Editorial
Subsidy Palliative Loan: Need For Caution
The Minister of Finance, Budget and National Planning, Zainab Ahmed, announced that the Federal
Government had borrowed $800 million from the World Bank. According to her, it would be used as a palliative before the total removal of petrol subsidies in June. This announcement sparked outrage among Nigerians. At the official rate, the borrowed amount is equivalent to N368.2 billion, while at the black market, it is N596 billion.
Petrol subsidy has been a cardinal topic in Nigeria’s public space and economy for over 40 years. Reductions in the subsidy and subsequent increases in petrol pump prices have led to nationwide strikes, protests and social upheavals since the late 1980s. These events have been led by trade unions, students, civil society organisations, and professionals. The cost and impact on public finances have been significant. Recently, there have been incremental reductions in the subsidy.
Economic and financial experts have expressed doubts about the viability of the subsidy that is currently being implemented in Nigeria. They suggest that the N368.2 billion intervention will not cushion the economic challenges that will arise from the removal of ‘under-recovery’, as stated by the government. Zainab has said that post-subsidy palliative plans will be distributed to 50 million Nigerians, which represents 10 million households.
The issue of subsidy could have been resolved if previous governments had addressed the root cause. Palliatives are only a temporary solution that barely scratches the surface since the underlying issue will resurface. Marketers and other groups in the downstream sector of the petroleum industry claimed that fuel prices might double once the subsidy is removed, creating a ripple effect on everything.
Debates about the implications of eliminating petrol subsidy have intensified. Those who oppose the withdrawal include labour, trade unions and some oil and gas industry experts. They argue that it would increase inflation and harm Nigerians. Organised labour has always insisted that the refineries must be functional before subsidy is taken off. The incoming government must be prepared to face challenges in sustaining or withdrawing the subsidy.
Nigerians are questioning the lack of transparency regarding the World Bank’s funding and raising concerns about the potential for it to be another fruitless endeavour. In September 2022, a report from the Nigeria Extractive Industries Initiative (NEITI) revealed that over the last 15 years (2005-2020), the country had spent N17.6 trillion ($74.386 billion) on fuel subsidies. Meanwhile, the nation’s total debt stock continues to increase, with the latest figure standing at N44.06 trillion, due to unequal revenue generation capacity.
In 2022, Nigeria’s revenue collection reached N10 trillion, according to Federal Inland Revenue data. The possibility of the country taking out an $800 million loan from the World Bank has caused concern among stakeholders. We believe that borrowing to finance post-fuel subsidy removal palliatives is not feasible. Hence, we insist that the incoming administration should handle fuel subsidy removal and palliatives.
In the past, the country funded palliative care through savings from subsidy removal without resorting to borrowing. That is why the current proposal to fund palliative care through borrowing is unacceptable and unconventional. Additionally, there are policy considerations that need to be taken into account when delivering palliative care. The government should explore fiscal and monetary policy options to encourage investment in sectors that can help alleviate the pain caused by subsidy removal.
Investors in various sectors, such as refineries, pipelines, petrochemicals, marketing, and fertiliser plants, can benefit from incentives that facilitate investment in the power sector and the use of autogas. The elimination of fuel subsidies would reduce the Federal Government’s debt burden and is necessary for the country’s economy.
However, the $800 million loan from the World Bank cannot alleviate the burden of fuel subsidy removal on Nigerians, who are already groaning loudly. The new government must prioritise restructuring the government’s revenue profile to boost foreign investment in crucial sectors of the economy.
The government must return the borrowed money if the fuel subsidy removal process has indeed been suspended as declared by the Finance Minister after the National Economic Council (NEC) meeting last month. Nigeria is at present in a calamitous financial situation, with records from both national and international financial and debt institutions indicating a State in crisis. Continuing to borrow money without a coherent plan for repayment only exacerbates the problem and puts the country further into a debt trap.
According to the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), Nigeria’s public debt stock reached N44.06 trillion or $101.91 billion in Q3 of 2021. The debt might increase to N77 trillion with the addition of the Central Bank of Nigeria’s (CBN) Ways and Means expenses, which have caused controversy. In just three months, the debt grew by 2.84 per cent, rising from N42.84 trillion or $103.31 billion in Q2 of 2022 to N44.06 trillion in Q3.”
Following far-reaching corruption, the country’s subsidy system is currently unsustainable. It is crucial to carefully and gradually approach this problem to prevent resource waste and financial hardship. The Federal Government must be open about its strategy for removal.
Editorial
Rivers’ Retirees: Matters Arising

