012
The table shows that 205 respondents representing 52.6 % of the sample size population were in support of the fuel subsidy regime while 185 respondents representing 47.4% of the sample size population were not in support of the fuel subsidy regime therefore majority of Nigerians were in support of the fuel subsidy because they were able to purchase fuel at a cheaper price or subsidized rate.

RESEARCH QUESTION 1B
To whom was the fuel subsidy made available?
Table 4.1.3

Respondents view

Options

Number of respondents

Percentage(%)

Cabals/fuel promoters

301

77.1

Masses

89

22.8

Total

390

100

Source: research data 2012

107

The table shows that 301 respondents representing 77% of the sample size were of the view that the subsidy was made available foe the cabals while 89 respondents representing 23% of the sample size were of the view that the subsidy was made available for the masses.

RESEARCH QUESTION 1C
Were other sectors of the economy were as healthy as they should be under the fuel subsidy?
Table 4.1.4

Respondents view

Options

Number of respondents

Percentage(%)

Yes

10

2.6

No

380

97.4

Total

390

100

Source: research data 2012
The table shows that 10 respondents representing 3% of were of the view that other sectors of the economy were in good condition during the subsidy regime while 380 respondents representing 97% agreed that other sectors of the economy were in bad conditions during the subsidy regime. This showed that the other sectors of the economy such as heath, transportation, education, agriculture etc suffered during the subsidy regime.

RESEARCH QUESTION 1D
Did the masses benefit from the fuel subsidy regime?

108

Table 4.1.5

Respondents view

Options

Number of respondents

Percentage(%)

Yes

89

22.8

No

301

77.1

Total

390

100

Source: research data 2012

The table shows that 89 respondents representing 23% of the sample size is of the view that the masses benefited from the subsidy and 301 respondents representing
77% of the sample size is of the view that the people or the masses did not benefit from the subsidy during the subsidy regime.

RESEARCH QUESTION 1E
Did the cabals/promoters or beneficiary of the subsidy benefit more from the subsidy than the masses?
Table 4.1.6

Respondents view

Options

Number of respondents

Percentage(%)

Yes

297

76.2

No

93

23.8

Total

390

100

Source: research data 2012

The table shows that 297 respondents representing 76% of the sample size were in support of the view that it was only the cablas that benefited more from the

109

subsidy regime while 93 respondents representing 24% is of the view that the cabals did not benefit more from the subsidy.
According to the data collected from research question one(1) and other subquestions that were formulated in order to answer the major question, it showed that the fuel subsidy regime was not useful to a majority of Nigerians and that it was only the few privileged ones or the cabals that the regime was useful to, it also showed that majority of Nigerians were against the fuel subsidy regime. It also went further to prove that the cabals were the ones that benefited more from the subsidy and not the masses and that the other sectors of the economy were in bad shape during the subsidy regime.

RESEARCH QUESTION 2
Was the federal government reasonable enough by removing subsidy on fuel?
Table 4.2.1

Respondent view

Options

Number of respondents

Percentage (%)

Yes

250

64.1

No

140

35.9

Total

390

100

Source: research data 2012

The table shows that 250 respondents representing 64 % of the sample size is of the view that the federal government was reasonable enough by removing subsidy on fuel and 140 respondents representing 36% of the sample size were of the view

110

that the federal government was not reasonable enough by removing subsidy on fuel. RESEARCH QUESTION 2i
For which of the following reasons did the federal government remove subsidy on fuel. Table 4.2.2

Respondent’s view

Options

Yes

Percentage (%)

No

Percentage
(%)

a)

To stamp out corruption in the oil

160

41.0

230

58.9

250

64.1

140

35.8

90

23.0

300

76.9

d) To raise the standard of living

290

74.3

100

25.6

e)

208

53.3

182

46.6

390

100

0

0

sector
b) To encourage competition in the oil sector c)

To ensure that Nigerians benefit from the money accruing from the subsidy removal To reduce the rate of borrowing from international organizations

f)

To develop other sectors of the economy. Source: research data 2012.

The table above shows that 160 respondents representing 41% of the sample size agreed that government removed subsidy on fuel so as to stamp out corruption in the oil sector and 230 respondents representing 59% of the sample size were

111

opposed to that. (Two hundred and fifty) 250 respondents representing 64% of the sample size agreed that the government removed subsidy on fuel in order to encourage competition in the oil sector and 140 respondent representing 36% of the sample size were opposed to that (ninety) 90 respondents representing 23% of the sample size agreed that the government removed subsidy on fuel to ensure that
Nigerians benefit from the money accrued from the subsidy removal while 300 respondents representing 77% of the sample size disagreed with that. Two hundred and ninety (290) respondents representing 74% of the sample size agreed that the government removed subsidy on fuel in order to raise the standard of living of the people while 100 respondents representing 26% of the sample size opposed to that. (Two hundred and eight) 208 respondents representing 53% of the sample size were of the view that the government removed subsidy on fuel in order to reduce the rate of borrowing from international organization while 182 respondents representing 47% of the sample size opposed to that view and lastly
390 respondents representing 100% of the sample size were of the view that the government removed subsidy on fuel in order to develop other sectors of the economy. According to the data collected for research question two(2) and other subquestions that were formulated under the research question 2 in order to help answer the questions, the research found out that the Federal Government was reasonable enough in removing subsidy on fuel in order to encourage competition in the oil sector raise the standard of living of Nigerians, reduce the rate of
112

borrowing from international organizations, and develop other sectors of the economy. RESEARCH QUESTION 3
What does that fuel subsidy removal portend for Nigerians?
Table 4.3.1

