37
TUESDAY, JANUARY 10, 2012
POLITICS THE NATION
E-mail:- politics@thenationonlineng.net
Can the National Assembly muster the strength to resist implementation of the fuel subsidy removal that has provoked a nationwide protest against the federal government? SANNI ONOGU writes on the challenge faced by the federal legislature in mediating the government/labour face-off.
National Assembly quakes over subsidy removal
I
T was an extraordinary move. On Sunday, the House of Representatives took an unprecedented step as it cut short its recess to consider the national debate on fuel subsidy removal. The legislators had enough time to air their views on the state of the nation and the step taken by the executive in unilaterally removing the subsidy and the pending national strike called by Organised Labour that threatened to shut down the nation. Although the Senate did not complement the step taken by the lower House, its members, too, were at work, attempting to avert the strike which some members said could provoke national crisis. The announcement of the subsidy withdrawal by the Petroleum Products Pricing and Regulatory Agency (PPPRA) on New Year day was expected by the lawmakers. Attempts to debate it in the Senate before going on recess instantly collapsed. Although some senators spoke against the removal when it was clear there was no provision for subsidy in the 2012 Appropriation Bill presented to the National Assembly by President Goodluck Jonathan, many PDP legislators saw it as a ‘no go area’. Senators who opposed the removal were mainly of the opposition Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN). PDP legislators may have seen the policy, at that time, as “family affair”. They chose to keep quiet to avoid being seen as rocking the boat. However, the House spoke loud and clear. As the Senators were frolicking and looking up to their imminent Christmas and New Year break, the House erupted in stiff opposition to the idea. Representatives took up the battle on behalf of the masses. The Chairman, House Committee on Media and Public Affairs, Zakari Mohammed, said the House would continue to side with the suffering Nigerian masses. “We are here to do the bidding of Nigerians; we are prepared to do whatever Nigerians want us to do. So far, they have said they do not want the removal of subsidy. As a House, we have long given our position on this matter. We do not support the proposal. We are on the same page with Nigerians as far as this issue is concerned.” The Senate, in its reaction to the subsidy removal which has resulted in astronomical increases in prices of fuel, goods and services, said it is yet to decide on the matter. It added that it would continue to “support every effort of the President to make life better for the Nigerian people, so long as such efforts would be in the interest of the vast majority of the people.” The Chairman, Senate Committee on Information, Media and Public Affairs, Senator Eyinnaya Abaribe, said: “The Senate heard
•Mark
of the commencement of full deregulation of the downstream sector of the petroleum industry by the express and immediate removal of subsidy on Premium Motor Spirit (PMS) by the PPPRA. The Senate is yet to take a final decision on the issue. “While it is true that there was no provision for subsidy in the 2012 budget proposal, the senate still believes that consultation is still going on, which means the senate is yet to reach a consensus on the matter. “This can only be done when the budget bill is considered and final decision taken on it. You will recall that senators held different positions when the issue came on the floor. So, the prevailing situation will not vitiate the ongoing consultation, which must take full cognizance of the general mood and also of utmost economic benefit to the country. “However, the Senate will always support every effort of the President to make life better for the Nigerian people, so long as such efforts would be in the interest of the vast majority of the people.” The National Assembly’s reaction to the crisis underscores the difference between the two chambers. Unlike the Senate, the House, said Deputy Minority Leader, Hon. Abdurahman Kawu (ANPP/ Kano), would do everything possible to stop the
• Tambuwal
controversial policy, when it resumes from the Christmas break. Kawu said: “We will use the law to stop this inhuman act. It’s another form of terrorism against Nigerians who are already impoverished. We will not fail to salvage them from this bondage and enslavement. This is another form of terrorism against the Nigerian people which we as their true representatives will not allow.” After a long debate, the Houseresolved that the executive should suspend the withdrawal to allow for more dialogue. The National Assembly cannot deny the fact that the executive had given it a long notice that the subsidy regime was no longer tenable and thus, would be jettisoned this year. President Jonathan had, in the 2012-2014 Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) and Fiscal Strategy Paper (FSP)in September last year , hinted that fuel subsidy would be scrapped in 2012. Now that the cat is out of the bag and with Nigerians roling and boiling, it is left to be seen on whose side the legislature would stand. While analysts believe that the Aminu Tambuwal-led House would be true to type by opposing the move, the Senate, whose President David Mark is rumoured to have presidential ambition for 2015, may take a
