Opinion
Education : The Way Forward
Ipalibo T. Asemebo
For sometime now the education sector has suffered or experienced series of industrial crises that has paralysed academic activities across the country. The most painful part of the story is that whenever there is industrial misunder-standing between government and teachers or lecturers the causalities are the pupils, and students. It is very painful and heart breaking that after 60 days both the federal government that is represented by the Executive arm and the Academic Staff Union of Universities are yet to have an understanding that will lead to the end of the strike. What is now going on between both parties is war in the Media, which literally is war of words on the pages of newspapers, radio and television. And I want to say that with this kind of situation where instead of having face to face dialogue both parties now settle there scores on the media. am afraid to say this strike embarked upon by the lecturers will linger for a very long time.
All over the world peace can only be achieved whenever there is conflict after a face to face interaction, it is only after the interaction between aggrieved parties which is usually mediated by a third party that the outcome is relayed to the press. And usually during such meetings there is usually concessions, each party must be willing to shift grounds not by sticking to their guns.
The advice that I will give to both parties, ASUU and the Federal Executive Council is to stop the war of words in the media and go back to the roundtable with the interest of Nigerians. And to achieve this the representative of the Federal Executive Council which is the Minister of Education should not feel that if he agrees on behalf of the government to give ASUU what they want he is a weak minister, neither should the President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua feel that he cannot stoop so low to negotiate with ASUU. Because if he does say he will be seen as a weak man in handling critical issues, what any body should consider is National interest, the moment the interest of an individual supersedes that of an organisation, society, a people or a state, that interest becomes a selfish one. So there should be an end to the media propaganda and let both parties go to the table. For instance, what will it take to engage the striking lecturers before even approving 40% salary increase, nothing of course.
However, what happened was that without any negotiation a minister just gathered one or two press people and made a statement that council has approved this or that, which is a violation of the principle of collective bargaining.
Even the sudden announcement without any move to discuss or have further talks, by Deacon Gamaliel Onosode that the Federal Executive Council is backing out of every talk with ASUU until they call of strike is unfair.
If they for the sake of Nigerian students who have stayed at home for over 60 days engage the lecturers in further negotiations, and the lecturers refuse to call of the strike then every body will hold the lecturers responsible for the shutting down of our universities.
But this was not the case infact the vice-president Dr. Goodluck Jonathan was having talks with the lecturers before Gamalie Onosode dropped the bombshell that no further talks which is like adding salt to an injury.
This industrial dispute has lingered for tool long, and is not doing any good , every day thousands of students across the country sit very close to their radio sets, peruse through on daily basis to see if both parties will agree so that there will be an end to the strike. Unfortunately, what they will be getting is press conferences where one party will say they will never agree, there is a popular adage which says that never be wicked or do any evil to a child or a youth, because the child or youth we see today will become the next governor, the next president, father, manager or anything tomorrow. One message or food for thought for our leaders today is they should ponder, what will they be remembered for tomorrow. Will they be remembered as wasters of the youth or builders of the youth which is the next generation.
In conclusion, all the industrial unions in the educational sector are doing a great job, because all the strikes they embark on are definitely meant for the revival of our citadel of learning. However, I will like to add that apart from making their demands alone on the executive arm, they should also do more by making most of their views known to the National Assembly, and see how the legislators can help to improve the condition of education in the country. A good example is the issue of funding. The Federal Executive Council under Yar’Adua has no such powers to increase funding like that without the National Assembly. The power to appropriate is with the National Assembly (the legislature) so ASUU from time to time should visit committee members. Its is only they who can call Yar’Adua and Sam Egwu or any other minister to order, if they are failing to give attention to education. The same call goes to NUT and other unions, they are stakeholders, the word Education cannot exist without them, they also should parley not only with the executive but also the legislature. In addition, for the sake of peace government at all levels must handle education with care because it is the oil of any society. They should engage all unions whether NUT, ASUU and others on the roundtable with all sincerity before making provocative statements on radio, TV, and newspapers. The attitude of telling lecturers and teachers to go to hell, while children or students suffer should be discarded.
And also ASSU and other unions whether at the university, polytechnic, or secondary level should be willing to make concessions where necessary for the stake of education so that there will be an end to all industrial disharmony currently going on.
Asemebo resides in Port Harcourt.
From all indications, Nigeria possesses enough human and material resources to become a true economic powerhouse in Africa. According to the National Population Commission (NPC, 2023), the country’s population has grown steadily within the last decade, presently standing at about 220 million people—mostly young, vibrant, and innovative. Nigeria also remains the sixth-largest oil producer in the world, with enormous reserves of gas, fertile agricultural land, and human capital.