Respondent’s view

Options
a) Generate employment opportunity
b) Stop Nigeria from importing fuel from other countries
c) Attract foreign investors
d) Ensure economic recovery and sustainability Yes
390
230

Percentage (%)
100
58.9

No
0
160

Percentage (%)
0
41.0

64
390

16.4
100

326
0

83.6
0

Source: research data 2012
The table shows that 390 respondents representing 100% of the sample size agreed that the removal of fuel subsidy in Nigeria will create a lot of employment opportunities. Two hundred and thirty 230 respondents representing 59% of the sample size agreed that the removal of subsidy on fuel will stop Nigeria from importing fuel from other countries while 160 respondents representing 41% of the sample size were opposed to that. (sixty-four) 64 respondent agreed that the remoal of subsidy on fuel will attract foreign investors in the nigeira down stream sector while 326 respondents representing 84% of the respondents were opposed to that. Lastly 390 respondents representing 100% of the sample size is of the view that the removal of subsidy on fuel will help to recover and sustain other sectors of the economy.

RESEARCH QUESTION 3i

113

Has there been any noticeable impact of the fuel subsidy removal on the Nigerian economy? Table 4.3.2

Respondent view

Options

Number of respondents

Percentage (%)

Yes

307

78.7

No

83

21.2

Total

390

100

Source: research data 2012
The table shows that 307 respondents representing 79% of the sample size is of the view or agreed that there has been a noticeable impact of the fuel subsidy removal on Nigerian economy while 83 responds representing 21% of the sample size is of the view that no noticeable impact has been felt on Nigerian economy.
RESEARCH QUESTION 3II what level of impact has been felt in these sectors of the economy.
The table below shows the table of economic sectors.
Table 4.3.3

Respondents view

Sectors

Very high Agriculture
88
Health
50
Transportation 18
Communication 96
Education
46
Power
14
Tourism
Social
10
amenities
Infrastructures 15

120
60
12
64
20
12
10
92

Very low 56
50
15
30
82
60
96
88

Not all 30
30
15
60
24
20
130
30

at Don‟t know 14
92
10
130
88
64
64
14

320

20

35

-

High

Low

82
108
320
10
130
220
64
-

Source: research data 2012.

114

The table below tries to analyze the impact of fuel subsidy removal on other sectors of the economy, the table shows that a high impact has been felt in the health sector, transportation, education and power sector. It also shows that a low impact has been felt in the agricultural sector, infrastructure, and social amenities.
The table also showed that majority of the respondents had no idea of the achieved impact in communication and no impact was felt at all in tourism.

4.2

INTERPRETATION OF DATA

The data collected from research question one(1) showed that the fuel subsidy regime was not useful to a majority of Nigerians. It also showed that majority of
Nigerians were against the fuel subsidy regime, it went further to prove that the cabals were the ones that actually benefited from the subsidy.
Research question two(2) proved that the federal government was reasonable enough in removing subsidy on fuel in order to encourage competition in the oil sector, raise the standard of living of Nigerians, reduce the rate of borrowing from international organizations and develop other sectors of the economy.
Research question three (3) showed that the removal of subsidy on fuel will help in generating employment opportunities for Nigerians, stop Nigerians from importing fuel from other countries, attract foreign investors in the down stream sector of the economy and ensure economic recovery and sustainability. It also went further to show that the removal of subsidy has made a high impact on health, transportation, education and power sector, made a low impact on agricultural sector, infrastructure and social amenities. It also showed that majority of the respondents had no idea of the achieved impact in communication and that no impact has been felt at all in tourism.

115

CHAPTER FIVE
FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 FINDINGS
In the course or process of this research, the researcher observed from the numerous respondents that the subsidy on fuel which the federal government introduced was not useful to a majority of Nigerians because it did not benefit the masses. Thou majority of Nigerians did not benefit from the subsidy but they were able to buy/purchase fuel at a cheaper rate during the subsidy regime. The researcher also found out that it was the cabals whom the fuel subsidy was made available for. In the process of this research, the researcher also discovered that other sectors of the economy such as the agricultural sector, communication sector, educational sector, etc were highly neglected during the subsidy regime.
The researcher also observed that the federal government was reasonable enough in removing subsidy on fuel with the sole aim of developing other sectors of the economy, with the belief that the result of the removal will generate employment opportunities for Nigerians, stop Nigerians from importing fuel from other countries, attract foreign investors in the downstream sector of the economy and also to recover and sustain other sectors of the economy.Finally, the researcher also found out that the removal of subsidy on fuel has a high impact on the health, transportation, education and power sectors of the economy, a low impact was felt in the agricultural sector, infrastructures and social amenities. The

