Connect with us

Opinion

FCCPC: Tell us, is air travel also not for the poor?

Published

on

AGHAN

By Bola BOLAWOLE

FCCPC airline pricing investigation reveals alleged festive fare hikes, prompting sharp response from Airline Operators of Nigeria

Advertisement

By Bola BOLAWOLE

David Alechenu Bonaventure Mark, remember him? This man was the military governor of Niger state between 1984 and 1986 (straddling the military juntas of Muhammadu Buhari and Ibrahim Babangida).

Also read: Arne Slot Slams Wasteful Liverpool in Painful Wolves Defeat

He, therefore, must have been a prominent member of the group that staged the coup that ousted the country’s first (though, fraudulently?) elected civilian president, Shehu Shagari, thereby truncating democracy in Nigeria.

Advertisement

It is a measure of the forgetfulness of Nigerians, their I-don’t-care attitude to public probity and rectitude, and the fact that there is no consequence for bad behaviour here, that the same man, after pulling off his uniform, was not only elected a senator of the Federal Republic, representing Benue South constituency from 1999 to 2019, he was also the longest-serving president of the upper chamber from 2007 to 2015.

Currently, he serves as the chairman of the opposition conglomerate called the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

Those who truncated democracy at home now tout themselves as African democrats! Their charity begins not at home but abroad! So, like Olusegun Obasanjo and Muhammadu Buhari, Mark is another topnotch beneficiary of the same democracy they had truncated.

Advertisement

Mark was also Nigeria’s Minister of Communication (during the military junta of Babangida) between January 1988 and June 1990.

He will forever be remembered for his statement that telephones are not for the poor; never mind the spirited efforts made later to white-wash and whittle down the impact of that statement!

Maybe we should digress a little to put that ignoble effort at re-writing history to the sword straight away.

Advertisement

Here is what they said: “In Nigeria, myths always are garnished and promoted to facts. Up till tomorrow, Nigerians will quote David Mark as saying telephone is not for the poor. But what he said as Minister of Communication was that NITEL would disconnect the lines of its debtors. He said they could not claim that they were too poor to settle their bills. Poor people, he added, didn’t own telephones. The headline the following day was ‘Telephone is not for the poor – David Mark’”.

Now, judge! What can you infer from that statement by David Mark? How do you interpret it? Since you own a telephone line, you are not poor; so pay for it.

If you are poor, you cannot own a telephone line because you cannot pay for it! To own a telephone line, you must be rich, not poor! Wetin poor man dey take find telephone? Who dash monkey bananas? Ask any sub-editor worth his salt to cast that headline, it will still be “Telephone is not for the poor!” The inference is clear and direct.

Advertisement

In all modesty and with a deep sense of humility, I have been editor many times over, and the same headline is what I will cast!

Talking seriously, however, David Mark was correct. Those were the days when telephones were really not for the poor. People had to keep vigil at NITEL offices to make calls.

The telephone box was a status symbol. At PUNCH newspapers at the time, only three of us carried the Mobitel 090 luggage of a phone – the Chairman, Chief Ajibola Ogunshola; the MD, Demola Osinubi; and my humble self, Bola Bolawole, as the editor.

Advertisement

But, today, how does David Mark feel seeing that telephones are no longer for the rich but every Tom, Dick, and Harry carries a phone?

Those who were in positions but offered nothing to improve the life of the people, who again gallivant seeking leadership positions, we should ask them what they did with the opportunities that came their way!

That is one reason for this digression. The other is to hope that one day, air travel, which today is not for the poor, will also become available and affordable to the poor as well!

Advertisement

How many Nigerians can afford air travel today? Except you are a political appointee. Top government official. You work in an organization that foots the bill.

You live and luxuriate on the proceeds of crime. Very few people spending hard-earned money can still afford air travel.

To complicate matters for the citizenry are the twin evils of bad roads and insecurity.

Advertisement

You must pray, do vigil and commit your ways into the hands of God before travelling on our roads these days.

When people complain about the proliferation of airports, the hazards of road travel account majorly for it.

Those in leadership positions taking the decision to build all sorts of phoney airports under all manner of guises simply want to avoid the road.

Advertisement

And they can afford it because they fall within the categories listed above of those who can still pay the cut-throat air fares charged by shylock airlines.

Hence, my interest when I read of the efforts of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) to investigate the way airlines inflate and skyrocket air fares like the typical Lagos “molue” and “danfo” drivers.

