Notes From Atlanta

▼
Saturday, November 5, 2011


Biggest Scandal in Oil “Subsidy Removal”
Fraud
By Farooq A. Kperogi

To begin with, the idea that the Nigerian
government is subsidizing fuel for the
masses is a willfully double-tongued
twaddle. Only four kinds of people
believe that: the hopelessly ignorant, the
mentally subnormal, masochists with a perverse thirst for self-abasement, and
beneficiaries of real government
subsidies such as our indolent,
unproductive, and ruthlessly acquisitive
government officials and their equally
debauched cronies in the private sector. Many informed commentators have
conclusively proved that.

But there is an even more treacherous
scandal in this “oil subsidy” scam that the
Nigerian national media is either not
aware of or has chosen to ignore. Two weeks ago, when I compared fuel
prices among oil-producing nations of the
world and showed that Nigerians pay the
highest price for petrol even though they
receive the lowest minimum wage
among their peers, I actually did a gross disservice to my argument. The situation
is a lot worse than that. I will come back
to this point shortly.

I pointed out that the petrol I use for my
car in America burns A LOT SLOWER than
the one I use when I visit Nigeria,
meaning that, at the current rate,
Nigerians (with a miserable minimum
wage of N7,000 per month or about $45 per month— against America’s over
N180,000 minimum wage per month)
actually pay more than or about equal to
Americans for petrol. It takes a
remarkably heartless person to ignore
this heartrending fact. But that’s an issue for another day. A Nigerian online citizen investigator
who goes by the handle “Viscount”
revealed on a Nigerian Internet
discussion forum recently that Nigerians
not only pay the highest price for fuel in
OPEC; they also consume the worst imaginable grade of petrol among oil-
producing countries. That means
comparing fuel prices between Nigeria
and other oil-producing countries—or
even countries in Europe and North
America— is actually like comparing apples and oranges. These countries not only pay considerably
lower prices than us for high-quality
petrol, Nigerians have been paying
unconscionably high prices for toxic fuel
for the past 12 years, as you will see
shortly. And they will pay even more for it next year. If this is not sufficien t
reason to give up everything and
“occupy” Nigeria until the oppressors are
brought to a standstill, I don’t know what
is.

At the center of the tragic importation of
toxic petroleum products into Nigeria—
and other West African nations— is an
Amsterdam-based multinational
company called Trafigura. Keep that
name in mind as you read this. Many Nigerians know that the fuel they
consume domestically isn’t derived from
the crude oil their country exports. They
also know that they have one of the
world’s best and finest quality of crude
oil. What many of them don’t know is that the cabal of rapacious oil importers
that the Jonathan administration—and
the administrations that preceded him—
mollycoddle with “subsidies” actually
import toxic, low-quality oil that is not fit
for consumption in Europe or North America—or in any society that cares for
the welfare of its citizens. In 2010, a group of journalists from the
UK, Norway, and the Netherlands won a
prestigious international journalism
award for a series of investigative
reports they did on Trafigura’s barbarous
dumping of toxic petroleum waste on Cote d’Ivoire. The waste killed scores of
people and sickened thousands more. In
July 2010, an Amsterdam court found the
company guilty and fined it 1 million
euros. (The caustic petroleum residues
were dumped on Cote d’Ivoire on July 2, 2006). On June 24 this year, Afrol News, an
Africa-centered news agency, reported
that it had been “given documentation”
that shows that the same Trafigura that
was fined for dumping deleterious waste
on Ivoirians had offloaded “dangerous and poor gasoline [i.e., petrol]” in the
“Nigerian port of Lagos.” This toxic
petrol, which Nigerians have been
consuming for years and which our
governments “subsidize,” according to
the Afrol News report, “is highly unstable, not enduring sunlight exposure,
and will cause damage to vehicles. It will
also cause environmental damages due
to high sulphur values, and can therefore
cause human health damages. The
product is strictly illegal in Europe and the US, but may in some cases be within legal
quality and environment standards in
some West African countries.” But this wasn't a one-off occurrence. It's
been happening for over a decade. So,
ordinary Nigerians are being forced to
use their hard-earned money to buy
inordinately overpriced and
demonstrably harmful petroleum products. Yet the Nigerian government
says this isn’t bad enough; it wants to
increase fuel prices again next year. And
the government has no plans to repair
our refineries so that we can refine our
own crude domestically and bring down the cost of petrol. \
But the bigger scandal is that in January
this year, the Jonathan administration
signed a multi-billion-dollar annual
contract with the same Trafigura of toxic
fuel dumping infamy. And there was no due process in the award of the contract.
According to Business Day of January 4,
2011, “Under the agreement with the
Nigerian government, Trafigura is
expected to pick up Nigerian crude oil
and in return, supply her with refined products; but it is unclear why the firm,
which has supplied refined products to
Nigeria in the last 12 years, was
favoured for the deal. “Trafigura agreed to an annual contract
with the Nigerian National Petroleum
Corporation (NNPC) on the basis of taking
60,000 barrels of crude oil per day in
exchange for refined products such as
gasoline and gas oil of equivalent value estimated at around $3 billion a year.” An oil industry expert who spoke to
Business Day said just “$1 billion of the
amount would have put the four
refineries in proper shape.” When I wrote
two weeks ago that Nigerians were
faced with a choice between death and life, I didn’t even know about all these. I am going to leave the reader with
“Viscount”’s parting thoughts: “Nigeria will give Trafigura (confirmed
supplier of bad petrol), 60, 000 barrels of
oil per day in exchange for their mega
tonnes of DEADLY-sulphurous petrol! Yep,
Jonathan's government is paying a
foreign company to systematically KILL Nigerians. And poor Nigerians are being
asked to be happy jare! “So, Nigerians, when your brand new
Tokunbo engine knocks - just like that,
thank Trafigura! When your I-better-
pass-my-neighbour generator's fume
smells funny and leaves a film like Casper
the Ghost - just like that, thank Trafigura! When you are walking in Lagos, or any
other Nigeria [city], and you are
experiencing a choking sensation from
the mundane act of breathing in - just
like that, thank Trafigura! Nigeria!”