116

researcher also noticed that majority of the respondents had no idea of the achieved impact on communication and that no impact was felt at all in tourism.
`

The researcher also observed that there is a great disappointment and a high

level of mistrust among the populace because Jonathan‟s presidency/regime has not proved to be different from other regimes in terms of sincerity and honesty.
The federal government promised to use the money that accrued from the fuel subsidy removal to develop other sectors of the economy but majority of Nigerians are protesting against the policy of fuel subsidy removal not because they don‟t know its importance in the long run, but because of their experience with past government.This is not the first time Nigerians are hearing of the word “subsidy removal”. Nigeria government have removed subsidy on kerosine, diesel and fuel but then the story still remains the same. Nigerians believe that the government will use the money that were accrued from fuel subsidy removal for their own selfish interest and not for the benefit of the masses. The people also agitated that
Jonathan did not mention anything about fuel subsidy removal all his month of campaigning for the presidential office, only to introduce it immediately he was declared winner of the election.
During the period of fuel subsidy, some major players in the petroleum sectors shared a huge sum of money all in the name of importing refined petroleum products into the country (Nigeria), some companies in the

117

downstream sector shared over #1.428 trillion between January and August 2011 alone (nation newspaper 2012:71). Oando oil, conoil, African petroleum and Mrs oil are among powerful players in the petroleum sector. However the corruption in the oil sectors by the cabals has brought more hardship to the poor Nigerian masses by the sudden removal of subsidy on fuel and deregulation of the downstream sector of the economy. Finally the policy was well formulated but poorly implemented and executed.

5.2 CONCLUSION
A majority of Nigerians accepted the fuel subsidy removal because they were not actually the ones benefiting from it. It was the hope of the masses that the government would use the money that accrued from the removal of subsidy on fuel to develop other sectors of the economy from which the masses could benefit.
The people agitated against the removal of subsidy on fuel not because they did not know its importance and what they would benefit from it in the long run, but because of the high level of mistrust they had in government and also the wrong timing and execution of the policy. Since the fuel subsidy removal has come to stay, the people are now asking that the government should provide palliatives measures that would help cushion the adverse effects in the short run. In summary the removal of fuel subsidy will be good for Nigerians and if properly applied would go a long way in reviving and sustaining the other sectors of the economy.

118

5.3 RECOMMENDATIONS
Government should identify areas of wastages in governance such as the allocation of largesse and booties in the name of allowance. The government should also try and adjust and reproioritize the proposed spending in the 2012 bedget to fund fuel subsidy, and in a way that addresses social needs and improve the well being of all citizens:
The palliatives should have been put in place before removing subsidy on fuel in other to help cushion the adverse effect of the subsidy removal, and the government should try and implement the N18,000 minimum wage which the president signed into law at the heal of elections.
Deregulation can also be attained in phases/stages, that is the current increment can be spread over period of six years or more.
The various law enforcement agencies such as the ICPC and EFCC should be fully empowered and well funded to perform effectively and again the cabals that constitutes the beneficiaries of the fuel subsidy that held the country and its economy to ransom should be identified and be brought to book immediately.
The federal government of Nigeria should address and adequately develop other sectors

of

the

economy

such

as

the

educational,agricultural,communication,transportation,tourism,heath,provision of social amenties and infrastmeture, which will go a long way in providing employment opportunity and raise the standard of living of the people.

119

The above panacea will go a long way to resolve the hardship in Nigeria and rest the issue of subsidy removal finally.

120

BIBLIOGRAPHY
BOOKS
Adebiyi, O. (2011). Fuel Subsidy: The True Story. Retrieved from http://www.234 Next.Com.
Bell, J. (1993). Doing Your Research Project. (2nd Edition). Buckingham: Open
University Press.
Cohen, J. N. (2007). The Impact of Neo-liberalism, Political Institutions and
Financial Autonomy on Economic Development. New York: Princeton
University Press.
Eileen, Kane. (1987). Doing Your Own Research. New York: Marion Boyans
Publishers.
Elekwa, N. N. (2004). Nigeria: The Political Economy of the Policy Process,
Policy Choice and Implementation. Retrieved from http://www.idrc.org.em/ev-71263-201-1-dotopic-html. Eyiuche, A. C. (2012). The Socio-Economic Implication of the Fuel Subsidy
Removal. Ibadan: Abok Publishers.
Odo, M. O. (1992). Guide to Proposal Writing in Social and Behaviorual Science.
Enugu: Snap Press Limited.
Okeke, T. C. (2005). Research Methods: A Guide to Success in Project Writing.
Bauchi: Nigeria Enterprise.
Prasad, M. (2006). The Politics of Free Markets: The Rise of Neoliberal Economic
Policies in Britain, France, Germany and the Untied States. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Taro, Yamani. (1964). Statistic: An Introductory Analysis. (3rd Edition). New
York: Hamper and Row Publishing Limited.

