Tinubu’s misery ‘relief’ plans: A blatant electioneering ploy, by Olu Fasan

Economic reforms are universally measured by their impacts on the living standards of ordinary citizens, but President Bola Tinubu judges his reforms by macro-economic statistics that have absolutely no bearing on the wellbeing of ordinary Nigerians. More than three years after their introduction, Tinubu’s economic reforms have had devastating social consequences, deepening poverty, hunger and misery across Nigeria.

But now, just over two months before the people decide whether to re-elect him for a second term, President Tinubu has suddenly realised that his policies have immiserated ordinary Nigerians, and, recently, announced “plans” to ameliorate their pains. However, those “plans” are too little, too late; and smack of cynical pre-election tactics. The most frustrating thing about President Tinubu’s economic reform is his refusal to recognise and acknowledge the central flaw of his flagship policies: the withdrawal of the fuel subsidy and the scrapping of the fixed exchange rate regime.

The two policies are, in themselves, not the issue. Both the fuel subsidy and the fixed exchange-rate regime were riddled with massive corruption. Moreover, the subsidy imposed a significant fiscal burden, partly due to subsidy scams, while the pegged currency triggered massive capital flight and the haemorrhaging of foreign exchange. So, there was a strong economic case for reform.

But here’s the issue. Every policy has costs and benefits, and some produce serious unintended consequences. Sound policymaking involves properly anticipating the adverse consequences of a proposed policy and putting in place adequate measures to mitigate those consequences, particularly ensuring effective protection for vulnerable citizens. For instance, in the UK, the government uses Impact Assessments, universally recognised tools for sound policymaking, to evaluate the economic, social and environmental effects of any major policy or legislative proposal.

Based on a cost-benefit analysis, the Impact Assessments quantify and weigh expected costs, benefits and risks to the economy, businesses and individuals, thereby enabling the government to design appropriate mitigating measures. However, the concept of Impact Assessments is completely alien to policymaking in Nigeria; and with a president like Tinubu, who acts impulsively, weighing the costs, benefits and risks of policies is never part of any reform design.

Indeed, President Tinubu was absolutely fixated on the benefits of removing the fuel subsidy and scrapping the pegged exchange rate, completely ignoring the other side of the ledger. He gave not an iota of thought to, or cared a hoot about, the knock-on effects of the new policies on the livelihood of ordinary Nigerians. Now, there have been some macroeconomic improvements, although some are not linked to the reforms.

For instance, “high oil prices”, as the World Bank observed, “strengthened export earnings and contributed to a larger current account surplus.” But some benefits have resulted directly from Tinubu’s reforms. The removal of the petrol subsidy has dramatically increased gross federation revenues, reportedly raking in about N15 trillion since 2023, when the subsidy was removed.

The massive devaluation of the naira, triggered by the scrapping of the fixed exchange rates, has made non-oil exports cheaper, resulting in a record $6bn export revenue in 2025. Furthermore, exchange rate flexibility, coupled with the CBN’s hiking of interest rates, has brought in huge foreign portfolio inflows, further boosting the external reserves, which rose above $54bn in September this year.

Yet, it would be utterly wrong to judge the success of President Tinubu’s economic reforms merely by macroeconomic indicators, such as higher portfolio inflows and higher external reserves, without considering the adverse effects of the naira’s massive devaluation, which creates imported inflation through increased domestic costs of imported goods and inputs, and persistently high interest rates, which raise the borrowing costs for businesses, undermining their profitability.

Truth be told, despite the government’s claims of macroeconomic stability, the fundamentals are weak, not strong, although things are not as volatile as they were under the Buhari administration. With the exchange rate still at about N1,400/$, compared to N470/$ before Tinubu floated the naira, or with the interest rate still at 23 per cent, only recently as high as 27 per cent, it’s hard to talk of macro-economic stability or strong fundamentals.

And GDP growth at 4.2 per cent won’t engender meaningful prosperity in Nigeria. What’s more, even the much-trumpeted higher foreign reserves still cover less than seven weeks of imports, just over half the 12-week benchmark. Add all this together, “Nigeria’s recovery is shallow and risky”, as SBM Intelligence, the respected market research firm, observed in a recent report.

But the weakest link in President Tinubu’s economic reform is it