THE COLOURS OF FUEL SUBSIDY REMOVAL

“Thank you, professor, you haven’t exactly answered my question, but we have to go now.”  That was a television interviewer. The professor?  Rufai Alkali. He is the National Publicity Secretary of the ruling party, and as expected, he came on air to speak for the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP. He was one of many party faces to have come on air. That is apart from the government officials who were deployed en masse to speak in favour of fuel subsidy removal. Round-tripping was a colour in all of this so far.

Oil importers who brought one oil tanker to port, and who repeatedly offloaded and collected payment made for subsidy on the same tanker owned the word, round-tripping. Some government officials, and  pro-protesters public speakers did the same in the current saga. They clustered the few media spaces and repeated the same thing over and over again.

They even made fantastic claims, and in the process misinformed Nigerians. At a stage, the television interviewer had to stop Rufai Alkali, for instance: “You say government wants to take subsidy from fuel and use it to subsidize health, education; I don’t think that is what it is.” She was right; but more importantly, it was part of what Nigerians got in this war of attrition over removal of fuel subsidy. Even those who should know simply dished out whatever came first to their mind in the name of defending a government policy. There had been a lack of thorough grasp of what this was all about right from the start, politics apart.
 “This court has not made any pronouncements on civil societies.” That was from the Chief Registrar of the National Industrial Court, NIS. It was part of a press statement that debunked words from government officials that  Nigerian Labour Congress, NLC, and Trade Union Congress, TUC, should respect an NIS order retraining them from embarking on strike actions. And the government had been dragged to the International Court of Justice, ICJ. Human rights group said President Goodluck Jonathan would have to answer questions over the activities of his securities agencies in the course of the street protests led by labour leaders. Unlike every member of the executive that spoke the language of the government over fuel subsidy removal, the judiciary spoke for itself.

Labour got its eighteen thousand naira minimum wage demand granted; it smiled in victory. The thirty six state governors had demanded withdrawal of subsidy before they agreed to pay minimum wage. Now that their demand was granted, Labour cried foul. Ekiti state government came up with palliative measures though – ten mass transit buses were distributed. “It is because as governors, we are part of the decision, and we know the way the mind of the federal government is working,” Ekiti state governor said to his people whom he offered relief. Rivers State came out earlier. Its governor gave more buses, and he fixed prizes too, in fifty naira, seventy naira, and one hundred naira for routes essentially in the state capital. And the federal government was even quicker. Slightly over one thousand mass transit buses as part of a palliative measure for One hundred and sixty seven million Nigerians -  to be run by road transport workers in the private sector. Lagos State government alone has some five hundred mass transit buses plying routes across the state, yet it has not solved all its transport problems. Hasty decisions, decisions that were not the outcome of a carefully thought plan. It is typical.

The president would travel to South Africa to attend the centenary celebration of the founding of the African National Congress, ANC. That was the announcement two days to the planned strike action that Labour threatened. The president was still in town, delivering a national address in which he promised pay cuts in the salaries of his officials, commissioning mass transit buses at the time the strike action eventually began. No one leaves fire on his rooftop and goes to sleep.

Labour had promised that a reversal to the sixty five naira fuel price was its condition to leave the street, and it would not engage in dialogue because the government had broken the table for dialogue. It had since engaged in dialogue with the government, though it still insisted on reversal to status quo. Days into the protests, government officials vowed there shall be no reversal of fuel price. They said anyone who called the president names, called his name in vain, and called it with contempt, would be summarily dealt with. Government had ordered civil servants to work, vowed to invoke the rule of no-work-no-pay, but there were no workers at work. Someone would blink first.

Officials of the ruling party had become foot soldiers for the government. On the other hand, members of the opposition party spoke at rallies in support of protesters. And they availed themselves the opportunities it afforded to strike at the heels of those in power, giving excitement with speeches that were similar to those heard at political rallies -  mostly lacking in content and alternatives,  except for abuses and lots of Latin words that hearers were cajoled to repeat. Broadcasting stations routinely shared ruling party and opposition party members among themselves to say the same thing over and over again. After critics said enlightenment about the removal of subsidy was low among the citizens that hit the street, broadcasting stations had smiled to the bank with revenue from hastily packaged advertorials. And what of voice-overs that sounded like someone was speaking above the heads of those the advertorials were meant to address, as well as the models that made the entire set up look like children at play. Another market emerged out of a crisis, money flowed in every direction, but none for those that walked distances, sweated and bought packaged water as they protested against subsidy removal.

 Some security agencies spoke the vocabularies of human right groups in the process. A thing that was long expected based on the good record of the Nigerian police whenever they engaged in United Nations operations abroad. Human rights have to be respected, both for protesters and those who choose not to protest; those were the words of the Inspector General (IG) of Police, and his men often drove in the opposite direction of where protesters gathered, an avoidance tactic that had reduced casualties somewhat. And government officials too spoke like the IG. People have the right to protest, but they should do so within the ambit of the law, they said. But there had been accusations in government circle that some comments at protest rallies could count for treason if they were microscopically checked. Threats and expected civilized comments in the public space over human rights concerns came in equal measures. At least, everyone was conscious of the court at the Hague for the first time in the history of Nigeria.

And Lawmakers were not left out. Representatives called themselves back to the dome from a recess, and they gathered on a Sunday. They claimed they had the power to do so; they demanded that the government reversed itself to sixty five naira, gave a standing ovation to their Speaker when he read out their opinion on the matter, then they said both Labour and Government should engage in dialogue, and just as quickly appointed themselves the umpire in  the dialogue, over an  issue in which they had already sided with Labour. Democracy in action!

Tunji Ajibade is a Communications Consultant. tunjioa@yahoo.com.