121

JOURNALS
Emeh, O. I. (2011). Deregulation of the Downstream oil Sector in Nigeria:
History and fallacies. Journal of Public Administration and Policy Research,
Vol. 3. (ii), P. 128-139.
Emeh, O. I, and Onyishi, A. O. (2012). The Domestic and International
Implications of Fuel Subsidy Removal Crisis in Nigeria. Kuwait Chapter of
Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review, Vol. 1 (6), P. 57-83.
Izibili, M, and Aiya, F. (2007). Deregulation and Corruption in Nigeria: An
Ethnical Response. Kamal Raj Journal of Sciences, Vol. 14 (3), P. 229-234.
Ojo, E. O. (1999). Modern Hyper and High Inflations. Journal of Economic
Literature, vol. 7 (8), P. 837-880.

NEWS PAPERS
Bankole, T. (2012, January 5). Strike Begins on Monday. The Nation, P.14.
Falana Urges EFCC to Probe PPPRA, NNPC. (2012, January 6). The Nation, P.6.
Fuel Crisis: Will Deregulation Roll Away all our Problems? (2012, May 5). The
Sun Newspaper. Retrieved from http://www.nigeriamasterweb.com.
Fuel Subsidy: Employers Arm Government to Avert Crisis. (2011, December 19).
The Nation, P. 1-2.
Gbenya, Budejo. (2012, January 15). Strike: Nigerians Count their Losses. This
Day, P. 24.
Jonathan: It Will be Tough, but Not Too Painful. (2012, January 2). The Nation,
P. 4.

Oladesu, E. (2012, January 3). Petrol Price go Wild. The Guardian, P. 1-6.
Omoniji, B. (2012, January 2). Subsidy Removal, Tougher Times Ahead in 2012.
The Nation, P. 2.

122

Onanuga, A. (2011, December 23). Subsidy Battle in Lagos: Labour, Government
Forces Clash at Town Hall Meeting. The Nation, P. 13.
Otaigbe, H. (2012, January 5). New Year, New Pains as Fuel Price Hike Bites.
The Nation, P. 5.
Salaudden, L. (2011, December 19). Concerns Over Risen Unemployment. This
Day, P. 24.
Subsidy Beneficiaries Financed Jonathan’s Election – El Rufai. (2012, January
11). The Nation. Retrieved from http://www.nigeriamasterweb.com.
Subsidy: Labour Accuses Okonjo-Iweala of Lying. (2011, December 22). The
Nation, P. 1-4.
The Lies About Deregulation. (2009, October 26). Nigerian Newsword, P. 15-21.

Ugo, E. (2011, December 18). Fuel Subsidy: Courting the Big Bang. Sunday
Independent, P. 15-17.

123

APPENDIX
Department of Public Administration
Faculty of management and Social
Science
Caritas University,
Enugu,
June 2012
Dear Sir/Madam/Miss

The researcher is a final year student of the above named school. She is currently carrying out a research on the impact of fuel subsidy removal on the
Nigerian economy, a case study of Abakaliki local government area in Ebonyi
State
The study is being undertaken as a part of the requirement for the award of
Bachelor of Science Degree in Public Administration of correct answers to the questions as set out here for meaningful evaluation and hey shall be treated in the student confidence

Thanks for your cooperation

Yours faithfully,

Nkwagu oluchi Winifred
PA/2008/182

124

QUESTIONNAIRE
SECTION A
1. Sex
Male [

]

Female [

]

2. Martial status
Single [

] Married [

]

3. Age
20-29 [

] 30-39 [

] 40-50 [

] 50 and above [

4. Educational qualification
a. F.S.L.C

[

]

b. W.A.E.C [

]

c. O.N.D.

[

]

d. B.S.C

[

]

e. H.N.D. [

]

f. M.S.c

]

[

SECTION B
1. Was the fuel subsidy regime useful to a majority of Nigerians
Yes [

] No [

]

1a. Were you in support of the fuel subsidy regime
Yes [

] No [

]

1b. To whom was the fuel subsidy made available?
Cabals [

] Masses [

]

1c. Were other sectors of the economy as healthy as they should be under the fuel subsidy regime
Yes [

] No [

]

1d. Did the masses benefit from the fuel subsidy regime?
Yes [

] No [

]
125

]

1e. Did the cabals/promoters or beneficiary of the subsidy benefit more from the subsidy than the masses.
Yes [

]

No [

]

2. Was the federal government reasonable enough by removing subsidy on fuel
Yes [

]

No [

]

2i. For which of the following reasons did the federal government remove subsidy on fuel
a. Stamp out corruption in the oil sector Yes [

] No [

b. To encourage competition in the oil sector Yes

]

[

] No [

]

c. To ensure that Nigerians benefit from the money accrueing erom the subsidy removal. Yes [

