Beyond FG’s Mass Transit Scheme Launch

Since the Federal Government, on January 1, 2012 announced the full withdrawal of subsidy on premium motor spirit (PMS), otherwise called petrol neither the government nor the people have slept with both eyes closed. This is because, following that decision, the Petroleum Products Pricing and Regulatory Agency (PPPRA), reacted by saying that the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) mega-stations would now sell PMS at N138 per litre while the major and independent marketers would sell at N140 per litre. That means that by the decision, the Federal Government has kick-started the complete deregulation of the downstream sector of the petroleum industry.

The immediate response to that was the hike in transport fares by up to 200 per cent across the country, a development that fuelled protests in most states, with very disturbing consequences.

However, as part of government’s policy to cushion the effects of the subsidy withdrawal, President Goodluck Jonathan, last Sunday, launched a mass transit programme which pushed 1,600 diesel-powered buses to the roads through the various transport unions across the country to increase the fleet of vehicles on the roads and consequently, reduce transport fares. While launching the programme at the Eagle Square, Abuja, the President said that the buses were the first batch of the strategy to reduce the sufferings of the poor masses occasioned by the withdrawal of subsidy on PMS.

He urged the leadership of the Road Transport Employers Association of Nigeria (RTEAN) and the National Union of Road Transport Workers (NURTW) to liaise with the government and other partners in the scheme, including some commercial banks, in order to benefit from the subsequent tranches of the programme. Dr Jonathan hoped that with the new diesel-powered buses, transport fares across the nation would drop to their former levels.

President Jonathan then directed immediate commencement of work on the rehabilitation of the Port Harcourt-Maiduguri and Lagos-Lokoja-Kaduna-Kano rail-lines, and the intensification of work on the new Lagos-Ibadab-Lokoja-Abuja-Kaduna gauge line. He said that the completion of work on these rail-lines would help reduce the pressure on existing roads, and also push down cost of road transportation.

Plausible as the President’s steps may be, we think that there is still the need to incorporate other ideas. One is the suggestion by the Chairman, Silverbird Group, Mr. Ben Murray-Bruce, to Mr President.

Murray-Bruce had, at the Town Hall meeting organised by the Newspapers Proprietors Association of Nigeria at MUSON Centre, Lagos, suggested that, “the money derived from the removal of fuel subsidy should be used to subsidise transportation for the masses”, saying that, “the funds will also enable transporters to buy energy-efficient buses and taxis.”

He insisted that, “the Standards Organisation of Nigeria should make it a policy that only vehicles that are energy-efficient can come into Nigeria”, asking government to ensure, “that energy-efficient vehicles should be brought into Nigeria duty-free, so that the average person can buy these vehicles.”

Murray-Bruce tasked the Federal Government to also develop a transport policy to check the use of unsafe and unhealthy vehicles, adding that the importation of tricycles for the masses to use while ministers drive in N20million worth of sport utility vehicles (SUVs) should be discouraged.

According to him, Nigerians spend between N30billion and N50billion yearly on transportation. He, therefore, appealed to the Federal Government to provide $500 million yearly to subsidise the transport sector as part of the $2billion intervention. The government should ensure the setting aside of $2 billion every year for the transport sector in the next five years as a deliberate policy of 100 per cent subsidy for the transport sector.

The Tide believes that a special intervention fund to support the transport sector would help drive the economy in the right direction. If the government pumps in $500 million to subsidise those going by bus; another $500 million for infrastructure, such as bus stops; and another $500 million for new, road-worthy trucks, the impact of the subsidy removal would be minimal.

This way, the burden of transport fares would nearly disappear, the cost of goods and services would drop, and the common man on the streets would reap greater benefit from the fuel subsidy removal. This is what we think would move this country forward at this critical time in our history.