Opinion
63 Years Of Electricity Mirage
Reliable electric power supply has remained an elusive mirage for millions of Nigerians, as well being a major factor underlying Nigeria’s economic woes. There is no prosperous nation, despite it’s natural endowments and strategic location on the globe, that is not backed by a robust power sector. Series of past Nigerian leaders appeared to champion national industrialisation. Apparently, they were not oblivious of the fact that industrialisation runs on the backbone of sufficient, steady, or predictable, electricity. Their past posturings notwithstanding, industrialisation has remained elusive while electricity for basic household uses remains a prayer point for most Nigerians, 62 years after colonial independence. According to reports, electricity power generation in Nigeria began in 1886 when two generating sets were installed to serve the then colony of Lagos while later in 1951, the Electricity Corporation of Nigeria (ECN) was established by an Act of Parliament. Shortly after Independence in 1962, the Niger Dams Authority (NDA) was established for the development of hydroelectric power.
Ten years later in 1972, both ECN and NDA were merged into the infamous the National Electric Power Authority, NEPA with the responsibility of generating, transmitting and distributing electricity across Nigeria. Similar to most post-independence government establishments, NEPA’s failures ranked those of the defunct NITEL and the Nigerian Airways. 32 years later, during the Olusegun Obasanjo – led civilian administration’s privatisation drives in 2004, NEPA was privatised into government-owned Power Holding Company of Nigeria (PHCN). As if there was something ominous about the phrase ‘Power Holding’ in PHCN which still held the free flow of electricity, PHCN was quickly unbundled, following an Electric Power Sector Reform (EPSR) Act of March 2005, to enable private companies participate in electricity generation, transmission, and distribution, in a wave of reforms that also swept off poorly performing NITEL. The Act also created the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) as an independent regulator for the energy sector.
The PHCN was unbundled into eleven electricity Distribution Companies (DisCos), six Generating Companies (GenCos), and a Transmission Company (TCN). Unfortunately, while the federal government privatised the GenCos and DisCos, it retained ownership of the TCN which then stood as a stifling bottleneck to both the production and consumption ends in the electricity business, by ‘holding’ central monopoly as the sole receiver of all generated electricity from the GenCos and the sole suppler to the DisCos, whereas government should have been only a regulator via the NERC, or at most an equal competitor like MTEL in the telecoms sector. It is therefore noteworthy that its the participation of government via TCN in the electricity business processes that holds the flow of power. Is it not abnormal that the TCN which does not bear the business risks nor benefits of investing in electricity generation or distribution infrastructure, solely manages electricity transmission network in the country? What is the stake of the TCN, and what motivates its priorities?
It is no wonder the TCN has not done the much needed overhaul of its inherited, dilapidated transmission infrastructure. As the energy sector continues to slumber in Nigeria, it is imperative to compare Nigeria with its African peers. According to the US Energy Information Administration’s 1980 – 2021 energy survey, most populous African nation, Nigeria with a population of over 220 million ranks 5th in energy production capacity at 11.7 Gigawatts, behind much less populated South Africa at 63.28 Gigawatts, serving a 60.41 million population, followed closely by Egypt at 60.07 Gigawatts, serving 112.7 million persons, Algeria at 21.69 Gigawatts for 48.6 million persons, and Morocco at 14.26 Gigawatts which serves 37.84 million persons.Nigeria ranks far lower if the comparison is computed on energy per head basis, where Libya which produces 10.53 Gigawatts for a 6.9 million population supplies over 1500 watts per head, Nigeria in comparison, supplies a paltry 52.18 watts per head. This is even lower, considering the actual power consumed due to transmission inefficiency, and the epileptic, unpredictable nature of our supply, unlike in West African neighbour, Ghana, where though production capacity is low at 5.35 Gigawatts for 34.12 million, the supply schedule is dependable to the extent that companies now exit Nigeria for Ghana due to power epilepsy, whereas their major markets remain in Nigeria.
Ghana is turning the Economic Commission of West African States’ free trade treaty to its advantage. Local businesses relocating to Ghana, a neighbouring country with stable electricity and a more business friendly environment, can produce and ship to countries within the ECOWAS free trade zone. In 2006, two of Nigeria’s leading tyre manufacturers, Michelin and Dunlop, relocated factories to Ghana citing epileptic energy supply in Nigeria as main reason. Other companies have since followed suit. The high unemployment rate, rapidly dwindling economy and a depreciating currency are some effects of these corporate decisions. South Africa and Botswana generate most of their electricity from coal to achieve more than 72 per cent universal electricity access in their respective countries, followed by Kenya and Senegal. Meanwhile Nigeria has rich coal and petroleum energy resources among others, that could be applied to boost its energy mix.