] No

[

]

d.Raise the standard of the living Yes [

] No [

e To reduce the rate of borrowing from international Yes [
f. To develop other sectors of the economy

Yes [

]
] No [
] No [

]
]

3i. Has there been any noticeable impact of the fuel subsidy removal on the
Nigerian economy Yes [ ] No [

]

3ii. What level of impact has been felt in these sectors of the economy

Sectors

Very high

High

Low

Very

Agriculture
Health
Transportation
Communication
Education
Power
Social amenities
Infrastructures

126

Very low

Not at all

Don‟t know

Similar Documents

Premium Essay

Economic

...Function Application: Enlightment to the Impact of Fuel Subsidy Removal in Nigeria Abang I. S.*, Elufisan T.O., Okwubunne A. C. National Centre for Technology Management, an Agency of the Federal Ministry of Science & Technology, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria Abstract This paper adopts a linear function approach to analyse the effect of fuel subsidy removal on the value of Nigerian Naira and local production in the country. Data for about eight different periods where fuel hike occurred in Nigeria was used, and a mathematical model with the aid of a graph, was also developed to aid estimated calculation of Naira’s value. We also deduced from this study that increase in fuel pump price has an adverse effect on the standard of living of the people, since fuel is essential for the transportation of major Nigerian commodities, such as Agricultural produce and other market product. The significant impact of the upsurge of petroleum pump price on the price of goods transport initiates this study; with the aim of checking its effect on the purchase value of naira. Though this study is totally neutral about the subsidy removal, its just to enlighten us on the topic and let viewers decide. Keywords GDP, Subsidy, Data, Scarcity calls for a quick intervention. In a bid to averting the continual occurrence of this problem, Nigeria government have decided to intervene by deregulating the petroleum sector in the form of subsidy removal. The aim of the government for doing this is...

Words: 2674 - Pages: 11

Premium Essay

The Implications of Fuel Subsidy to Nigerian Economy

...Implications of Fuel Subsidy to Nigerian Economy Babandi Ibrahim Gumel Doctor of Business Administration California Southern University Mike Ewald, PhD November 2015 Introduction This paper would discuss the implications of fuel subsidy in the Nigerian economy. It is a position paper as an extra credit assignment for ECO 87501 for DBA course at California Southern University. The paper would review what subsidy is, the reason for subsidizing petroleum product in Nigeria, challenges the Nigerian economy is facing because of subsidizing petroleum products, and the crisis the country is facing because of subsidy. Analysis According to the dictionary of Investopedia, “subsidy is a benefit given by the government to groups or individuals usually in the form of a cash payment or tax reduction. The subsidy is given to remove some burden and is often considered to be in the interest of the public. Politics plays an important part in subsidization. In general, the left is more for having subsidized industries, while the right feels that industry should stand on its own without public funds” (Investopedia, 2015, p. 1). The above definition clearly indicates that the subsidy is a kind of free money in whatever form given to the public by Government. It is worth noting that the definition highlighted that politics plays a role in subsidy, and politicians on the left, (e.g. in U. S. the Democrats) favor subsidy. The Merriam-webmaster dictionary defines subsidy as “money that is...

Words: 1471 - Pages: 6

Premium Essay

Supply and Demand Economics

...are removing fuel subsidies, which has caused riots and protests throughout the country. The effect that this will have on the demand for fuel is explained in this report, using the demand and supply model and also the priced determinants of demand. The report also explains the effect the removal of the subsidies will have on the revenue of the people supplying the fuel. The increase in fuel prices has a flow on effect increasing the prices of other goods which use fuel in their production. Question 1 The supply and demand model shows that when supply and demand quantities are balanced we have an equilibrium price. Once the price increases over this equilibrium price the demand decreases and supply increases which results in a surplus of good. When the price drops and demand increases it results in a shortage of goods. This is shown in diagram 1 below. Diagram 1 (Word Press 2011) The removal of the subsidy will mean there is an increase in the price of fuel making it too expensive for many consumers and therefore decreasing demand which may result in a surplus of fuel. Question 2 A “Elasticity of demand is a measure of how responsive consumers demand is to a change in the price of a product” (Jackson et al 2012, page 61). Inelastic demand occurs when the change in the price of a product has little impact on the quantity demanded. The price elasticity of demand for fuel in Nigeria is inelastic, as the increase in price from the removal of the subsidy would have little...

