Opinion
Nigeria: Need For Robust Presidential Debates (I)
Debate is not enshrined in the Nigerian constitution or the electoral law in Nigeria. Even in the US where we adopted key aspects of our presidential democracy, debate is not sanctioned by law. However, since 1960, televised presidential debates have become a major staple of the electoral process in the US. It has been a veritable avenue for both party members and the unaffiliated undecided voters to cut through the clutter of campaign noise in order to choose their preferred candidates based on substance. In Nigeria, we are still grappling with the apparent lack of debates, especially presidential debates between flag bearers of political parties; whereas in the US, there are series of debates within the political parties even before the primary elections. Not only that, the same applies to other elective positions, including Senatorial, and Congressional seats, and the position of Governors and Mayors. Debates also create avenues for candidates to do battle based on their authenticity, the veracity of their individual policies; and their position in key national issues.
The importance of debates in the current electoral cycle was amplified by the Chief Executive Officer of the Nigerian Economic Summit Group (NESG) when he stated recently in Abuja, that they are essential to the election process and are increasingly regarded as a tradition and the bedrock of a healthy democracy. According to him, debates “embody fundamental principles which ensure that the citizens are informed and actively involved in leadership choices and decision-making. At this critical time in our country’s history, it is now more important than ever to nudge Nigerians towards informed voting choices that result in transformational leaders with the knowledge and understanding of the issues that will steer our country toward shared economic prosperity.” The lack of debates, since the advent of the current political era, has compelled the electorate in most cases to caste their votes blind for the full spectrum of elective positions. In fact, the amount of money spent since 1999 to maintain both houses of the national assembly is not commensurate to their legislative output, in terms of volume of bills passed, or the level at which they have been able to fulfil their oversight functions on MDAs to ensure that they are not operating as independent silos without accountability.
Due to the lack of debates, the electorate has voted stark illiterates as legislators, thereby denying constituencies and senatorial districts the required robust debate on the floor before certain bills are passed. As a consequence, the country has been plagued by a rubber stamp legislative arm like the current 9th Assembly, and various state Houses of Assembly. Recently, the anticipation of most Nigerians to listen, and to interrogate the presidential candidates of the frontline political parties was rewarded with partial disappointment when the Presidential Candidates of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Bola Armed Tinubu and his Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) counterpart, former Vice President, Atiku Abubakar did not show up at the Townhall Series. The debate was organised by the Nigeria Electoral Debate Group (NEDG), Nigeria Economic Summit Group, Centre for Democracy and Development, and others.
Nigerians anticipated a robust debate among major contenders for the highest office in the land, but only Peter Obi of Labour Party, and Rabiu Kwankwaso, of the New Nigeria’s People Party made themselves available for the debate; even though the Presidential Candidate of PDP sent his running mate and Governor of Delta State, Ifeanyi Okowa in his stead. That robust debate never happened, and from the stated position of the Bola Tinubu’s campaign, Nigerians may never have the opportunity to scrutinise the next likely occupant of Aso Rock.
In 2011, the current President availed himself for the presidential debate, and he lost the election. Sadly, he avoided the debates in 2015 and 2019, but won both elections; and the past seven years have seen Nigeria heading to the precipice in every sector. No Nigerian leader, even in the days of the Military, mismanaged our diversity the extent President Buhari has in the past seven years.
In 2015, Nigerians voted an unrepentant former dictator into office, a tribesman who has given more attention to cows than 200 million Nigerians in the past seven years. Since our forced marriage in 1914, and the horse trading that occurred behind closed doors, between the North and the British before our independence in 1960, there have always been religious and tribal fault lines, but the past crop of leaders even from the North were able to manage it. But President Buhari failed woefully in this regard. His body language and policies in the past seven years have transformed hitherto fault lines to gaping tribal and religious chasms that are now threatening to swallow up the country. In this electoral cycle, Nigerians deserve the opportunity to hear the candidates outline their progammmes, and how they intend to manage our economy, security, education, health, foreign policy, but most importantly, how they intend to manage our diversity.
In the US, political parties organise series of televised presidential debates bordering on key issues like the economy and foreign policy before party primaries. These series of debates go a long way to inform the American voter, especially voters who are unaffiliated to either the Democratic party, or the Republican Party such that, by the time the main debates come around voters are fully primed on what to look out for. The case is different in Nigeria even in 2022, where neither the APC, PDP, LP, NNPP, or any other party for that matter had debates before their various presidential primaries. Essentially, it means that we do not know these candidates the way we ought to. You may recall that during one of the APC’s presidential campaigns in 2015, candidate Muhammadu Buhari was quoted as saying that he was going to make $1 equal to N1, but today, that promise is considered a slip of tongue, or political misspeak. Therefore, going by this, almost everything a Nigerian politician says in the campaign trail is worth nothing. This is the reason why the current set of presidential candidates must be put on the spot in a debate setting to face the scrutiny of Nigerians. To be continued in our next edition.
By: Raphael Pepple
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
-
City Crime2 days ago
RSG Ready For 2030 Digital Transformation
-
Opinion2 days agoA Renewing Optimism For Naira
-
Business2 days agoFG Fixes Uniform Prices for Housing Units Nationwide, Approves N12.5m For 3-bedroom Bungalow ……..Says Move To Enhance Affordability, Ensures Fairness
-
News2 days agoReps Summon NAFDAC, Police, Others For Illicit Drug Probe
-
Niger Delta2 days ago
Coy Advocates Indigenous Innovation For Africa’s Energy Future
-
News2 days agoDangote Begins Refinery Expansion To 1.4mbpd
-
Business2 days agoNDDC Unveils Naval Facilities To Boost Region’s Security
-
News2 days agoRIVERS PEACE EFFORTS YIELDING RESULTS, SAYS FUBARA ….Promises Rehabilitation Of Internal Roads, GSS Akabuka
