Opinion
Private Schools And State Policy
Private schools, students, teachers and owners deserve meaningful support from both the state and the federal governments. This simple truth seems to have suffered negligence by successive political leaders. Although the need to support private schools has been a subject of debate, one should not argue the fact that every child should be given equal right and access to quality education.
The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) signed by 189 countries and 23 international organisations at the United Nations General Assembly in September 2000, provides that every child be given equal access to education, whether in public or in private schools. With children under 16 years of age accounting for about 46 percent of the country’s population, one would admit the fact that public schools cannot cater for the current educational demand. Private schools must, therefore, work hand-in-hand with public schools to meet this growing need.
Currently, not every child between the age of three and 14 has access to education. A 2014 UNICEF report indicates that more than 10.5 million children are out of school. This could either be as a result of the current ratio of students to teachers in public schools, or as a result of the amount needed to enroll in private schools.
The Universal Basic Education, a program lunched in1999 by the Nigerian Government to provide free primary and secondary education for all, seems not to have been successful, especially for students in private schools, who are not benefitting from State budget on education.
In Australia, for instance, both state and territory governments provide supplementary fund for nongovernment schools.
According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, the Australian Government provides grants for science laboratories and equipment in both government and non-government (private) schools. Besides, major assistance to finance libraries in both government and non-government schools are provided yearly in their fiscal policy.
But here in Nigeria, the situation is very different. Those who find themselves in private schools, whether as students, teachers or minders, are only separating themselves from State purse.
Private school teachers for instance do not benefit from State budget; the government would rather visit them periodically to check their lesson notes, ask for their qualifications, check their class performance and probably ask some job-threatening questions. Those who are extremely qualified could end up receiving a hand shake from top “political gurus”. That ends it. Their prospect of retirements has no place in government policy.
Although many private school teachers are poorly paid, no government has ever considered supporting them. To governments at all levels, placing militants on annual salaries, declaring amnesty for a terrorist group, buying special cars for selected individuals, wining an election, or spending billions of naira at a political rally is more important than organising a training programme for teachers in both private and public schools.
One would have thought that, rather than just fixing a date for the inspection of private schools, and invading the mass media with such news as part of efforts to keep relevant in the public space, the government could invest on teachers training programmes, subsidize students school fees in private schools, and aid the provision of facilities in all approved private schools.
Such efforts would widen educational opportunities, give equal access to education, especially at the primary and secondary levels, eradicate extreme poverty and hunger, promote gender equality and youth empowerment, reduce child mortality, combat some chronic diseases like HIV/AIDS, and reduce the rate of crime in the States as well as in the country at large
The N30 billion allocated by the Rivers State Government in the 2018 budget for educational infrastructure, as well as improving the quality of education should go round. ‘Let it go round’. Students and teachers in private schools should benefit.
Governor Nyesom Wike should distinguish himself from his predecessors who only acted like the Asian giants of the ancient capitalist class, and remained incurably addicted to the problems of double taxation, renewed registrations, selling of multiple stickers, and incessant harassment of private school owners.
The Wike-led administration should take proactive measure in ensuring that students in both public and private schools benefit from government spending especially as it affects their education. One should not be denied access to the State government commitment towards educational reform, simply because he schools or teaches in a private school.
As the current academic session ends successfully and the third term academic session is being anticipated, the decades of negligence and indifference towards the plight of students, teachers and owners of private schools should end. The government should wake up to a fresh dispensation of justice, equity and fairness.
Private school students, teachers and owners should equally benefit from State budget on education.
James writes from Port Harcourt.
John James
Opinion
A Renewing Optimism For Naira
Opinion
Don’t Kill Tam David-West
Opinion
Fuel Subsidy Removal and the Economic Implications for Nigerians
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
-
Business1 day agoNCAA To Enforce Zero-debt Rule By 2026 ……….As Airlines Face Compliance Sanctions
-
Politics4 days agoReps Ask FG To Curb Arbitrary Rent Hike Nationwide
-
Rivers1 day ago
Shippers Council moves To Enhance Service Delivery At Nigerian Ports
-
Oil & Energy1 day agoEkpo, , Mshelbila Elected Gas Exporting Countries Forum Chiefs
-
News1 day agoTinubu commissions seven new projects at Unilorin
-
Opinion4 days ago
Fuel Subsidy Removal and the Economic Implications for Nigerians
-
Business1 day agoNAICOM Tasks New NCRIB President On Innovation, Professionalism
-
Featured4 days agoFubara Pledges Cleaner Gateway To PH City …Visits New Dumpsite At Igwuruta