Words: 746 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Feul Subsidy

...Working Paper Series DOES SUBSIDY REMOVAL HURT THE POOR by Manson NWAFOR Kannayo OGUJIUBA Robert ASOGWA Les Cahiers du SISERA – 2006 / 2 AFRICAN INSTITUTE FOR APPLIED ECONOMICS (AIAE) DOES SUBSIDY REMOVAL HURT THE POOR by Manson NWAFOR1 Kannayo OGUJIUBA Robert ASOGWA This research was undertaken with the financial support of the United States Agency International Development (USAID) and the International Development Research Centre (IDRC), Ottawa, Canada February 2006 1 Corresponding author. Contact is: mansonnwafor@yahoo.com AVANT-PROPOS Le Secrétariat d’Appui Institutionnel à la Recherche Économique en Afrique (SISERA) a pour mission de faciliter l’émergence de centres d’excellence en recherche économique en Afrique subsaharienne et de les aider à jouer un rôle effectif dans le processus d’élaboration des politiques économiques. Un des objectifs du Secrétariat est d’aider les centres à disséminer les résultats de leurs travaux de recherche. Les Cahiers du SISERA ont donc été créés pour permettre une meilleure diffusion des travaux de recherche des Institutions partenaires du Secrétariat. La présente édition des Cahiers du SISERA est consacrée à diffusion des résultats des études conduites par six Institutions partenaires du SISERA dans le cadre du programme de formation et de recherche en économie dénommé « Stratégies et analyses pour le développement et l’accès à la croissance (SAGA) » mis en place par l’USAID et administré par SISERA. L’objet de ce programme...

Words: 10029 - Pages: 41

Premium Essay

The Effect of Subsidy in Nigerian Economy

...NAME: Fatmah Ibrahim CLASS: SS 3A SUBJECT: Economics Topic: The Effect of subsidy in Nigeria Economy THE EFFECTS OF SUBSIDY IN NIGERIA ECONOMY. DEFINATION A subsidy is an assistance paid to a business or economic sector. Most subsidies are made by the government to producers or distributed as subventions in an industry to prevent the decline of that industry (e.g., as a result of continuous unprofitable operations) or an increase in the prices of its products or simply to encourage it to hire more labor (as in the case of a wage subsidy). Examples are subsidies to encourage the sale of exports; subsidies on some foods to keep down the cost of living, especially in urban areas; and subsidies to encourage the expansion of farm production and achieve self-reliance in food production.[1] EFFECTS OF SUBSIDY REMOVAL In a country of power instability the removal of fuel subsidy has triggered double in the price of fuel . 1. increased price of fuel and other petroleum product 2. increase in transport fares 3. increased price of food products. The Lagos Chamber of Commerce and Industry (LCCI) has listed some of the adverse effects of the Federal Government's recent policy to deregulate the nation's downstream oil sector LCCI, in a statement, said the policy has led to fresh inflationary pressures resulting from sharp increases in transportation cost, high inflationary expectations across all sectors of the economy, and a devastating impact on the psyche of the common people...

Words: 717 - Pages: 3

Free Essay

Maths

...illustrate what sort of analysis is expected. Topic Selected: Economic Welfare Fuelling Controversy The Economist 11 January 2014 Overview of Article  Many governments subsidise fuel consumption.  However, many countries that currently subsidise fuel are starting to reverse course.  In June 2013, Indonesia increased fuel prices by 44% and decreased their total subsidy cost by $20 billion annually.  Malaysia also reduced fuel subsidies – household energy bills increased by 15% as a result.  Egypt and India are considering following suit.  The key rationale to these governments of removing subsidies was to decrease the budget deficit. Effects of Fuel Subsidy According to Article  The article discusses that there are many other benefits to reducing fuel subsidies. o Fuel subsidies generate deadweight loss. o Fuel subsidies make inequality worse – it is mostly the rich that benefit (the rich use fuel disproportionately more). o Removal of fuel subsidies will allow the government to develop infrastructure.  These policies are unpopular, however, and many in Indonesia and Malaysia protested the new policies. Fuel Prices around the World  Indonesia and Malaysia have some of the largest fuel subsidies and lowest fuel prices in the world. Analysis of Welfare Effects of Fuel Subsidy    This article discusses that there are deadweight losses...

Words: 750 - Pages: 3

Free Essay

Government Intervention

...government subsidies. This paper will discuss an industry that is subsidized by the U.S. government and address the following: why the U.S. government subsidizes the industry, how the subsidy alters the market outcome, who gains and who loses from the government intervention, any beggar-thy-neighbor issues, and why the subsidy is or is not justified. Introduction Many industries rely on government assistance in both good times and bad. “The potential micro and macro failures of the marketplace provide specific justifications for government intervention” (Schiller, 2010). Government interventions “encompass a wide range of regulatory, fiscal, tax, and legal actions that modify the rights and responsibilities of various parties in society. Interventions can increase or decrease costs to particular groups, effectively acting either as a subsidy or as a tax” (Subsidies and Market Interventions, 2013). Since the 1930’s the government’s role has assumed more responsibilities including “maintaining macroeconomic stability, protecting the environment, and safeguarding the public’s health” (Schiller, 2010). Government Intervention A government subsidy is defined as “monetary assistance granted by a government to a person or group in support of an enterprise regarded as being in the public interest” (Subsidy, 2013). An example of an industry that is subsidized by the U.S. government is the energy market, specifically related to the costs of fuel. Government subsidies are common...

