Opinion
For Lagos To Work Again
As the Centre of Excellence, Lagos in southwest arguably did backslide from its position in 2015 where the then governor, Babatunde Raji Fashola (SAN), impressively left the state. Without a doubt, Fashola’s exploits during his tenure compellingly fetched his portfolios in President Muhammadu Buhari’s administration as trinity minister immediately after handing over to his successor, Akinwunmi Ambode.
During Fashola’s tenure, residents were overwhelmed to such an extent of enthusiastically paying taxes owing to convictions that the state was synchronizing with his slogan Eko o ni baje.
No doubt, gigantic projects particularly some necessary overhead bridges to address traffic situations alongside inner roads constructed by Ambode’s administration are commendable. However, the state honestly didn’t sustain the momentum from Fashola’s administration. For example, scores of roads in the state are presently eyesores to an extent that some motorists now pack and use commercial buses.
Disgustingly, the state metamorphosed to refuse dump arena after Fashola’s exit. Ambode’s first gaffe was the cancellation of monthly environmental sanitation exercise in place which restricted movement for merely three hours on last Saturdays, without any alternative scheme to address sanitation. That alone is abysmal error. Ambode’s government had anchored its action on a court judgment that declared the exercise unlawful and an infringement to freedom of movement enshrined in the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
Strangely, the state government without wasting time comfortably adopted the verdict despite the critical implications particularly hygiene that is sufficient to set aside the judgment. Reports show that the state government appealed but was practically unserious by not filing their brief. To restrict movements for such a reasonable time in a month for health reasons cannot fall within the context of infringement to peoples’ movements. There is a doctrine of necessity for remedying lacunas. For example, under national security, movements are always restricted during general elections as well as presidential movements despite Sections 35, 38 and 40 of the Constitution.
Logically, if there is a right to life which can be indirectly threatened by dangerous sicknesses resulting from unhealthy environments, arguably, a public policy to prevent such hazards within a reasonable time aptly cannot amount to infringement of right to movement. The World Health Organization (WHO) report shows that one-fourth of deaths across the globe are attributed to unhealthy environments. Besides, every society grows and presently, governments shouldn’t responsibly leave general hygiene to citizens’ discretions.
Another critical issue is bad roads. In fact, those that shuttle from Badagry axis to the Island are completely cut-off due to bad roads. Not even officials of Lagos State Traffic Management Authority (LASTMA) are on sight in these critical areas. The stresses motorists and commuters go through daily are better imagined than experienced. To describe the people as isolated or forsaken is no hyperbole. All these are convincingly traceable to not adopting continuum in government accordingly. Had Ambode conscientiously continued with his predecessors’ policies with constructive modifications as Fashola did after succeeding Asiwaju Bola Tinubu, believably, Lagos will be ahead of where Fashola left it.
Thus, these episodes present big lessons to the present governor, Babajide Sanwo-Olu. The new administration thus, faces critical tasks to put the state back to shape. The situation requires state of emergency principally on refuse disposal, roads rehabilitation and traffic management. Similarly, the rate of area boys’ excesses in Lagos roads grew exceedingly during Ambode’s tenure than it was when he took the mantle of office from Fashola. These areas must be critically addressed.
Now, over to the federal government; the high population in Lagos is undeniably worrisome. Imagine if the military junta of General Ibrahim Babangida didn’t thoughtfully relocate the federal capital to Abuja, how would the federal government effectively be operating from Lagos including presidential movements alongside the great workforce?
In a nutshell, the seaport calls for a state of emergency and transcends temporary decongestion. Sensibly, having a functional seaport only in Lagos is a big blunder. There’s urgent need to spread out the seaports to other geopolitical zones. If not, the trailers-parking, traffic crisis in Lagos roads and excessive population may never be subdued no matter the efforts deployed.
For example, by the present poor arrangement, indisputably, all clearing and forwarding agents, haulage workers in the country alongside their families are all resident in Lagos; likewise their trailers and trucks in numbers. These numbers alone are in high and sufficient to create catastrophe let alone other seaport-related businesses. By decentralizing the seaport, other zones will instantly pick up economically as scores of people will relocate to other areas and operate through other seaports; thereby drastically depopulate Lagos to be a standard and viable state. Beyond that, job opportunities will abound in all those new areas.
Typically, in any system where economic activities are concentrated in one direction, the congestion being experienced in Lagos environs must follow. Same for unemployment ratio as too many people would be queuing for few employment opportunities. But if decentralized, job opportunity will multiply correspondingly to a number of seaports and government agencies alone will likewise absorb a good number across all their operational stations. Thus, while the palliative measures by the governments are estimable, the ultimate panacea remains to decentralize the seaport.
Umegboro, a public affairs analyst, wrote from Abuja.
Carl Umegboro
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