Pat utomi, those are peeps with brains that knows their onions whose phd can't be questioned. I wonder where the retardeen got his own.
Nonsense.

Fuel subsidy: ‘Jonathan can’t
convince Senators, Reps
December 18, 2011 Politics By Paul Odenyi

President Goodluck Jonathan was
unable to convince members of the
National Assembly on the imperative
to remove the subsidy on petrol at a
recent meeting, according to Hon.
Bimbo Daramola, a member of the House of Representatives, present at
the parley. Daramola exclusively
spoke to Sunday Vanguard. Read on…

Let us begin with the meeting
between the president and members
of the National Assembly at the State
House. How did it go?

First and foremost, a few of our
members felt that we should assert
ourselves as an arm of government
after assessing the implication of
having to go to see Mr. President in his
own turf. But reason prevailed and members felt this is not about
Goodluck Jonathan, it is about the
Presidency of this country, that, most
likely, the president will be talking to
us about Nigeria. This is the superior
argument that made us to go and listen to Mr. President. The National Assembly, particularly
the House of Representatives that I
have the privilege of being a member
of, we know too well that we will not
be parliamentarians if we are not
Nigerians in the first place. And then we felt that whatever the president
will be talking about will be anchored
on our country which is very dear to
every one of us. As we prepare for 2012, a number of
issues are on the ground and we felt
that Mr. President will have the
opportunity to broker an amity, close
ranks with us and make our
relationship seamless. Then we will be able to see his side of the story.
Like I said, a few members said, no,
he should come to us because that is
the way it should be. We prevailed on
them and so Mr. President had the
opportunity to speak to the 469 members. That would be the first time the
president was addressing the joint
session of the National Assembly even
if it happened in his on turf. Well, everyone of us who made it to
that meeting must be representing a
vital constituency in this country. So,
you may say that he was talking to
Nigerians but, because we did not
have the media in attendance, it could be compared to what we call
executive session in parliament. Hon. Bimbo Daramola He presided and there were some of
his ministers and the anchor person
was the Secretary to the Government
of the Federation (SGF), Senator
Anyim Pius Anyim. So we wanted to
extend the courtesy to the president to show we are not in adversarial
relationship but we must have a
relationship that recognizes that we
have a nation to administer. As the executive and the legislature,
one thing that binds us together is
that we must collectively address the
nation’s problems. On the strength of
this, we went to meet Mr. President. What we heard earlier was that it
was the Senate that really wanted to
see the president as a result of the
issues raised at a sitting of the Upper
House.