Words: 906 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Renewable Energy

...by grid electricity. Policies needed to implement renewable energy systems in rural areas are discussed in this paper. Most prominent are removal of subsidies to traditional energy primarily benefiting the wealthiest; involving the local populace in decision making; educating financial institutions about the economics of investing in renewable energy systems and creating investment vehicles appropriate to financing them in poor localities; training personnel on management, maintenance and drafting contracts; requiring vendor provision of maintenance and parts; and effective regulation and oversight of system management and financing. I. Introduction The recent sharp increases in the prices of oil, natural gas, uranium and coal underline the importance for all countries to focus on development of alternative energy resources. For developing countries, these price increases can have ruinous economic consequences; for many countries already plagued by poverty this means a choice between fuel and food, health care, education and other essentials. Renewable energy resources need priority because: 1) the overwhelming scientific evidence that anthropological emissions of greenhouse gases from carbon combustion threaten catastrophic results from rapid climate change; 2) the severe health and environmental consequences from fossil fuel combustion being experienced...

Words: 14169 - Pages: 57

Free Essay

Fuel Subsidies

...Indonesia’s Fuel Subsidies: Action plan for reform David Braithwaite Alexander Chandra Prasetyaning Diah R. L. Ami Indriyanto Kerryn Lang Lucky Lontoh Nataliawati Siahaan Damon Vis-Dunbar Bobby A. Wattimena Unggung Widhiantoro Peter Wooders NE SI A N I N S TI TU T E F OR E N E RG IN DO I I EE FO U N D AT I O N C O NOM I YE CS March 2012 www.iisd.org/gsi © 2012 The International Institute for Sustainable Development © 2012 The International Institute for Sustainable Development Published by the International Institute for Sustainable Development. About IISD The International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) contributes to sustainable development by advancing policy recommendations on international trade and investment, economic policy, climate change and energy, and management of natural and social capital, as well as the enabling role of communication technologies in these areas. We report on international negotiations and disseminate knowledge gained through collaborative projects, resulting in more rigorous research, capacity building in developing countries, better networks spanning the North and the South, and better global connections among researchers, practitioners, citizens and policy-makers. IISD’s vision is better living for all—sustainably; its mission is to champion innovation, enabling societies to live sustainably. IISD is registered as a charitable organization in Canada and has 501(c)(3) status in the United...

Words: 22015 - Pages: 89

Premium Essay

Nothin

... Experts believe the cash-less Policy would curb corruption but may increase price level in the short – term By Goke Awoyemi The Managing Director of Financial Derivatives Company Limited, Mr. Bismark Rewane, has said that the cash-less policy the central Bank of Nigeria will increase price level in the short term. The policy commenced in Lagos last month. There has been debate by different observers of Nigeria’s financial system over the effects the cash-less policy and fuel subsidy removal will have on inflation. While some observers have argued that inflation rate will shoot up to an average of 20 per cent in 2012, others have said the rise in inflation rate will only exist in the short term. Rewane said in a report entitled, “Fuel Subsidy Saga,” delivered at the Lagos Business School, that one of the macro-economic effects of the cash-less policy is that price level would increase in the short-run, adding that, “inflation could average 12 to 14 per cent in 2012 due to subsidy impact.” He said, “Short-run effect is that money supply will decline by 50 per cent to N2.5tn and broad money supply (M2) will increase to N18.5tn. Velocity of circulation will increase due to transaction settlement speed. Bank float levels will reduce correspondingly.” Rewane pointed out that some global issues would affect Nigeria, saying that, “African currencies including the naira will come under increasing pressure. The recession will reduce aid and Diaspora flows. If the CFA...

Words: 596 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Reasons for Upheavals in Oil Prices

...What Causes The Upheavals In Oil Prices In The World Robert Bourgot Florida Institute of Technology The Causes of Oil Price Upheavals in the World Introduction At this stage of civilization, oil has become an essential commodity for all countries of the world.  The lack of it means that the pace of development of any country will be adversely affected (Carollo, 2011). The world has, in the recent times, experienced severe fluctuations in oil prices. As at the start of twenty first century, the oil prices have shown a significant increase, but the most significant rise in oil prices started around the year 2002. As mentioned earlier, these upheavals in oil prices have adverse effects to the economy of each nation. An increase in oil price causes increased production costs which consequently lead to cost push inflation. This leads to unemployment, decrease in supply, fall in the people’s purchasing power among many others (Brabec, 2012). In order to address these issues, it is imperative that the roots of these issues are identified. This is the central focus of this paper. It identifies and explains the possible causes of oil price upheavals in the world. According to Maher (2012), causes of fluctuating oil prices in the world can be explained under demand side, supply side, economic side, and environmental protection side. This section looks at the causes of oil price upheavals from the different points of views mentioned above. The demand...