Once there is a crowd at bus stops and at airports, fares flare! During festive periods when people have to travel, they hike fares to collect “owo odun!” Once buses or aircraft scarcity is experienced, passengers and travellers must pay triple fares.

Advertisement

There is hardly any noticeable difference between the motor parks and our nation’s airports!

I also read of the intransigence of the Airline Operators of Nigeria, trying to rubbish the FCCPC initiative. The FCCPC must not buldge but should carry the initiative also to the foreign airlines like it has vowed.

Some of the preliminary findings of the FCCPC are damning enough. A report that I read had this to say:

Advertisement

“A review undertaken by the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) has uncovered patterns of price manipulation perpetrated by some local airlines during the last festive season.

The findings are contained in the interim report released … by the Commission’s department of Surveillance and Investigations…

“The report compares domestic airline pricing from the December 2025 festive period with post-peak January 2026 fare levels.

Advertisement

Preliminary analysis indicates that fares recorded during the December peak were materially higher than those observed in the post-peak period across several routes despite relative stability in critical operating variables like fuel price, government taxes and foreign exchange.

The differences observed in fares therefore appear to reflect airlines’ arbitrary pricing decisions, including yield management and capacity allocation, rather than any variation in regulatory fees…

“Commenting… the Executive Vice-chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the FCCPC, Mr. Tunji Bello, said the review is part of the Commission’s statutory responsibility to promote competitive markets and safeguard consumers. ‘This assessment is intended to provide clarity on pricing behaviour during predictable peak travel periods. The Commission’s role is not to disrupt legitimate commercial activity but to ensure that market outcomes remain consistent with competition and consumer protection principles under the law’”, Bello was quoted as saying.

Advertisement

Yes, consumers rights must be protected. This is a country under law, and not one governed according to the whims and caprices of buccaneers.

As would be expected, the airline operators have responded, albeit hastily, to the FCCPC, shipping it off as ignorant! A news report that I read put it this way:

“Domestic airlines, under the aegis of the Airline Operators of Nigeria (AON), have strongly dismissed allegations of price manipulation and fixing brought by the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC)… Reacting, AON raised concerns over the agency’s interference in ticket pricing, saying it is detrimental to the survival of domestic operators. AON, which dismissed the outcome of the probe, said FCCPC lacked knowledge about the economics of airlines and did not possess the professional expertise to engage in how airlines fix prices.”

Advertisement

Really! Is airline operation rocket science? Or are the AON re-inventing the wheel as far as airline management is concerned? Professor Obiora Okonkwo, who spoke for AON, said he was yet to read the details of the FCCPC report; yet, he had gone ahead to dismiss it as hogwash!

“They don’t know the economics of airlines and do not possess the professional expertise to dabble into how prices are fixed. They don’t understand airline operations and as far as the AON is concerned, they are playing to the gallery and should not be taken seriously”, he said.

Waooh! Some professors! Someone who was yet to avail himself with the full details of a report; yet, felt comfortable enough to disparage the organization and thrash its report – just like that!

Advertisement

Back to my question as we draw the curtains: Is air travel also not for the poor? I am sure you know this question is hypothetical and the answer is not one dangling in the air.

Air travel is not for the poor as we speak, just like telephones were not for the poor in 1989. In this, David Mark and Professor Okonkwo appear as kindred spirits.

But in future, possibly in our own lifetime, one of two things will happen: Either air fares will descend from its high horse and Olympian height to meet the poor or Nigeria’s poor would have been taken out of poverty – like Chinese leaders have taken hundreds of millions of their people out of poverty within a generation – to a point where air travel, like telephone, will no longer be the exclusive preserve of the rich.

Advertisement

Also read: Zamfara Governor Lawal Weighs Political Options Amid PDP Legal Disputes

Let the FCCPC keep holding their feet to the fire!

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Opinion

Seven prime ministers in a decade: What Nigeria can learn from Britain’s chaos

Published

on

Prime Minister

By Dr Toju Ogbe,

The resignation of British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, less than two years after leading the Labour Party to  a landslide electoral victory, was dramatic, yet reflected a pattern we have become familiar with in recent British politics.

Advertisement

Also read: Abolish state of origin: A prerequisite for true national integration

Starmer now joins a procession of fallen prime ministers stretching back to 2016 – from David Cameron to Theresa May, Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, and Rishi Sunak.