While the industrialised world has used fossil energy to hone their technologies to levels where universal electricity access through clean and renewable energy resources are now achievable, Nigeria would find it more difficult to use its fossils when global environmental conditions become critical, and may emerge as an old-fashioned polluter when, and IF, it does wake up. Considering that privatisation of the energy sector was a laudable reform, it emerged with a faulty structural constrictions posing as the TCN, which has knotted operators into a circle of vicious blame traders, whereas the much-needed commodity is kilowatt-hours. It is very obvious that the model of the reform structure that emerged in the telecoms sector would have been more appropriate as witnessed in the rapid transformations that followed the unbundling of NITEL, where government’s regulatory agency, the National Communications Commission, stood away from the daily operational processes of MTN, Econet, Glo and government-owned MTEL, enabling these operators to have end-to-end control of production, distribution and sales, as well as being able to solely pursue priorities that drive company objectives.
The manifesting benefits became outstanding, and transformational in proportions no one ever imagined. It is to the credit of Nigeria that these telecom companies, while competing to serve Nigerians, gained the enabling capacities that made them big international players. A vibrant energy company in Nigeria should have the enablement to independently plan its strategy, source its fuel, generate electricity, and distribute electricity directly to its consumers while NERC devises the appropriate energy metering modality and service ethics. It would be to the nation’s advantage if energy firms operate in a competitive environment by not allotting them exclusive coverage areas, a monopoly that breeds complacency. NERC should devise a means by which these firms run supply lines side by side in every part of Nigeria they have the capacity to operate. As every business is driven by profits and customer base, a company’s ability to control its business processes amidst competition, would enable it see the potentials that spur it towards innovations and expansion. Nigeria’s energy sector continues to slumber in the absence of total, private process control and free competition.
By: Joseph Nwankwo
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
Opinion
Betrayal: Vice Of Indelible Scar
The line that separates betrayal and corruption is very thin. Betrayal and corruption are two sides of the same coin. Like the snail and its shell they are almost inseparable. They go hand-in-globe. Betrayal and corruption are instinctive in humans and they are birthed by people with inordinate ambition – people without principles, without regard for ethical standards and values. Looking back to the days of Jesus Christ, one of his high profile disciples-the treasurer, was a betrayer. Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus Christ for just 30 pieces of silver. One of the characteristics of betrayers is greed.
So, when on resumption from his imposed suspension, the Rivers State Governor, Sir Siminilayi Fubara threatened to bring permanent secretaries who were found complicit in “defrauding” the State during the days of Locust and Caterpillar regime, he did not only decry a loot of the Treasury but the emotional trauma of betrayal perpetrated by those who swore to uphold the ethics of the civil service. Governor Siminilayi Fubara had least expected that those who feigned loyalty to his administration would soon become co-travellers with an alien administration whose activities were repugnant to the “Rivers First” mantra of his administration. The saying that if you want to prove the genuineness of a person’s love and loyalty feign death, finds consummate expression in the Governor Fubara and some of the key members of the State engine room
Some of those who professed love for Governor Siminilayi Fubara and Rivers State could not resist the lure and enticement of office in the dark days of Rivers State, like Judas Iscariot. Rather, they chose to identify with the locusts and the caterpillars for their selfish interest. Julius Caesar did not die from the stab of Brutus but by his emotional attachment to him, hence he exclaimed in utter disappointment, “Even you Brutus”. The wound of betrayal never heals and the scar is indelible. Unfortunately, today, because of gross moral turpitude and declension in ethical standards and values, betrayal and corruption are celebrated and rewarded. Corruption, a bane of civil/public service is sublime in betrayal. The quest to get more at the expense of the people is the root of betrayal and sabotage.
This explains why Nigeria at 65 is the World’s capital of poverty.
Nigeria is not a poor country, yet, millions are living in hunger, abject poverty and avoidable misery. What an irony. Nigeria, one of Africa’s largest economies and most populous nation is naturally endowed with 44 mineral resources, found in 500 geographical locations in commercial quantity across the country. According to Nigeria’s former Minister for Mines and Steel Development, Olamiekan Adegbite, the mineral resources include: baryte, kaolin, gymsium, feldspar, limestone, coal, bitumen, lignite, uranium, gold, cassiterite, columbite, iron ore, lead, zinc, copper, granite, laterite, sapphire, tourmaline, emerald, topaz, amethyst, gamer, etc. Nigeria has a vast uncultivated arable land even as its geographical area is approximately 923, 769 sq km (356,669 sq ml).
