Mr. President, Nigeria’s hunger crisis should not become another battleground for partisan accusations. The country has more urgent priorities, and millions of families cannot afford to wait indefinitely for politicians to settle their differences. The immediate concern should be how to make food affordable, protect livelihoods and restore hope to households struggling to survive.
By Shu’aibu Usman Leman
President Bola Ahmed Tinubu said in Kaduna on Saturday, October 24, 2026 while inaugurating his 2027 campaign that “I hear my opponents talking about hunger. Who created it? They did. They created the hunger. They created the poverty. We are trying to eradicate it.”
With respect, Mr. President, this assertion deserves closer examination. Hunger is too serious a national problem to be reduced to a political contest over who is to blame. Nigerians do not buy food with political slogans; they buy it with money. Unfortunately, for millions of households, the money they earn can no longer buy as much food and other necessities as it once did. The hardship facing ordinary Nigerians demands an honest assessment of its causes, including the policies and decisions of the present administration.
Consider the cost of living. Following the removal of the petrol subsidy on your first day in office, prices rose dramatically, reaching between ₦1,400 and ₦1,500 per litre at certain points in many parts of the country. Although prices vary by location and period, the increase has been substantial.
The consequences extend far beyond the filling station. Transport fares have increased, businesses spend more money moving their goods, and traders face higher costs bringing food from farms to markets. These additional expenses are often passed on to consumers, who must pay more for the same goods. The removal of the subsidy therefore affected not only motorists but also families struggling to afford food and other basic necessities.
The weakening of the naira has added to the problem. Following the government’s foreign-exchange reforms, the naira lost considerable value. In simple terms, when the naira loses value, Nigerians need more money to buy goods from abroad.
READ ALSO:
Counterfeit products: When greed becomes weapon of mass destruction
This matters because Nigerian businesses depend on imported machinery, fertilisers, raw materials and other essential supplies. When these items become more expensive, the cost of producing goods also rises. Business owners often respond by increasing their prices, leaving consumers to bear much of the burden.
Rice provides a clear illustration of the pressure on household budgets. A bag that sold for approximately ₦30,000 in May 2023 subsequently rose to around ₦90,000–₦100,000 at certain points in many markets. Prices vary by location and quality, but the reality is that many families now struggle to afford one of the country’s most important staple foods.
Can the hardship associated with these increases reasonably be blamed on the opposition? Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi did not implement your administration’s petrol subsidy and foreign-exchange policies. While the opposition must offer credible alternatives and support its criticisms with facts, the government’s economic record cannot be defended simply by accusing its critics of creating public dissatisfaction.
Blaming the opposition does not make food cheaper, just as blaming previous governments does not relieve the present administration of its responsibilities. A fair assessment must acknowledge that Nigeria’s economic problems did not begin with your administration. Before May 2023, the country already faced insecurity, inflation, rising public debt and longstanding weaknesses in economic management.
For eight years, Nigeria was governed by the All Progressives Congress under President Muhammadu Buhari. The APC is the same political party to which you belong. During that period, Nigerians experienced serious economic difficulties and persistent insecurity. It would therefore be unfair to suggest that all the country’s problems began when you assumed office.
Equally, it would be unreasonable to expect Nigerians to ignore the consequences of policies introduced since May 2023 simply because some problems existed before then. Inheriting a troubled economy does not make a new administration responsible for every existing problem, but neither does it excuse that administration from responsibility for its own decisions.
The concerns raised by traditional rulers and political leaders outside the opposition also deserve attention. The Emir of Katsina reportedly expressed concern about the hardship confronting ordinary Nigerians, including difficulties affecting farming communities and the reported closure of schools in parts of the state. Such concerns should be examined on their merits, regardless of who raises them.
Borno State Governor Babagana Zulum has also raised concerns about children who are out of school. The figure of 800,000 cited in connection with these concerns should be verified against the relevant statement and reporting. However, the wider problem remains significant, that many children in northern Nigeria continue to miss out on education.
These issues are connected to the country’s hunger crisis. When insecurity prevents farmers from cultivating their land, food production suffers. When communities cannot safely reach their farms, livelihoods are threatened. When families lose their means of earning a living, their ability to afford food diminishes. Insecurity, poverty and hunger reinforce one another.
When traditional rulers raise concerns about insecurity, governors speak about children missing school, and citizens complain about food prices, the government should examine the evidence and respond with practical solutions. Such concerns should not be dismissed simply because they draw attention to the government’s difficulties.