Editorial
That FEC’s Decision On Tertiary Institutions

Editorial
Addressing Unruly Behaviours At The Airports

It began as a seemingly minor in- flight disagreement. Comfort Emmason, a passenger on an Ibom Air flight from Uyo to Lagos, reportedly failed to switch off her mobile phone when instructed by the cabin crew. What should have been a routine enforcement of safety regulations spiralled into a physical confrontation, sparking a national debate on the limits of airline authority and the rights of passengers.
The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) wasted no time in condemning the treatment meted out to Emmason. In a strongly worded statement, the body described the incident as “a flagrant violation of her fundamental human rights” and called for a thorough investigation into the conduct of the airline staff. The NBA stressed that while passengers must adhere to safety rules, such compliance should never be extracted through intimidation, violence, or humiliation.
Following the altercation, Emmason found herself arraigned before a Magistrate’s Court and remanded at Kirikiri Maximum Security Prison, a location more commonly associated with hardened criminals than with errant passengers. In a surprising turn of events, the Federal Government later dropped all charges against her, citing “overriding public interest” and concerns about due process.
Compounding her woes, Ibom Air initially imposed a lifetime ban preventing her from boarding its aircraft. That ban has now been lifted, following mounting public pressure and calls from rights groups for a more measured approach. The reversal has been welcomed by many as a step towards restoring fairness and proportionality in handling such disputes.
While her refusal to comply with crew instructions was undeniably inappropriate, questions linger about whether the punishment fit the offence. Was the swift escalation from verbal reminder to physical ejection a proportionate response, or an abuse of authority? The incident has reignited debate over how airlines balance safety enforcement with respect for passenger rights.
The Tide unequivocally condemns the brutal and degrading treatment the young Nigerian woman received from the airline’s staff. No regulation, however vital, justifies the use of physical force or the public shaming of a passenger. Such behaviour is antithetical to the principles of customer service, human dignity, and the rule of law.
Emmason’s own defiance warrants reproach. Cabin crew instructions, especially during boarding or take-off preparations, are not mere suggestions; they are safety mandates. Reports suggest she may have been unable to comply because of a malfunctioning power button on her device, but even so, she could have communicated this clearly to the crew. Rules exist to safeguard everyone on board, and passengers must treat them with due seriousness.
Nigerians, whether flying domestically or abroad, would do well to internalise the importance of orderliness in public spaces. Adherence to instructions, patience in queues, and courteous engagement with officials are hallmarks of civilised society. Disregard for these norms not only undermines safety but also projects a damaging image of the nation to the wider world.
The Emmason affair is not an isolated case. Former Edo State Governor and current Senator, Adams Oshiomhole, once found himself grounded after arriving late for an Air Peace flight. Witnesses alleged that he assaulted airline staff and ordered the closure of the terminal’s main entrance. This is hardly the conduct expected of a statesman.
More recently, a Nollywood-worthy episode unfolded at Abuja’s Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport, involving Fuji icon “King”, Wasiu Ayinde Marshal, popularly known as KWAM1. In a viral video, he was seen exchanging heated words with officials after being prevented from boarding an aircraft.
Events took a dangerous turn when the aircraft, moving at near take-off speed, nearly clipped the 68-year-old musician’s head with its wing. Such an occurrence points to a serious breach of airport safety protocols, raising uncomfortable questions about operational discipline at Nigeria’s gateways.
According to accounts circulating online, Wasiu had attempted to board an aircraft while he was carrying an alcoholic drink and refused to relinquish it when challenged. His refusal led to de-boarding, after which the Aviation Minister, Festus Keyamo, imposed a six-month “no-fly” ban, citing “unacceptable” conduct.
It is deeply concerning that individuals of such prominence, including Emmason’s pilot adversary, whose careers have exposed them to some of the most disciplined aviation environments in the world, should exhibit conduct that diminishes the nation’s reputation. True leadership, whether in politics, culture, or professional life, calls for restraint and decorum, all the more when exercised under public scrutiny.
Most egregiously, in Emmason’s case, reports that she was forcibly stripped in public and filmed for online circulation are deeply disturbing. This was an act of humiliation and a gross invasion of privacy, violating her right to dignity and falling short of the standards expected in modern aviation. No person, regardless of the circumstances, should be subjected to such degrading treatment.
Ibom Air must ensure its staff are trained to treat passengers with proper decorum at all times. If Emmason had broken the law, security personnel could have been called in to handle the matter lawfully. Instead, her ordeal turned into a public spectacle. Those responsible for assaulting her should face prosecution, and the airline should be compelled to compensate her. Emmason, for her part, should pursue legal redress to reinforce the principle that justice and civility must prevail in Nigeria’s skies.
-
Politics2 days ago
2027: Bayelsa APC Adopts Tinubu As Sole Candidate … As Lokpobiri, Lyon Shun Meeting
-
Sports2 days ago
GOtv Boxing Night 34 holds Dec. in Lagos
-
Politics2 days ago
Alleged Smear Campaign Against Yakubu, CSOs Demand Apology From Uzodimma
-
Sports2 days ago
WCQ: NFF Denies Post Match Statement
-
Politics2 days ago
Why INEC Can’t Punish Politicians For Early Campaigns – Yakubu
-
Politics2 days ago
2027: Jega Condemns Premature Campaigns, Blames Elected Officials
-
Politics2 days ago
Stopping Natasha’s Resumption Threatens Nigeria’s Democracy – ADC
-
Sports2 days ago
Gov. Decries Delta’s Poor Performance At 2025 NYG