How did the invitation extend
to you at the House of Reps?

This is not the first meeting between
us and the president. As the vice
chairman of one of the committees, I
was privileged to, alongside a few
chairmen, meet the president about
two months ago. It was Dr Okonjo- Iweala (finance minister and
coordinating minister of the
economy), who spoke to us then
about the intentions of the president
vis a vis the 2012 budget. So, when
this invitation came, it was impromptu and some members,
smarting from the past experience of
chairmen going to meet Mr. President,
felt we needed to be very careful
about this one. The invitation was all-embracing.
Whether this invitation was at the
instance of the senators or not, I may
not be able to clarify. For some
reasons, it was extended to us. I think
that if it was at the instance of the senators which grew from their
executive session over security
concerns in the country, then it should
be seen as an attempt to kill two birds
with one stone. If it was at the instance of the
senators, the president may have
decided, ‘let us all meet’, because,
indeed, the issue of security has also
been discussed at the House. The first
motion of the seventh House of Representatives was moved by me
and was entitled, “Emerging Threat to
Internal Security and the Need for
Establishment of the Department of
Homeland Security in Nigeria.” It was modeled after the United
States. The same challenge, the point
at which America got in 2002, when
President George Bush Jnr needed to
frontally take on the issue of internal
security as a result of the upsurge in global terrorism, we have also
reached that point. And members also felt that these are
some of the issues that we need to
see and resolve. That bill is in the
pipeline in the House of
Representatives and maybe the
president must have said whatever we discuss on how to increase our
security infrastructure, the House of
Representatives must be carried
along.

At the end of that meeting, what
impression did you come out with on
the state of the country?

Without wanting to divulge what
happened, when the meeting started,
Mr. President spoke to us about
deregulation and then the thrust of his
2012 budget. The issue of subsidy
removal, as it has turned out, is one of the planks of the 2012 budget. He
wanted to have a soft landing for that
because the National Assembly is the
hurdle he must cross in his pursuit of
this policy. There were mixed
reactions. The way it was received would not be
satisfying to the president. I am sure
he would not have been satisfied
with the reactions he got. Don’t forget
that the National Assembly is the last
gate keeping post for Nigeria and, if anything slides at this point, then we
may be imperiled. We may begin to
say that the horse is out of the stable
and so we are in trouble. We made
that very,very clear, especially
members of the House of Representatives. We made it clear to the president that
we must be very careful on that issue
and that it was something that we
would take more time to discuss, not
one to be exhausted within one hour
that the meeting lasted. But beyond that, Mr. President used the
opportunity to address what the
Senate President raised about the
security of the nation. He wanted the
president to address the issue at that
meeting. He tried to acquaint the
parliamentarians with what he is
trying to do. He went to into the
historical trajectory of violent crimes
in Nigeria. He spoke about the Niger
Delta and the pogrom there, he dovetailed into the Boko Haram issue.
I think he is reasonably convinced
that his government is trying to deal
with it. To me, he can still do a little
bit more.

Encountering the president at this
level, and given the reasons he gave
for his planned removal of fuel
subsidy, how convincing were they? Mr. President did not sufficiently
convince me or my other colleagues in
the House of Representatives. I don’t
want to be graphic on what happened
there but I am telling you that it was
a faux pax. I don’t think he achieved any purpose. I don’t think he moved
the story forward. I would say that
his reasons did not appeal to members
of the House of Representatives. He tried to say and, indeed, make it
clear to us that if he does not take out
the subsidy, Nigeria will go down. In
his own words, Nigeria will crash. I
don’t think that was the right thing to
say but I believe very strongly that the nobility of the intentions of Mr.
President may not be questionable.
Like he said, it is not about Goodluck
Jonathan, it is about Nigeria. We are
on the same page on that score. The truth of the matter, however, is
that there are so many ways that lead
to the market.