The broader lesson from political thinkers such as Niccolò Machiavelli is that leadership requires an understanding of reality as it is, not as leaders would like it to be. The reality in Nigeria today is that many hardworking citizens can no longer afford the necessities of life. Farmers, traders, civil servants, artisans and small-business owners continue to work, yet their earnings buy considerably less than before.
This brings us to an important point, the problem is not only how much people earn, but also how much their earnings can buy. When the prices of food, transport, rent and medicine rise faster than incomes, people become poorer in practical terms, even if their salaries remain unchanged.
You have pointed to the regular payment of salaries as evidence of your administration’s efforts. Paying salaries on time is important and should be acknowledged wherever it is achieved. However, a worker earning the ₦70,000 national minimum wage may receive a salary regularly and still struggle to feed a family, pay rent and cover transport costs.
The question is not merely whether the salary arrives on time, but whether it can meet the worker’s basic needs. A regular salary is important, Mr. President, but its purchasing power matters just as much. Workers should not have to choose between feeding their families, paying for healthcare and keeping their children in school.
There is a legitimate argument for reforming Nigeria’s economy. The petrol subsidy placed considerable pressure on government finances, while longstanding problems in the foreign-exchange system created difficulties for businesses and the wider economy. Successive administrations struggled to address these challenges. However, the fact that reform is necessary does not mean that every decision about how to implement it is automatically right.
Government must consider how its decisions affect ordinary people, particularly those with little money to fall back on. When food prices rise faster than wages, families are forced to buy less, reduce the quality of their meals or sacrifice other essential needs. For wealthier households, rising prices may mean reduced spending on luxuries. For poorer families, they may mean fewer meals, delayed medical treatment or difficulty paying school fees.
Economic policies must therefore be judged not only by government announcements or reports about the economy, but also by their effects on people’s daily lives. If your administration believes its reforms will eventually bring prosperity, it should explain the progress achieved, acknowledge the difficulties that remain and demonstrate what it is doing to protect vulnerable households while the reforms take effect.
The opposition, for its part, must offer practical alternatives rather than rely solely on public dissatisfaction. Political criticism is more useful when supported by facts and credible proposals. But political disagreement does not make the suffering of ordinary Nigerians, imaginary. The existence of partisan interests does not invalidate the experiences of citizens struggling to meet their daily needs.
Nigerians do not need an opposition politician to tell them that food has become expensive. They discover it when they enter the market. They do not need a press conference to tell them that transport fares have risen. They experience it during their daily journeys. They do not need a campaign speech to tell them that their earnings are insufficient. They know it when they calculate their household expenses. The hardship is real, regardless of which political party chooses to talk about it.
A government that wishes to reduce hunger must improve security so that farmers can return to their farms without fear. It must support agricultural production, improve the movement of food from farms to markets and help vulnerable households cope with rising living costs. It must also pursue policies that enable workers and small-business owners to earn enough to meet their basic needs.
Mr. President, Nigeria’s hunger crisis should not become another battleground for partisan accusations. The country has more urgent priorities, and millions of families cannot afford to wait indefinitely for politicians to settle their differences. The immediate concern should be how to make food affordable, protect livelihoods and restore hope to households struggling to survive.
Your ambition for a second term, or any claim to continued public confidence, must ultimately be judged by your administration’s record. Nigerians want to see workers earn enough to meet their basic needs, farmers work without fear of attack, food become more affordable and families meet their daily expenses without constant anxiety.
You are entitled to defend your policies and explain why you believe they are necessary. Nigerians, in turn, are entitled to judge those policies by their consequences. The opposition must scrutinise the government, but blaming political opponents does not explain away the hardship facing millions of citizens. Likewise, blaming previous administrations does not remove the responsibility to act today.
The real question is not which political party can escape blame for Nigeria’s difficulties. It is what must be done, who must do it and how quickly the lives of ordinary Nigerians can improve. The government must accept responsibility for its decisions, the opposition must offer credible alternatives, and all public officials must recognise that the welfare of Nigerians should come before partisan interests.
Hunger is too serious a national concern to be reduced to a contest of political blame. It demands honesty about its causes, accountability for policy decisions and a determined effort to restore the purchasing power and dignity of Nigerian households. Mr. President, history will judge your administration not merely by the intentions behind its reforms, but by whether those reforms make life better for the people they are meant to serve. The success of any government is measured not simply by what it promises, but by whether ordinary citizens can afford to live with dignity.