“This clearly demonstrates the wide mineral spectrum we are endowed with, which offers limitless opportunities along the value-chain, for job creation, revenue growth. Nigeria provides one of the highest rates of return because its minerals are closer to the suffer”, Adegbite said. Therefore, poverty in Nigeria is not the consequences of lack of resources and manpower but inequality, misappropriation, outright embezzlement, barefaced corruption that is systemic and normative in leaders and public institutions. According to the World Poverty Clock 2023, Nigeria has the awful distinction of being the world capital of poverty with about 84 million people living in extreme poverty today.
The National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) data also revealed that a total of 133 million people in Nigeria are classed as multi-dimensionally poor. Unemployment is a major challenge in the country. About 33 percent of the labour force are unable to find a job at the prevailing wage rate. About 63 percent of the population are poor because of lack of access to health, education, employment, and security. Nigeria Economic Summit Group (NESG) speculated that unemployment rate will increase to 37 percent in 2023. The implications, therefore, is increase in unemployment will translate to increase in the poverty rate. The World Bank, a Washington-based and a multi-lateral development institution, in its macro-poverty outlook for Nigeria for April 2023 projected that 13 million Nigerians will fall below the National Poverty line by 2025.
It further stated that the removal of subsidy on petroleum products without palliatives will result to 101 million people being poor in Nigeria. Statistics also show that “in 2023 nearly 12 percent of the world population of extreme poverty lived in Nigeria, considering poverty threshold at 1.90 US dollars a day”.Taking a cursory look at the Nigerian Development Update (NDU), the World Bank said “four million Nigerians were pushed into poverty between January and June 2023 and 7.1 million more will join if the removal of subsidy is not adequately managed.” These startling revelations paint a grim and bleak future for the social-economic life of the people.The alarming poverty in the country is a conspiracy of several factors, including corruption. In January, 2023 the global anti-corruption watchdog, Transparency International, in its annual corruption prospect index which ranks the perceived level of public sector corruption across 180 countries in the world says Nigeria ranked 150 among 180 in the index. Conversely, Nigeria is the 30th most corrupt nation in the ranking. It is also the capital of unemployment in the world.
Truth be told: a Government that is corruption-ridden lacks the capacity to build a vibrant economy that will provide employment for the teeming unemployed population. So crime and criminality become inevitable. No wonder, the incessant cases of violent crimes and delinquency among young people. Corruption seems to be the second nature of Nigeria as a nation . At the root of Nigerians’ poverty is the corruption cankerworm.How the nation got to this sordid economic and social precipice is the accumulation of years of corrupt practices with impunity by successive administrations. But the hardship Nigerians are experiencing gathered momentum between 2015 and 2023 and reached the climax few days after President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, who assumed power as president of Nigeria, removed the controversial petroleum subsidy. Since then, there is astronomical increase in transport fares, and prices of commodities. Living standard of most Nigerians is abysmally low, essential commodities are out of reach of the poor masses who barely eat once a day.
The Dollar to Naira exchange rate ratio at one dollar to N1,000, is the most economy-unfriendly in the annals of the history of Nigeria. The prohibitive prices of petroleum products with the attendant multi-dimensional challenges following the removal of the subsidy, has posed a nightmare better to be imagined than experienced. Inflation, has been on the increase, negatively affecting the purchasing power of low income Nigerians. Contributing to the poverty scourge is the low private investment due to.unfriendly business environment and lack of power supply, as well as low social development outcomes resulting in low productivity. The developed economies of the world are private sector-driven. So the inadequate involvement of the private sector in Nigeria’s economy, is a leading cause of unemployment which inevitably translates to poverty.
Igbiki Benibo
Opinion
Dangers Of Unchecked Growth, Ambition
In today’s fast-paced, hyper-competitive world, the pursuit of success and growth has become an all-consuming force. Individuals, organisations, and nations alike, are locked in a perpetual struggle to achieve more, earn more, and surpass their rivals. Yet, beneath this relentless drive for progress lies a silent danger—the risk of self-destruction. This perilous pattern, which I call the self-destruct trajectory, describes the path taken when ambition and growth are pursued without restraint, awareness, or moral balance. The self-destruct trajectory is fueled by an insatiable hunger for more—a mindset that glorifies endless expansion while disregarding the boundaries of ethics, sustainability, and human well-being. At first glance, it may appear to promise prosperity and achievement. After all, ambition has long been celebrated as a virtue. But when growth becomes the only goal, it mutates into obsession.