(I said something on my posting to this thread "There are always several paths that leads to a stream"

His strongest argument
was that it was becoming difficult to
sustain the high subsidy regime on
fuel products. He said if we go on this way, Nigeria will be in deep trouble.
His words: ‘Nigeria will crash’. The
truth of the matter is that we need
more money, but there are many
ancilliary issues that will need to be
sorted out. Removal of subsidy is not an isolated event. This is an economy that is mono-
product and driven by the same
product, we would expect that
anything that happens to this product
will resonate across the length and
breadth of the country. What the president did was all rationalization.
He said the guys who move the
product to the market don’t actually
use PMS, that they use diesel. This is
simplistic rationalization.

He also tried to say that the subsidy
we are talking about does not profit
Nigerians but a pocket of cartel in the
industry. And people immediately
rose up to say, ‘Mr. President, why are
you saying this? If it is a cartel, you crack it’.

Abdul Ningi, I remember,
said it clearly that he was the most
powerful president in the black world,
and that is the truth. And if we are confronted by a cabal or
cartel, then it is about time we deal
with the issue decisively. And, today,
we are trying to give this reason for
taking such a decision that will affect
the masses of our people. He also tried to talk about the issue of bunkering,
that it was also being resolved and all
of that. People also said, ‘ okay, if you take
out the subsidy, what becomes of the
amount of money you may eventually
raise?’. He tried to tell us that there
was a committee headed by the vice
president and that they were working on what will be committed from the
revenue from the removal of subsidy
and that they had gone eighty percent
and all that. To me, that is not sufficient to begin
to push this idea of removal of
subsidy. The strongest of the
arguments is pure simplistic and
rationalization. Issues like the
removal of subsidy must have cogent, articulate, verifiable, clear cut
arguments for and against. You must be able to say, ‘ Yes, if you
do this, we gain this and that’. Abdul
Ningi tried to raise the political and
security consequences of the push
particularly at a time when you have
the Arab spring and all that. Removal of subsidy should not be left in the
realms of conjecture and simplistic
rationalization.

Nigeria needs a humble, bold and sincere leader. GEJ has demonstrated that. If the late Yar'Adua did not reverse the privatization of the refineries by OBJ based on sentiments, we wouldn't be faced with these problems today.
The legislators and some politicians are the greatest problem of this nation. They want the country to incur debt but they are not ready to cut down their jumbo pay. Why are they rejecting the removal of fuel subsidy? Are some of them beneficiaries of the subsidy?
All the states that are dependent on monthly allocations should develop resources in their areas to generate revenue. Some state governors are wasting money on carnivals, settlement of aged politicians and rigging of elections. Most of them are not interested in agriculture and rural development, human development nor long term investments.
How many refineries did General Gowon build? He shouldn't be talking about deregulation. He did not lay a good foundation for the economic development of this country.
I don't want the future of my children to be mortgaged in debt. Most of the politicians that are against the removal of subsidy are insincere. Lets be objective and patriotic.

I asked GEJ how far with the fuel subsidy. This is what he told me:

@Lanre_post

I will like to ask a very simple question, while ignoring your side talk about who I am because it adds nothing to the argument.

In the US and Europe where their economies have come crashing down, do they not have hundreds of eminent professors of economics who are ten times more qualified than Pat Utomi? I ask this because you seem to have taken a stand that what Pat Utomi says is the be all and end all of economics and should be the bible of the government. And if they have and these economists are employed in the various government agencies, why are their economies still going into recession? Please respond.

dmainboss:

@Lanre_post

I will like to ask a very simple question, while ignoring your side talk about who I am because it adds nothing to the argument.

In the US and Europe where their economies have come crashing down, do they not have hundreds of eminent professors of economics who are ten times more qualified than Pat Utomi? I ask this because you seem to have taken a stand that what Pat Utomi says is the be all and end all of economics and should be the bible of the government. And if they have and these economists are employed in the various government agencies, why are their economies still going into recession? Please respond.

What are u talking about? Stop attributing to me what I've not said or implied. Infact you are saying the exact contradiction what I've said.

I was saying the entire rest of professional and technical experts that should be in the know can't all be wrong and only the ones in employ/service of goverment can see the light.

I only cited & posted Proff. Pat Utomi (and two others) as one of these numerous people.