None of these prime ministers was ousted through military intervention, popular insurrection, or a court order. Rather, each was ultimately brought down by the same political system that elevated them to electoral glory.

To the casual observer, the rapid turnover of British Prime Ministers in the last decade may appear chaotic, or even a symptom of political instability. Some argue that the British electorate has become ungovernable.

Advertisement

However, beneath the apparent chaos at Westminster lies an uncomfortable truth that African democracies would do well to examine, particularly Nigerians who wonder why our democracy has delivered so little despite almost three decades of uninterrupted civilian rule.

The turbulence of British politics over the last decade, presents an important lesson on democratic accountability beyond successful elections.

Once the prime minister is deemed a liability by their own political party, the mechanics of accountability are activated. The daggers are quietly drawn and the ruthless pressure to resign begins.

Advertisement

Every poll and survey on public opinion is closely monitored, local election results are taken as a referendum on leadership. Cabinet resignations begin to gain momentum and backbenchers get restless.

Once the news media smells an internal uprising, they amplify scrutiny of the prime minister, subjecting every move – speech, public appearance, political misstep etc to relentless examination.

Pressure gradually mounts until the prospect of bitter internal leadership challenge becomes impossible to resist. The Prime Minister falls.

Advertisement

For every British Prime Minister, winning an election is merely the beginning of examination, not the end. Political survival lasts only for as long as the prime minister maintains the confidence of his party and the parliament.

This is the muscle of British democratic accountability; a political culture that prioritises institutional survival over individual ambition. Starmer recognised this reality in his resignation speech:

“The question my party is asking now is whether I am best placed to lead us into the next general election. I have heard the answer of my parliamentary party to that question, and I accept that answer with good grace.”

Advertisement

That closing sentence alone is a masterclass in British institutional democracy. The party spoke. The leader listened. The correction comes from within.

 

Nigeria presents a strikingly different political logic.

Advertisement

Nigeria on the other hand, presents an interesting contrast with a different political logic and culture.

The notion that a governing party would overtly interrogate the performance of its own leader and engineer a transition to someone better equipped to maintain public confidence, is in most cases politically unthinkable in Nigeria.

Political parties in Nigeria do not coalesce  around ideological principles; rather, they operate more as electoral instruments organised around powerful individuals.

Advertisement

Internal dissent is often dealt with as betrayals rather than as part of healthy democratic engagement. Godfatherism and transactional loyalties shape political succession and leadership retention.

Once elected in Nigeria, there is an inherent assumption that a governor or president has a fixed two-term lease on power.

While 10 Downing Street is preparing to welcome its seventh Prime Minister in a decade, Nigeria, in contrast, has had only two democratically elected presidents during the same period – one of whom is still serving.

Advertisement

Social and economic conditions may deteriorate. Insecurity may worsen. Campaign promises may be ignored.

Public frustrations may become unbearable. Yet, incumbent governors and presidents often remain insulated from meaningful internal scrutiny and are even routinely anointed as ‘consensus’ candidate for second terms provided loyalties to godfathers, rather than the electorates are maintained.

The consequence is that loyalty, instead of performance is often rewarded at the expense of accountability.

Advertisement

This is not an argument for a revolving door at Aso Rock, as frequent leadership changes, by themselves, do not guarantee good governance.

Rather it is a case for making accountability an integral aspect of party politics in Nigeria.

Although the Nigerian presidential system provides for a fixed four-year term regardless of party confidence, political parties should however, be more than instruments for election campaigns, activated to simply retain or take over power every four years.

Advertisement

Electoral victory, should not be the ultimate goal, but the starting point of public service where democratic legitimacy must be continuously earned.

Equally important, political parties must develop the institutional maturity to honestly evaluate their own leaders. They must prioritise public interest and institutional credibility over loyalty to ‘Godfathers’.

The ultimate lesson from Westminster’s revolving door is clear: the true strength of a democratic system, lies not in the ability to produce leaders, but the capacity to effectively replace them, when they no longer command confidence.

Advertisement

Protecting failing leaders from accountability weakens democracy and political parties must ensure that no leader is more powerful than the institution.

Also read: Madugu Targets Strong WAFCON Title Defence for Super Falcons

As political parties gear up for the 2027 general elections, the political class must decide what matters more: we can continue to reward blind loyalty and endure predictable decline, or discover the courage to demand accountability from those who seek to lead us.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending