Former Minister of Youth and Sports Development, Solomon Dalung, has faulted President Bola Tinubu’s decision to remove fuel subsidy, describing it as a hasty move taken without proper consultation or understanding of governance processes.
Dalung made the remarks during an interview on Channels Television on Thursday, criticising the administration’s justification for the policy.
According to the former minister, the claim that subsidy removal was the only option available at the time exposes a “poverty of ideas and knowledge.”
He said, “The admission that subsidy removal was the only option is a demonstration of poverty of ideas and knowledge because in life, there are too many alternatives.
“For them to single out this issue defines the vested interest in the withdrawal of fuel subsidy.”
Dalung insisted that the core issue was not the subsidy itself but the mismanagement surrounding it.
He said, “I don’t see it as something that was necessary at that point in time.
“If we know as a fact that the subsidy regime has been investigated by the National Assembly, the fraud had been established, companies were indicted, meaning that the problem is not even the withdrawal of subsidy but the subsidy management itself.”
He criticised the Federal Government’s failure to prosecute those allegedly involved in subsidy fraud over the years.
Dalung said, “This government is not interested in holding those who have defrauded this country for many years but chose to make a sweeping statement, ‘subsidy has been withdrawn’.
“For me, it is an endorsement of fraud.”
While acknowledging that the subsidy removal has already been implemented, Dalung said the decision revealed a fundamental lack of knowledge about the workings of government.
“Granted, it has been done, but it was done in a manner that demonstrated again that the President, as at that time, did not even understand the working of the government and the complex nature of the country called Nigeria,” he said.
Dalung further argued that the policy was introduced without institutional input or consultation with stakeholders, as Tinubu had not yet formed his cabinet at the time.
“He needed consultation. As at that time he made the statement, there was no government. It was only the President and the Vice President that had been sworn in, and that wasn’t government.
“A government means a cabinet, advisers, and policy makers taking a decision like that,” he added.