There could have been hunger and poverty in the land in some degrees before now but certainly not at the level Nigerians have been confronted with the menace since the coming of this government. The truth is that Tinubu made a fundamental mistake on the day of his inauguration on May 29, 2023, when he whimsically removed the so-called subsidy on petroleum products and floated the foreign exchange market without putting on ground any strategy to absorb the consequent shock. That was the beginning of the current regime of hunger plaguing the country. Anything to the contrary is sheer buck-passing and cannot stand.
By Emeka Alex Duru
You would notice the unceasing efforts by the President, Bola Tinubu to absolve his administration of the economic crisis in the land and shift the blame to others. Before now, his foot soldiers had literally been on the loose, pushing the blame of the poor economic situation to preceding administrations. A common refrain was the claim that Tinubu inherited an economy that was on the verge of collapse. The intention was to portray him as being on redeeming mission to the nation, for which Nigerians owed him measures of gratitude.
Tinubu is forcefully latching onto the tune and becoming more audacious. The other day at the All Progressives Congress (APC) presidential campaign flag-off at Ranchers Bees Stadium in Kaduna, Tinubu went a step further by accusing the opposition political parties of creating the hunger and poverty in the country. He did not stop at that but scored his administration high for paying salaries and lauded the governors for embarking on development projects in their states.
He stated, “I hear my opponents talking about hunger. Who created it? They did. They created hunger and poverty. We are trying to eradicate them. We pay salaries regularly. Our governors are working, and I am proud of them. They are developing their states”. That was the crux of his reelection campaign flag-off speech. Curiously, he skipped addressing the ravaging insecurity in the land, the continuous crash of the naira, the worrisome youth unemployment, rising national debt and galloping inflation under his administration. Incidentally, while Tinubu humoured himself with the phantom claims, his fawning listeners cheered and ululated. But they knew that he was not saying the truth.
Of course, there could have been hunger and poverty in the land in some degrees before now but certainly not at the level Nigerians have been confronted with the menace since the coming of this government. The truth is that Tinubu made a fundamental mistake on the day of his inauguration on May 29, 2023, when he whimsically removed the so-called subsidy on petroleum products and floated the foreign exchange market without putting on ground any strategy to absorb the consequent shock. That was the beginning of the current regime of hunger plaguing the country. Anything to the contrary is sheer buck-passing and cannot stand.
READ ALSO:
2027: Tinubu doesn’t have energy, competence to run Nigeria — Obi
There are even statistics that point at the President and his shoddy policies as drivers of the economic uncertainties in the land. Let us take the pump prices of petrol for instance. During the Olusegun Obasanjo presidency (1999–2007), the pump price of petrol ranged from ₦20 to ₦75 per litre across several adjustments. Correspondingly, the peak cost of a 50kg bag of rice at the time was about ₦5,000. When President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua took over in 2007, he lowered the price of petrol from ₦75 to ₦65 per litre after reversing an increase made in the final days of the Obasanjo administration. The price remained fixed at ₦65 per litre throughout his presidency. Comparatively, for the three years of the administration (2007-2010) 50kg bag of rice was sold at about ₦3,500 to ₦8,500, depending on the specific year and type.
The succeeding Goodluck Jonathan administration inherited a ₦65 per litre petrol pump price from Yar’Adua. On January 1, 2012, the price jumped to ₦141 per litre after the government attempted to remove the fuel subsidy. Following nationwide protests, the government adjusted the price to ₦97 per litre on January 16, 2012. In February 2015, the price was further reduced to ₦87 per litre. During the period, the price of a 50kg bag of rice ranged between ₦7,000 and ₦13,000, depending on the year, brand, and market location.
Under the President Muhammadu Buhari administration (2015–2023), the pump price of petrol ranged from ₦87 to about ₦195 per litre. During the period, the price of a 50kg bag of rice increased significantly from about ₦18,000 at the start of his tenure in 2015 to around ₦38,000 – ₦52,000 or slightly higher in some areas, due largely to the government’s border closure policy.