For clarity, this is the relevant extract of my post:

{{ Is it
that u guys close your brain to every
other arguement of public & informed
personalities made available on this thread and several others and just choose
you must swallow line hook and sinker
whatever comes out of the mouth of the
President and his officials?
Do they possess some monopoly of
knowledge which is inacessible to any other person? Do goverment officials (economist,
bankers etc) once appointed to their
portfolios suddenly develop exra brain-
cells which empowers them to
understand phenomenon which their
entire rest of expert colleagues cannot comprehend How come their presentaions,
submissions, persuations, arguements on
the subsidy-removal matter is not
acceptable to almost all other
professionals who should be in the know,
have intergrity and can be trusted?

Or are we saying Ngozi-Iweala,
Madieson, etc. are the only people who
and can understand and comprehend? }}

Then your analogy of Europe and US and them having plenty of economists and the counrty failing is nonsensical: has no head or tail. Are yoy saying eminent economist & financial experts shouldn't be listened to? Because that will also include Ngozi-Iweala, Mandisean and all the rest of goverment officials. I think not.

And if we must listen to them, while at it, why should we ignore all the rest and what they have to say. There are numerous Nigerian energy & petroleum experts in Nigeria and US who have lent their knowlegde and experise to analysis of the dileama; and beleive me they are making a lot of sense. Dr. Tam David-West is another example, a former Petroleum Minister.

So many issues has been raised which must be addressed. The President cannot expect these serious and thorny issues to just be swept under the carpet. What is this insane hurry? The National Assembly say this is something that cannot be rushed. The President seems absolutely uninterested in seeking truth at all.

People, make no mistake about it, this is all about protecting the biggest vested interest of the PDP, the "goose which lays the golden eggs": the billions-of-dollars-making fuel-importation business; to sustain it or make it last as long as possible while they strategise how to shift the "billions-of -dollar-making" from the endangered fuel importation to the refining of crude-oil and selling it to us at International price.

You know someone has raised the question, the goverment has been completely silent on what happens once the nation start refining locally all of our petroleum consumption demand. Experts are expecting goverment to say something like: once we start refining all our PMS needs locally, then the price of PMS will go back down to N65(or even lower).

No, no, no; once through the instrumentalty of the NNPC & power of incumbency, the local refiniment of our pertoleum consumption demand is transfered to the former fuel-importers (CABAL), they continue selling to the country at International price.

The PDP goverment will simply see no need to bring down the price again. Is there anyone who does not know that in this country, so far as we know, when prices go up, they don't come down again. I remember GBAWE did day that it was unbeleivable that GEJ will put the now almost universally acknowledged corrupt NNPC currently under investigation, in charge of getting the 4 refineries to work and acquring all the new ones that should come up.

So like I said, wise guys in the house, do the arithmetic and the brainstorming, the so much dileama and travails of Jonathan and the "others" is to at all cost preserve this PDP's "goose that lays the golden eggs". They believe beyond anything you can imagine that it is imperative to their political survival. Afterall, the biggest powers of PDP is icumbency and vast financial muscles. Money has a lot to do with GEJ's electoral victory.

Take note that it is impossible for PMS price to be increased to Inernation price after the refineries must be fully working.

So PMS prices has to be increased now, so that it will continue selling at that price even after the refinires would have started fully working.

Unless it's done in this order, that margin, which amasses to billions of dollars, the golden goose will be forever lost to the PDP.

Call me crazy? Well that's my take on the matter,

^
Who do you think is interested in reading long rambling stuff that is neither here nor there?
Keep it brief, its not like there is any kernel of knowledge up there anyway. Abi you just wan mek we tire?

Why is Jonathan so bent on this help he wants to provide for the people; this help they have said they do not want.

Is it because he loves Nigeria so sp much that he must help them by force? When you see traviling so much to offer help by force the way Jonathanis bent on doing, then u should know there must be something pushing him; more to it than meets the eye.

Opposition to fuel subsidy
removal rises
Posted by Information Nigeria in Home »

Uncategorized on December 19, 2011

THE days roll by. It is countdown to
January 1, 2012. With a certain frenzy,
the Federal Government reiterates its
resolve to remove oil subsidy on that
date. But will it be a smooth sail? The
opposition groups do not think so. They
are refining their measures to counter
the government’s position.

