Owei Lakemfa fuel subsidy criticism challenges Tinubu’s petrol policy, highlighting rising prices, workers’ purchasing power and Nigeria’s refining challenges

Nigerian columnist and former journalist Owei Lakemfa has criticised President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s decision to remove petrol subsidies, arguing in an opinion article published by Vanguard on Monday, 26 October 2026, that Nigeria’s persistent fuel-price pressures reflect years of policy failures, inadequate domestic refining and weak public accountability rather than an unavoidable shortage of petroleum resources.

Also read:Mbappé, Yamal, Kane, Olise Battle for Ballon d’Or

In his article, titled We Never Left Egypt, Only Prodigals Need to Return Home, Lakemfa challenges Tinubu’s comparison between the biblical story of Moses leading the Israelites out of Egypt and the government’s decision not to restore petrol subsidies.

The columnist uses the metaphor to argue that Nigerians should not be expected to accept worsening living conditions in a country endowed with substantial natural resources.

The article follows remarks made by Tinubu on 19 October at an event organised by the City Boy Movement, where the President defended the removal of petrol subsidies and rejected calls to restore the policy.

“I came and I removed subsidy the first day. I knew Nigeria would go bankrupt. There was nothing left to pay subsidy,” Tinubu said, according to TheCable’s report of the event.

The President also invoked the biblical account of Moses and the Red Sea, arguing that Nigeria should not return to the former subsidy arrangement.

He urged young Nigerians to obtain their permanent voter cards and participate in the 2027 presidential election.

Lakemfa takes a sharply different view. He argues that Nigeria’s oil resources, historical refining capacity and revenue potential should provide a stronger foundation for economic security than many households currently experience.

The columnist recalls Nigeria’s development of commercial oil production in the 1950s and its subsequent operation of four state-owned refineries.

He also cites a 1973 statement by former Head of State Yakubu Gowon that money was not Nigeria’s principal problem, but how it was spent.

For Lakemfa, the central question is not whether the country possesses oil, but how successive administrations have managed its petroleum resources and the revenues generated from them.

He alleges that years of inadequate refinery maintenance, insufficient investment in domestic refining and dependence on imported petroleum products have contributed to the difficulties facing consumers.

He also questions the cost structures associated with importing, transporting and distributing petrol.

His criticism reflects a wider debate over whether Nigeria can reduce its exposure to international oil-price movements and foreign-exchange pressures by strengthening domestic refining and improving transparency across the petroleum supply chain.

Nigeria’s fuel-subsidy debate predates the current administration. Successive governments have struggled with the cost of keeping petrol prices below market levels, concerns over smuggling, the financial burden on public finances and disputes over whether the benefits of subsidised fuel reach the intended beneficiaries.

Tinubu announced the removal of petrol subsidies during his inauguration on 29 May 2023.

The decision triggered a sharp increase in pump prices and contributed to public concern over transportation costs, inflation and household purchasing power.

Lakemfa argues that the promised developmental benefits of subsidy removal have not adequately addressed the pressures experienced by ordinary Nigerians.

He points to concerns about public infrastructure, healthcare, education, housing and insecurity, while questioning how the additional revenues generated by the policy have been allocated and accounted for.

The Federal Government, however, maintains that retaining the former subsidy arrangement would impose an unsustainable financial burden.

It has argued that the reform is intended to improve fiscal stability and redirect public resources towards development priorities.

In October 2026, the Presidency announced additional measures to cushion the impact of rising global petroleum costs.

These included a temporary decision by NNPC Retail to forgo its petrol retail profit margin, alongside plans involving crude-oil supplies to domestic refineries and efforts to moderate fluctuations in fuel costs.

Finance Minister and Coordinating Minister of the Economy Taiwo Oyedele said the measures were intended to provide relief without restoring a blanket subsidy.

The government maintained that targeted interventions and support for domestic refining would be preferable to returning to a system that it considers financially unsustainable.

Rising international oil prices have also contributed to recent increases in Nigerian petrol prices. Nairametrics reported in September that petrol was selling at approximately ₦1,400 to ₦1,450 per litre in major cities, reflecting the influence of higher crude prices and wider market pressures.

Lakemfa nevertheless questions the extent to which international developments explain the difference between Nigeria’s pump prices and those in other oil-producing countries.

He draws on figures attributed to federal lawmaker Afam Victor Ogene, who compared petrol prices and minimum wages in Nigeria, Iran, Libya and Saudi Arabia.

The figures cited in the comparison placed Nigerian petrol at between ₦1,300 and ₦1,500 per litre, against substantially lower prices in the other countries.

A report by NN News Media published on 22 September also carried Ogene’s comparison, including the claim that Nigeria’s ₦70,000 national minimum wage buys significantly less petrol than the stated wage levels in the three other countries.

The comparison highlights the relationship between fuel prices and workers’ purchasing power.

However, the figures should be treated as attributed estimates rather than a fully standardised international comparison, as petrol pricing policies, exchange rates, wage coverage and subsidy arrangements differ between countries.

The Nigerian minimum wage was raised to ₦70,000 under legislation signed by Tinubu in July 2024. Since then, organised labour has continued to raise concerns about the erosion of workers’ purchasing power amid rising transportation, food and other household costs.

The Nigeria Labour Congress called in October 2026 for lower petrol prices and renewed minimum-wage negotiations, arguing that the existing wage floor had become inadequate in the face of escalating living expenses.

Lakemfa also challenges warnings attributed to Oyedele about the economic consequences of restoring petrol subsidies.

According to the columnist, predictions of further currency depreciation and petrol prices reaching ₦2,000 per litre require transparent calculations and supporting economic analysis.

The government’s position is that a return to blanket subsidies could increase fiscal pressures, encourage smuggling and expose public finances to renewed shocks.

The disagreement therefore extends beyond the immediate price of petrol to questions about the country’s fiscal priorities, energy policy and the distribution of economic costs.

At the heart of Lakemfa’s argument is the belief that Nigeria’s natural-resource wealth should translate into better living conditions for its population.

His reference to Egypt serves as a political metaphor for a country whose citizens, he argues, should not be expected to accept hardship as an inevitable consequence of economic reform.

He concludes that the responsibility for improving the country’s circumstances rests with its political leadership, calling for greater accountability and a renewed commitment to public welfare.

The debate over subsidy removal is likely to remain prominent as political parties prepare for the 2027 elections.

For the Federal Government, the challenge is to demonstrate that its economic reforms can deliver measurable benefits while protecting public finances.

Also read:Mbappé, Yamal, Kane, Olise Battle for Ballon d’Or

For critics such as Lakemfa, the priority is to ensure that the costs of reform do not continue to fall disproportionately on households already struggling with rising living expenses.