A heated argument between two men over the removal of fuel subsidy and the impact of President Bola Tinubu’s administration on Nigerians has sparked debate in a viral video.
The two men held opposing views on the country’s economic situation, with one calling for a factual examination of the subsidy policy and government revenue, while the other slammed the administration over the rising cost of living and hardship faced by Nigerians.
The debate focused on the previous administration’s handling of fuel subsidy, how revenue from its removal was distributed, and the responsibility of both federal and state governments to improve citizens’ welfare.
One of the men argued that the decision to remove fuel subsidy did not start with Tinubu’s administration, claiming that the previous government under former President Muhammadu Buhari had already set the stage for the policy.
He maintained that the Buhari administration failed to implement the measure during its tenure, leaving the task to the succeeding government.
He said: “I’m not trying to support the government, I’m just trying to move with facts, right. The Buhari administration had already taken out subsidy. If you remember the Petroleum Proliferation Act was supposed to come into existence six months after their government and that law itself talked about removal of subsidy.
“But the government of Buhari exhibited cowardice by not implementing it in their government and they brought it over to the next government.”
The man further contended that the revenue realised from the removal of fuel subsidy had been distributed among the three tiers of government.
He said Nigerians should also demand accountability from their respective state governments on how they utilised the extra funds received as a result of the policy.
He added: “Then lastly I will say this, right, let’s go online, make research and articulate based on facts. The subsidy removed, the funds that the government generated from subsidy removal today, they have split it between the three tiers of government.
“The question you should be asking is, what is your state government doing with the money they are getting?”
The other man countered the argument, maintaining that Nigerians were going through severe economic hardship and that the government should not be spared from criticism.
He traced the country’s problems to past administrations, including that of former President Goodluck Jonathan, but argued that the current administration had failed to fulfil its promises to Nigerians.
He said: “Sometimes we always talk as if we’ve lost our humanity. Before Buhari came, even since Jonathan, this country has been a mess, right.
“Even since Jonathan, the country has been a mess. The last time the country has been a reasonable country was when Ambassador was there. Not really as if Ambassador was even doing something extra like that, right.”
He also recalled how Nigerians had demanded a change of government during Jonathan’s administration, leading to the emergence of the All Progressives Congress (APC), which campaigned on promises of better governance.
According to him, political parties should have clear policy directions and plans before seeking public office.
He said: “Jonathan came, everybody was clamouring for change. They got the change which your current president championed. If I was the head of everything that time, they strategised the whole game.
“Meaning that before you can strategise a game with somebody, your party must have a blueprint. You guys must have a philosophy that guides your party. You don’t just belong to any useless party all in the name of you want to play games with people’s life, right.”