The Conference of Nigerian Political
Parties (CNPP), civil society organisations
(CSOs) and the vice presidential
candidate of the Congress for Progressive
Change (CPC) in the last general elections,
Pastor Tunde Bakare, were among those who at the weekend expressed their
resistance to the fuel subsidy removal. The statement of the CNPP and civil
groups at a meeting on Saturday night in
Abuja, which was made available to The
Guardian by the Secretary to CNPP, Osita
Okechukwu, noted that the stakeholders
would not hesitate to take to the street if government is adamant that the fuel
subsidy should not be removed. “Don’t push us to the street; for we went
to the street to make you president and
would not like to go to the street to
remove you as president!,” the document
warned. While calling on Nigerians to join “the
Mother of Mass Actions,” Okechukwu said
that the CNPP and the CSOs would work
in league with the Nigeria Labour
Congress (NLC) and Trade Union Congress
(TUC). The statement titled: “Fuel subsidy:
Seven-point charter to President
Jonathan,” requested that new refinerie s
be built.

“We are saying build new
refineries; for if you don’t have
confidence that Nigerians can manage refineries, we don’t have confidence that
you can manage the withdrawal
proceeds. Stop the rampant corruption in
fuel importation; before removing the
fuel subsidy! If you can’t stop rampant
corruption in fuel importation; you cannot guarantee the proceeds to
be withdrawn,” he said. According to the document, the removal
of fuel subsidy is a road Nigerians have
passed severally since 1978 and
unfortunately, all promises made were
broken while the pains of serial removal
of fuel subsidy have remained permanent. Explaining why Nigerians should resist
the move at a press conference in Lagos
yesterday, Bakare said successive
governments had failed to explain why
the refineries had remained
incapacitated despite the huge investments over the years in Turn
Around Maintenance (TAM). Bakare also wondered why NNPC had to
leave its own storage facilities unused
and proceed to incur additional costs
from leasing third party storage facilities.
According to him, the owners of these
third party facilities are not faceless people, “they are part of the cartel
siphoning the resources of our nation.” He further noted that the Federal
Government had failed to tell the whole
truth surrounding the matter as “each
time it trumpets and blows its
propaganda machinery that the N65 per
litre we pay for petrol is the lowest in the world. Ours is the highest if we
compare the price here to other oil
producing nations.” Bakare warned that if the country ever
allowed the removal of fuel subsidy,
“Nigerians will be made to pay for the
ineptitude of their leaders and the
kleptomania of government
functionaries.

” But rather than castigate President
Goodluck Jonathan for the decision of his
administration to remove oil subsidy,
former Defence Minister Tokunbo Kayode
said Nigerians should praise the
president for his courage to take the step. Kayode, who stated this in his Ikaram-
Akoko, Ondo State country home at the
weekend said successive governments in
Nigeria knew the desirability of the
removal of fuel subsidy but lacked the
political will to implement it. According to the former member of the
Federal Executive Council (FEC) who
spoke during his inauguration as the
Baba Ijo of his local congregation, St.
James’ Anglican Church, the decision
being taken by Dr. Jonathan was sealed during the administration of the late
President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua. Kayode, who was in charge of the
Ministry of Labour and Productivity when
the controversial decision was taken in
2009 by the cabinet of President
Yar’Adua, said the administration lacked
the courage to go through the process of implementation.

On its part, the Action Congress of Nigeria
(ACN) in Osun State has called on the
National Assembly to save the nation
from an unwarranted crisis by prevailing
on Jonathan and his economic team to
shelve the plan for fuel subsidy removal. The party said the widespread poverty,
unemployment and insecurity in the
country might be aggravated if the
Federal Government removed fuel
subsidy. The party also blamed the Peoples
Democratic Party (PDP)-led Federal
Government of President Jonathan for his
stand on the matter despite the outcry of
Nigerians against the action, warning
that the authorities should be prepared to take full responsibility for the outcome
of the subsidy removal. Speaking at an interactive session with
journalists in Osogbo, the state capital,
the ACN Director of Research and
Strategy in the state, Mr. Kunle Oyatomi,
expressed worry that the Presidency was
yet to have a rethink about the unpopular policy despite outcry against it by
Nigerians. Describing the fuel subsidy removal as
anti-people policy by the PDP-led Federal
Government, the party urged the National
Assembly to stand by the citizens by
ensuring that President Jonathan and his
economic team do not succeed in inflicting unbearable burden on the
already pauperised populace.