Individuals burn out, organisations lose their soul, and societies begin to fracture under the weight of their own excesses. The consequences are everywhere. People pushed beyond their limits face anxiety, exhaustion, and disconnection. Companies sacrifice employee welfare and social responsibility on the altar of profit. The entire ecosystems suffer as forests are cleared, oceans polluted, and air poisoned in the name of economic progress. The collapse of financial systems, widening income inequality, and global environmental crises are all symptoms of this same relentless, self-consuming pursuit. To understand this dynamic, one can turn to literature—and to Charles Dickens’ Oliver Twist. In one of the novel’s most haunting scenes, young Oliver, starving in the workhouse, dares to utter the words: “Please, sir, I want some more.” This simple plea encapsulates the essence of human desire—the urge for more. But it also mirrors the perilous craving that drives the self-destruct trajectory. Like Oliver, society keeps asking for “more”—more wealth, more power, more success—without considering the consequences of endless wanting.
The workhouse itself symbolises the system of constraints and boundaries that ambition often seeks to defy. Oliver’s courage to ask for more represents the daring spirit of human aspiration—but it also exposes the risk of defying limits without reflection. Mr. Bumble, the cruel overseer, obsessed with authority and control, embodies the darker forces that sustain this destructive cycle: greed, pride, and the illusion of dominance. Through this lens, Dickens’ tale becomes a timeless metaphor for the modern condition—a warning about what happens when ambition blinds compassion and growth eclipses humanity. Avoiding the self-destruct trajectory requires a radical rethinking about success. True progress should not be measured solely by accumulation, but by balance—by how growth serves people, planet, and purpose.
This calls for a more holistic approach to achievement, one that values sustainability, empathy, and integrity alongside innovation and expansion
Individuals must learn to pace their pursuit of goals, embracing rest, reflection, and meaningful relationships as part of a full life. The discipline of “enough”—knowing when to stop striving and start appreciating—can restore both mental well-being and moral clarity. Organisations, on their part, must reimagine what it means to succeed: prioritising employee welfare, practising environmental stewardship, and embedding social responsibility in the core of their mission. Governments and policymakers also play a vital role. They can champion sustainable development through laws and incentives that reward ethical practices and environmental responsibility. By investing in education, renewable energy, and equitable economic systems, they help ensure that ambition is channeled toward collective benefit rather than collective ruin.
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) provides a tangible pathway for this transformation. When businesses take ownership of their social and environmental impact—reducing carbon footprints, supporting local communities, and promoting fair labour—they not only strengthen society but also secure their own long-term stability. Sustainable profit is, after all, the only kind that endures. Ultimately, avoiding the self-destruct trajectory is not about rejecting ambition—it is about redefining it. Ambition must evolve from a self-centred hunger for more into a shared pursuit of the better. We must shift from growth at all costs to growth with conscience. The future will belong not to those who expand endlessly, but to those who expand wisely. By embracing restraint, compassion, and sustainability, we can break free from the cycle of self-destruction and create a new narrative—one where success uplifts rather than consumes, and where progress builds rather than burns.
In the end, the question is not whether we can grow, but whether we can grow without losing ourselves. The choice is ours: to continue along the self-destruct trajectory, or to chart a more balanced, humane, and enduring path toward greatness.
Sylvia ThankGod-Amadi
-
News22 hours agoEFCC Arrests 792 Suspects In Investment, Crypto Fraud Crackdown
-
News22 hours agoNew INEC Chair Pledges Free, Fair, Credible Polls
-
Nation22 hours agoNIOB President Calls For Innovation, Entrepreneurship In Housing Delivery
-
News21 hours agoNLNG, NCDMB Unveil ICT Centre In P’Harcourt To Boost Tech Skills
-
Business21 hours agoNigeria’s Gold, Other Solid Minerals Being Stolen – NEC
-
Niger Delta20 hours agoOando Recommits To Education …Assures Continuous Partnership With RSU
-
Politics20 hours agoReps Ask FG To Curb Arbitrary Rent Hike Nationwide
-
Opinion23 hours ago
Fuel Subsidy Removal and the Economic Implications for Nigerians