different approach. The upper chamber of the National Assembly has not hidden the fact that it, at least tacitly, aupports subsidy removal. Abaribe had in a statement lent credence to this assertion when he urged labour not to embark on strike, but should rather negotiate with government. He also called on the Federal Government to ensure that its promised palliatives are implemented as soon as possible. The Senate’s position, observers argue, runs counter to public opinion. Abaribe said: “The Senate is concerned over the impact of a total shut down of the national economy, which the threat of strike action by organized labour will cause. “The Senate is also worried that the Nigerian people especially the ordinary ones would ultimately be at the receiving end of the planned strike and mass protest. Of utmost worry to the Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is that such protest and total shut down of the country portends greater danger to the polity especially in the face of prevailing security situation. “Consequently, the Senate appeals to Organised Labour- Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) and the Trade Union Congress (TUC)to reconsider their stand and continue with dialogue, which the Presidency has expressed its readiness to so do. “Labour must of necessity explore the dialogue table and for the sake of Nigeria explore the opportunities provided by the readiness of government to further negotiate. ”Also, the Senate urges the presidency to do everything possible to avert the ugly situation, by not only fast tracking the implementation of the palliative measures, but also to vigorously pursue meaningful negotiation with the organized labour. “The Senate therefore, calls on well-meaning Nigerians to intervene in other to avoid further deterioration of the already precarious situation. The senate however appeals to the government and labour to put the interest of Nigeria first in trying to resolve the impasse.” Now that the House has set up committees to mediate the crisis, many members of the Labour/Civil Society coalition would have preferred a stronger resolution on the side of the people. The last time Nigerians were called on the streets, it was over the need to have an Acting President in view of the prolonged absence of the late Alhaji Umaru Yar’Adua. The people won the battle. Earlier, when the Obasanjo administration took the unpopular stance of tenure elongation, the people were called out. Again, they won. It remains to be seen who will win the subsidy battle: the people or the government.
Subsidy removal: ‘Where government erred’ House of Representatives member Eseme Eyiboh spoke with Assistant Editor ONYEDI OJIABOR on the subsidy crisis and other issues.
W
HAT is your reaction to the withdrawal of the fuel subsidy by the federal government despite opposition by the people? The fact is that everybody has come to the conclusion that the economy should be deregulated and that subsidy should be removed. But the complaint and protest is basically about the procedures adopted. Some said that certain percentage should have been done; others said that government should have prepared the people’s minds and other positions like that. But nobody is contesting the desirability for the removal of subsidy. Again, there is no way the removal could have taken place without its attendant backlash, which include hardship, rise in prices of goods and ser-
vices. Government also has a responsibility which it did not fully discharge, the responsibility of public education and enlightenment on the desirability for subsidy removal. Because the common person and some Nigerians who are complaining and who are actually the victims of the backlash do not even understand what the thing is all about, who is benefiting and who is not benefiting. The conflict is arising from a communication gap. Secondly, there has been this issue of mistrust between the governed and the government over time. The average person is not thinking that government would be honest in the implementation and usage of the proceeds of subsidy. That brings to the fore the roles and responsibilities of the National Assembly regarding appropriation and oversight. How this
money would be properly accounted for through appropriation, how this money would be accounted for after appropriation, oversight so that the attendant benefits arising from the policy will directly affect positively the lives of the people. But government overlooked most of the things those opposed to removal of subsidy asked it to do before the action. One of them was fixing the refineries… That is what I’m saying; that there is no disagreement on the desirability of the withdrawal of subsidy. But the issue is the procedure. Part of the procedure is creating the safety net, maybe there ought to have been a filter in place so that whatever is the backlash or the negative impact arising from it would be absorbed by the filter,
which they call safety net. Subsidy as it is operated in Nigeria is that government is subsidizing consumption and not production. So we all agreed that government has to step up production because it is actually production that has to be subsidized. Withdraw subsidy from consumption but plough it into production. Step up the game. And most of what we discussed came out of the last roundtable organized by The Initiatives which were properly articulated and captured in the communiqué and widely publicized. So it is the issue of procedure and building trust between the governed and the government. What informed the ‘Roundtable on Deregulation in an Emerging Economy’ organized by The Initiatives… • Continued on page 38