Besides, a member of the Upper Chamber
of the National Assembly, Senator Jide
Omoworare has accused the Federal
Government of insincerity in the
management of refineries, saying refusal
to build new refineries informed the proposal for fuel subsidy removal. Omoworare, representing Osun East
Senatorial District therefore called for a
state of emergency in the nation’s oil
sector to enable the government to
embark on aggressive measures to build
more refineries in different locations to increase availability of petroleum locally. The ACN lawmaker spoke at the
weekend in Ile-Ife, Osun State after he
gave certificate of recognition to some
cooperative societies to enable them to
access bank loan facilities to enhance
their businesses. He dismissed the argument for fuel
subsidy removal as a capitalist agenda
aimed at causing dislocation in the
economy, adding that the proposal was a
way of shifting the high cost of fuel
importation by a few rich elements to the masses. According to him, instead of fuel subsidy
removal, which would increase the
suffering of Nigerians, the Federal
Government should declare an emergency
in the building of refineries across the country.

informationnigeria.org/2011/12/opposition-to-fuel-subsidy-removal-rises.html

@beaf,

I will like to follow you on twitter, there is somebody I will like you to meet. He also has very keen interest in the socio economical well being of nigeria.

I'll leave the rest for twitter land
Kindly follow me on @unclecycs or the said friend of mine on,@ekekeee or kindle let me have ur twitter userID .

Looking forward!!!

bigcycs:

@beaf,

I will like to follow you on twitter, there is somebody I will like you to meet. He also has very keen interest in the socio economical well being of nigeria.

I'll leave the rest for twitter land
Kindly follow me on @unclecycs or the said friend of mine on,@ekekeee or kindle let me have your twitter userID .

Looking forward!!!

People claim BEAF is @renoomokri but he has vehemently denied it. Others have also denied that he is @renoomokri

balewa88:

People claim BEAF is @renoomokri but[b] he has vehemently denied it.[/b] Others have also denied that he is @renoomokri

That is correct. Thanks.

@bigcycs
Thanks for the kind words, unfortunately, I don't use tweeter; if its Reno Omokri you are after, I'm not him also. If you still wish to linkup on the web, we can sort something.

@Lanre_front

First you posted that long post which I dont have the time to read. I am not jobless.

secondly, it is amazing how you cannot answer a simple question.

Thirdly I also want to ask why ACN as a party rejects removal of subsidy while the ACN governors all endorsed it. Something tells me its the hand of Esau and the voice of Jacob at work. Its also hypocrisy and deceit at its worst. Very sad.

@beaf;
Okay ,what do you have in mind, !

@ Beaf/dmainboss

Looking at the amount of post and replies you make on Nairaland; the amount of time u spend making PR and arguements for GEJ, I'll say you probably spend more time than everybody else on Nairaland.

I beleive I already answered your nonsesical question. I say "nonsensical" because it's bereft of logic and only a ploy to get the other person on the defensive.

On the other hand, u are the expert at not answering (dodging) simple questions. I have asked u: explain how subsidy removal will put a stop to "the few Nigerians" as u have campeigned so viciously' from feeding fat?

Concerning your "ACN" question, any knowledable person knows, inspite of whatever party affiliations they may have, governors are a tribe of their own and the only language they understand is "money" & "more money". Do u know they are already engaing the FG in a fight as to their share of funds accrueing from subsidy removal will be?

I wonder, is it Jonthan or Iweala this will monitor how the shamelessly corrupt 36 governors spend the money?

Having said this, who the hell cares whether the ACN is suffering from policy-scizophrenia, thereby sending out mixed signals. This not an ACN vs PDP problem. It's the people vs their wicked goverment, or PDP if u like, since that party froms the present goverment.

fuel subsidy must go and corruption must stay. jonathan, u will not get away with this. you have turned blind eyes and deaf ears to the menace of corruption and stealing of public funds by your wife and members of your cabinets but the only benefit nigerians get from the large and numerous mineral resources God blessed us with.
God will surely bring you to justice.

lanre_front:

@ Beaf/dmainboss

Looking at the amount of post and replies you make on Nairaland; the amount of time u spend making PR and arguements for GEJ, I'll say you probably spend more time than everybody else on Nairaland.