Yet, despite this enormous potential, the country continues to grapple with underdevelopment, poverty, unemployment, and insecurity. Recent data from the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS, 2023) show that about 129 million Nigerians currently live below the poverty line. Most families can no longer afford basic necessities, even as the government continues to project a rosy economic picture.
The Subsidy Question
The removal of fuel subsidy in 2023 by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has been one of the most controversial policy decisions in Nigeria’s recent history. According to the president, subsidy removal was designed to reduce fiscal burden, unify the foreign exchange rate, attract investment, curb inflation, and discourage excessive government borrowing.
While these objectives are theoretically sound, the reality for ordinary Nigerians has been severe hardship. Fuel prices more than tripled, transportation costs surged, and food inflation—already high—rose above 30% (NBS, 2023). The World Bank (2023) estimates that an additional 7.1 million Nigerians were pushed into poverty after subsidy removal.
A Critical Economic View
As an economist, I argue that the problem was not subsidy removal itself—which was inevitable—but the timing, sequencing, and structural gaps in Nigeria’s implementation.
- Structural Miscalculation
Nigeria’s four state-owned refineries remain nonfunctional. By removing subsidies without local refining capacity, the government exposed the economy to import-price pass-through effects—where global oil price shocks translate directly into domestic inflation. This was not just a timing issue but a fundamental policy miscalculation.
- Neglect of Social Safety Nets
Countries like Indonesia (2005) and Ghana (2005) removed subsidies successfully only after introducing cash transfers, transport vouchers, and food subsidies for the poor (World Bank, 2005). Nigeria, however, implemented removal abruptly, shifting the fiscal burden directly onto households without protection.
- Failure to Secure Food and Energy Alternatives
Fuel subsidy removal amplified existing weaknesses in agriculture and energy. Instead of sequencing reforms, government left Nigerians without refinery capacity, renewable energy alternatives, or mechanized agricultural productivity—all of which could have cushioned the shock.
Political and Public Concerns
Prominent leaders have echoed these concerns. Mr. Peter Obi, the Labour Party’s 2023 presidential candidate, described the subsidy removal as “good but wrongly timed.” Atiku Abubakar of the People’s Democratic Party also faulted the government’s hasty approach. Human rights activists like Obodoekwe Stive stressed that refineries should have been made functional first, to reduce the suffering of citizens.
This is not just political rhetoric—it reflects a widespread economic reality. When inflation climbs above 30%, when purchasing power collapses, and when households cannot meet basic needs, the promise of reform becomes overshadowed by social pain.
Broader Implications
The consequences of this policy are multidimensional:
- Inflationary Pressures – Food inflation above 30% has made nutrition unaffordable for many households.
- Rising Poverty – 7.1 million Nigerians have been newly pushed into poverty (World Bank, 2023).
- Middle-Class Erosion – Rising transport, rent, and healthcare costs are squeezing household incomes.
- Debt Concerns – Despite promises, government borrowing has continued, raising sustainability questions.
- Public Distrust – When government promises savings but citizens feel only pain, trust in leadership erodes.
In effect, subsidy removal without structural readiness has widened inequality and eroded social stability.
Missed Opportunities
Nigeria’s leaders had the chance to approach subsidy removal differently:
- Refinery Rehabilitation – Ensuring local refining to reduce exposure to global oil price shocks.
- Renewable Energy Investment – Diversifying energy through solar, hydro, and wind to reduce reliance on imported petroleum.
- Agricultural Productivity – Mechanization, irrigation, and smallholder financing could have boosted food supply and stabilized prices.
- Social Safety Nets – Conditional cash transfers, food vouchers, and transport subsidies could have protected the most vulnerable.
Instead, reform came abruptly, leaving citizens to absorb all the pain while waiting for theoretical long-term benefits.
Conclusion: Reform With a Human Face
Fuel subsidy removal was inevitable, but Nigeria’s approach has worsened hardship for millions. True reform must go beyond fiscal savings to protect citizens.
Economic policy is not judged only by its efficiency but by its humanity. A well-sequenced reform could have balanced fiscal responsibility with equity, ensuring that ordinary Nigerians were not crushed under the weight of sudden change.
Nigeria has the resources, population, and resilience to lead Africa’s economy. But leadership requires foresight. It requires policies that are inclusive, humane, and strategically sequenced.
Reform without equity is displacement of poverty, not development. If Nigeria truly seeks progress, its policies must wear a human face.
References
- National Bureau of Statistics (NBS). (2023). Poverty and Inequality Report. Abuja.
- National Population Commission (NPC). (2023). Population Estimates. Abuja.
- World Bank. (2023). Nigeria Development Update. Washington, DC.
- World Bank. (2005). Fuel Subsidy Reforms: Lessons from Indonesia and Ghana. Washington, DC.
- OPEC. (2023). Annual Statistical Bulletin. Vienna.
By: Amarachi Amaugo