Words: 1550 - Pages: 7

Free Essay

Coal

...http://www.iea.org/co2highlights/CO2highlights.pdf page 3 http://www.iea.org/papers/2009/Wind_Roadmap.pdf page 4 http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/10/science/earth/10portugal.html?_r=1&hp=page Page 5 http://hubpages.com/hub/real-cost-of-fossil-fuels http://www.bp.com/genericarticle.do?categoryId=2012968&contentId=7065280- Page 2 http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/16/world/europe/16hungary.html?_r=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss Page 6 http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2010-07-10/news/ct-met-coal-plant-online-sidebar-20100710_1_coal-plant-coal-fired-peabody-energy Page 7 http://www.chicagotribune.com/health/ct-met-dirty-power-plant-20100918,0,6593923.story As Europe Kicks Coal, Hungarian Town Suffers Miners in Hungary-what to do with cities,industries, states dependent on coal as Ohio,West Virginai, Utah,etc. As countries endeavor to reduce their fossil fuel emissions, many are trying to wean themselves from over-reliance on coal, the most highly emitting fuel. But coal is also the lifeblood of communities from Hungary and Germany to Kentucky and West Virginia, providing jobs, power and warmth. Figure 3: World wind resource map with installed capacity and production data for leading countries 3 180 0 6.9 19.3% 25 170 8 358 52.4 1.9% Denmark United States 12 210 6 300 8.8 n/a 3 241 836 7.1 1.3% China United Kingdom India 9 645 1 800 11.6 n/a Portugal 2 862 712 5.7 11.3% Cumulative installed GW in 2008 Additional...

Words: 617 - Pages: 3

Free Essay

Electricyty Subsidy

...TUTORIAL WORK ELECTRICITY SUBSIDY Members: * Roberto Garzón * Ludwin Gutiérrez * Karina Peña * Joseph Valarezo How as electricity subsidy affects families of Guayaquil? INTRODUCTION Ecuadorian economy has shown a sustained growth in recent years, allowing to the Ecuadorian government to invest in health, education, housing, and some projects for the strengthening of the country. However, it is necessary to control and reduce costs as subsidies. There are subsidies, which are targeted to certain groups of the population according to their characteristics. For example, the Solidarity bonus is a subsidy that is targeted to people in the poorest municipalities in the country and whose income is too low. By the other hand, there are also generalized subsidies, which do not make a proper distinction between groups with different characteristics in the population since they reach all citizens. For example, the electricity subsidy in Ecuador This research shows how people who live in the center of Guayaquil is affected by the reduction of the electricity subsidy since this tool has become in the last seventy years the most used in country due to its versatility, cost, availability, and ease of use. These characteristics make it essential in the human activities either in factories or in the houses since the electricity allows turning on appliances or machines for working or facilitating the lives of people. However, removal of fuel subsidy as gas (LPG) and gasoline...

Words: 1183 - Pages: 5

Free Essay

The Word

...passionate debate on the removal of fuel subsidy with which the country has been bedeviled in previous couple of months; the issue of whether the 2012 Appropriation Bill is a budget of fiscal consolidation or retrogression is as timely as it is topical. Transformation is a huge word that the Jonathan administration thoughtlessly uses to describe its aspirations. Is there anything transformational about the 2012 Budget proposals? In the course of presenting the Draft Budget, President Jonathan in paragraph 1 of 81 of his address states “this budget is a stepping stone to the transformation of our economy and country in our walk to economic freedom” and concludes in paragraph 76 thereof that “Mr. Senate President……the Proposal I lay before you this day seeks to sustain sound micro-economic growth that will translate to achieving socio-economic transformation, and gainful employment for our people”. Meanwhile, and perhaps by divine providence, in the afternoon of the same Tuesday, 13th of December; the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reported that Nigeria’s biggest power generating plant, Egbin thermal station, with an available capacity of some 1,080MW out of the nation’s meagre total of about 4000MW has been shut down on account of poor maintenance! Thus, whilst the President was preaching a sermon of transformation in the National Assembly, Nigerians were simultaneously experiencing practical retrogression. Worse still, the raging debate on the removal of fuel...

Words: 3932 - Pages: 16

Free Essay

Biogas

...successful efforts in the past to produce biogas from cow dung slurry. Thousands of biogas plants have been installed in India and possibly abroad to say no to conventional energy resources. Afterwards there were experiments to mix cow slurry with food waste, paper waste and leaves poultry farm waste. We are going to use existing knowledge to make hostel messes energy efficient and moreover check the performance of the plant adding Algi from nearby marshy lands(easily located in village areas in India). This will help save lot LPG needed and also reduce environment hazards of land filling organic waste available in huge quantity in LPU. INTRODUCTION All over the world efforts are at their maximum level to decrease the dependency on conventional fuels giving way to green energy based upon renewable energy resources. Though LPG is used in all the hostels in Lovely Professional University (LPU) but we thought of utilizing the huge quantity of food waste coming out of hostel mess on daily basis. There are around more than 12,000 students staying in the hostels and every hostel have their own mess. Making biogas out of this would not make the messes energy efficient but also reduce the environment hazards as a result of decomposition of organic waste. Biogas production requires anaerobic digestion. Project aimed to create an Organic...

Words: 1751 - Pages: 8