I beleive I already answered your nonsesical question. I say "nonsensical" because it's bereft of logic and only a ploy to get the other person on the defensive.

On the other hand, u are the expert at not answering (dodging) simple questions. I have asked u: explain how subsidy removal will put a stop to "the few Nigerians" as u have campeigned so viciously' from feeding fat?

Concerning your "ACN" question, any knowledable person knows, inspite of whatever party affiliations they may have, governors are a tribe of their own and the only language they understand is "money" & "more money". Do u know they are already engaing the FG in a fight as to their share of funds accrueing from subsidy removal will be?

I wonder, is it Jonthan or Iweala this will monitor how the shamelessly corrupt 36 governors spend the money?

Having said this, who the hell cares whether the ACN is suffering from policy-scizophrenia, thereby sending out mixed signals. This not an ACN vs PDP problem. It's the people vs their wicked goverment, or PDP if u like, since that party froms the present goverment.

where are u coming from? simple things you dont understand, abeg go back to school and stop bring nigeria back ok!!!!

With due respect to the office of nigerias president, the argument holds no weight I think his advisers have forgotten to tell him the economy is a viscous circle which can't be easily broken petrol affects the woman that grinds pepper that these bus drivers would eat while going to ferry these food items they would enter transport to trhe market within the areas where they live their children would enter public buses which are powered by the same fuel so also their teachers, in the end this would be transferred to the school fees parents pay, as a result they would have to source for this money and increase the salaries of the teachers and this is just one sector of the micro-economy and the direct effect it would have its just unexplainable, the overheads on recurrent and over invoicing is stinking and filled with corruption the whole civil servants in ministries and parastals jointly connive from the lowest ranking officer to the chief accounting officer to over invoice and steal both from the contractors and from government these are the loop wholes were funds are wrongly channelled the civil service size is to big the ministries are too many mis-prioritization of policies are high e.g we are supposed to be thinking of blocking the waste in works, defence, water resources, fct, national planning commission, health, education, agriculture a repositioning of our general policy direction which would become more encompassing and acceptable to all such that when power is transferred their is a continuty, in policy implementation and execution, no more abandoned projects et al.

I had to make this extra contribution when I noticed one of beafs other posts that he made reference to the whole team of adviser telling jonathan that that was the way to go so maybe this statement may not be in line but it takes a genius to standout from the cloud it takes people with special talent to think beyond what some Prof., and Dr of economics would say to get unique answers e.g when the world bank was telling nigerians to embrace structural adjustment they (foreign countries) were pump doing the opposite pumping money into their industries and encouraging export of human capacity so why must you think a few people that are economist should be so good at determining human nature and a few formulars would be the solution to complex issues which form the economy.

^^^^ If the trillions reported to be spent by FG on fuel subsidy are correct, then it is being poured into a hole every time it is being paid.

Compare Nigeria/ns with citizens and taxpayers in other countries for a moment.

"Olajide, The woman you say grinds pepper, after selling her pepper, how much tax does she pay that goes back into the economy? The bus drivers who eat the pepper and collect fares from passengers in Naira notes, how much tax do they pay back into the coffers? Those children that then go to school and graduate and begin earning how much tax do they pay?

It is only one way and it is an undue burden. In the UK, even if you work 50hrs in a week, before you see one penny, you would have paid taxes. When the financial crisis happened, they had to turn to the taxpayer, other countries in Europe had to turn to other nations full of taxpayers.

If these countries had operated the "one way cycle" like Nigeria has been, where would they be now?

Nigerians have become a burden to Nigeria and they should seek to redress the balance.

If the president is getting opposition and backlash from the fat cat politicians who have been bending you over as a citizen thus far, then what he is proposing is probably for your own good.

These people are not suddenly overcome with compassion and concern for you, if this is bad for them, then its probably good for you.

They should also be made to cut their expenses, but let everybody add their quota,