Tinubu’s inauguration in 2023 and his instant removal of petrol subsidy, caused prices to jump immediately from about ₦195–₦210 to a range of ₦488 to ₦617 per litre depending on the region. Prices have since then, hovered between ₦1,350 and ₦1,450 or ₦1,500 per litre in some instances. In sharp response, a 50kg bag of rice currently costs between ₦54,000 and ₦62,000 in regular markets. Prices had previously peaked as high as ₦100,000 to ₦120,000 at a time under the administration.
In the midst of the rising prices of fuel and high cost of basic food items, the national minimum wage remains N70,000 with some states yet to key into the payment obligation. How else does the President define creation of hunger and poverty? Of course, global finance agencies and government image managers, can humour the president with doing much in re-engineering the economy. But the practical economy which the man on the street or the woman in the village understands, is that which impacts the prices of basic items and standard of living. That, for now, is discouraging.
Consider also the rate at which major multinational companies and foreign investments have fully exited, scaled back, or restructured their operations in Nigeria since President Tinubu took office in May 2023. The list includes, Equinor, the Norwegian energy company that completed the sale of its Nigerian operations (including its 20.21% stake in the Agbami oil field) to Chappal Energies for $1.2 billion in late 2023/December 2024; Kimberly-Clark, which closed its manufacturing facility and office in Lagos, halting local production of Huggies and Kotex; Shoprite, a retail franchise that wrapped up and closed its operations completely by March 2026.
In May 2024, Microsoft, closed its African Development Centre (ADC) in Lagos. Earlier in 2023, Procter & Gamble (P&G): ended local manufacturing and shifted to an import-only model for its products. Also, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), terminated direct commercial operations and transitioned to a third-party distribution model.
Reports from industry bodies like the Manufacturing Association of Nigeria (MAN) and financial analysts, attribute the departures to: severe foreign exchange (FX) scarcity and naira devaluation/floating; soaring inflation and high energy/operating costs and weakened local consumer purchasing power.
While the companies exit, scale down or fold up, the profile of unemployment rises, carrying with it the dangers of hunger, poverty and insecurity. According to the World Bank’s Nigeria Development Update, the poverty rate in the country stands at 63%, impacting approximately 140 million people. Nigeria’s total public debt under Tinubu had as of June 30, 2026, reached ₦166.79 trillion (roughly $120.9 billion) as, according to data from the Debt Management Office.
As if these were not enough, in October 2026, President Tinubu submitted a request to the National Assembly for approval of an additional $20.52 billion and €1.045 billion ($21.67 billion combined) in fresh external loans under the 2026–2027 borrowing plan, which could push total public debt toward the ₦200 trillion threshold if fully realized. This is in contrast to the debt profile of ₦87.38 trillion the administration inherited while coming on board.
The immediate consequence is mortgaging the future of the even the unborn children, especially when the loans are not being channeled to production purposes. In such situation, it would be hard for the country to escape from the piteous pit of hunger and poverty.
Tinubu in blaming his opponents for the hunger and poverty amongst Nigerians, amounts to admission of failure and abdication of responsibility. He is by that, confirming the observations by literary icon, Chinua Achebe, in ‘The trouble with Nigeria’, that “the trouble with Nigeria is simply and squarely the failure of leadership…the unwillingness or inability of its leaders to rise to the responsibility, to the challenge of personal example which are the hallmarks of true leadership”.
Who, in any case, are these Tinubu’s imaginary opponents that created the hunger in the land that he claims to be battling? Is it Atiku Abubakar, the Presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), who left office as Vice President nearly 20 years ago? Or is it Peter Obi, the flag bearer of Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC), who has never been president? Could the President be referring to the Buhari administration that he admitted playing key role in bringing to bear and sustenance?
He is simply running away from the realities of the day and hiding behind a finger. Peter Obi is therefore right that President Tinubu does not have the energy and resolve required to lead Nigeria today and should go home. That is putting it mildly. The president has failed! And Nigerians should do well in showing him the way out in 2027.
