FG’s unsure SURE-P policy

President Goodluck JOnathan

By Paul Arhewe

The imbroglio that greeted Federal Government's petrol subsidy removal in January coerced it to quickly embark on transformational campaigns. The Goodluck Jonathan administration used every available media and forums to propagate what Nigerians stand to benefit if the total subsidy on the produce is discarded. Palliatives to cushion the foretold suffering the common masses would experience when the full policy implementations began were hurriedly both announced and promise.

No sooner the representatives of Federal Government and Nigerian Labour Congress (NLC) met to broker partial removal of subsidy than the government put on a new garb and changed its transformational campaigns into a transitional paradigm. To me, that overt departure was the initial signs signifying that the surety in this Subsidy Reinvestment and Empowerment (SURE) Programme (SURE-P) is really uncertain.

Government, through the Neighbour to Neighbour Initiative, advertised its intentions to adequately utilise the saved funds from discarded oil subsidy policy in truly transforming Nigeria. Statements like Imagine how N1.3 trillion would transform the critical sector of Nigeria's economy, were one of the many soothing words then from a government that seemed determined to deliver on its promises. However, as Labour shielded its sword and suspended the weeklong strike, the next day Nigerians were greeted with front page adverts on newspapers, bearing message that is a total departure from previous ones. The President was quoted, If I cannot leave good roads for the youth, if I cannot leave good hospitals for them, the least I can do for them is not to leave debts for them.

Last month a report had it that the Presidency was seeking the approval of the National Assembly to borrow $7.9 billion (about N1.264 trillion) from the World Bank, African Development Bank, Islamic Development Bank, EXIM Bank of China and Indian lines of credit. This move is coming just a month that Nigerians were promised no debt would be left for them, even if the much cherished improved infrastructure and better life is not fort coming. One wonders what magic government would do after collecting such huge loan and still think it would leave the country debt free at the end of its administration.

No wonder, Professor Tam David-West urged the National Assembly not to approve the loan, describing the move as financial misadventure. Government's sincerity in all its programmes and policies should always be transparent so as to attract the total support of the people. When those who lead us say one thing and go on to do the direct opposite, then there is no immediate hope for salvaging the gloomy situation facing the country. Recent reports, though conflicting, show the Federal Government might not continue with its SURE Programme.

However, government was quick to deny that stance, saying it was misquoted. If the government has quickly jettisoned the SURE Programme which it launched with fanfare, then opposition to Jonathan government's fuel subsidy removal move had very solid support base.

The SURE Programme is loaded with promises: mass construction of roads across all parts of the country; improvement in power generation and supply; improvement in health care delivery; conducive learning environment; boosting agricultural productivity, and massive job opportunity creation. Indeed, Government is right when it seeks to adjust the original SURE-Programme, given the expected shortfall in revenue due to downward review of the pump head price of petrol from the initial N141 to N97.

The original SURE-P has N1.134 trillion as total reinvestment funds, with a US$90 per barrel benchmark; N478.49 billion of this money will go to the Federal Government, N411.03 billion to state governments, local governments will receive N203.23 billion, N9.86 billion to the Federal Capital Territory while N31.37 billion will be transferred to derivation and ecology, development of natural resources and stabilisation funds. Except government intend to pursue its full removal of subsidy on petrol in the nearest future, then there is a need to modify the aforementioned figures with the compromised pump price at N97.

Notwithstanding, to deny Nigerians these palliatives and the promised transformation to key sectors of the economy, would portray government as a bad negotiator that should not be trusted. The anticipated modified SURE Programme should be structured to accommodate and address those needs of the ordinary Nigerians. Even, as government has a shortfall in funds with the current partial deregulation, the successful implementation of the SURE policy to impact positively on the lives of Nigerians, no doubt, would spur support for future deregulation.