Though The Economy No More Bleeds, According To Wale Edun, To Nigerians, It Is Hemorrhaging

BY ISAAC ASABOR

In a recent declaration, Nigeria’s Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister of the Economy, Mr. Wale Edun, stated that the economic initiatives of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s administration had stopped the nation’s economy from “bleeding.” He pointed specifically to the removal of fuel and foreign exchange subsidies, claiming these measures were saving 5% of Nigeria’s GDP annually. While this assertion paints a hopeful picture, the everyday reality for most Nigerians tells a different story: the economy is not just recovering; it feels as though it is haemorrhaging.

Speaking at the National Council on Finance and Economic Development (NACOFED) in Bauchi, Mr Edun praised the removal of subsidies as a game-changer. He argued that these policies would redirect funds to critical sectors such as infrastructure, education, and healthcare while creating an investor-friendly economic environment.

On paper, these reforms seem bold and promising. The government eliminated subsidies that allegedly benefited only a few elites and neighbouring countries, with the hope of channelling the savings into developmental projects. However, for the average Nigerian, these promises remain unfulfilled. Prices continue to soar, unemployment persists, and basic living conditions have worsened.

Contrary to Mr. Edun’s optimistic claims, the removal of subsidies has unleashed a cascade of economic challenges. The end of the fuel subsidy, for instance, triggered an astronomical increase in transportation costs. This, in turn, caused prices of goods and services to skyrocket. The removal of foreign exchange subsidies has led to a sharp depreciation of the naira, further increasing the cost of imports and exacerbating inflation.

For Nigerians already grappling with poverty, these reforms have felt more like economic punishment than relief. The harsh reality is that while the economy may have stopped bleeding in the narrow sense described by Mr Edun, it now suffers from a deeper, systemic haemorrhage affecting millions of lives.

Mr. Edun highlighted the supposed benefits of increased inflows to the federation account from subsidy removal, assuring that the funds would benefit federal, state, and local governments. Yet, there is little evidence to suggest these gains are translating into tangible benefits for ordinary Nigerians. The promised improvements in healthcare, education, and infrastructure remain elusive.

For instance, public hospitals remain under-resourced, with patients often forced to pay out-of-pocket for basic treatments. Schools face similar neglect, with overcrowded classrooms and unpaid teachers.

In a similar vein, roads, power supply, and water systems have seen minimal progress. The much-touted redirection of subsidy funds appears to have stalled at the policy level.

Still, in the same vein, rising food prices and transport costs have pushed many Nigerians below the poverty line, negating whatever macroeconomic benefits the government might claim.

The government’s macroeconomic policies may seem sound in theory, but their execution has left much to be desired. Subsidy removal, while arguably necessary, was implemented without adequate palliatives or transitional support for the populace. The result has been widespread discontent, with many Nigerians feeling abandoned by their leaders.

Moreover, the government’s communication strategy has done little to inspire confidence. Sweeping statements about economic progress ring hollow when people struggle to afford a decent meal. Mr Edun’s claim that the economy is no longer bleeding feels disconnected from the lived experiences of millions.

The minister’s assertion that President Tinubu has halted the economy’s bleeding, projecting an image of economic stabilisation under his administration, is unarguably a stark contrast with the World Bank’s recent assessment, which indicated that Tinubu’s policies are not yielding the desired results, particularly in addressing poverty and inflation.

The contradiction highlights a growing disparity between the government’s narrative of progress and independent evaluations of Nigeria’s economic realities, raising questions about the true impact of the administration’s policies on the lives of ordinary Nigerians.

By virtue of being a Journalist on the Business Desk, permit me to suggest in this context that if the government truly wants to stop the haemorrhaging and not just declare it stopped, it must take bold and immediate action.
The first step to be taken in this context is that the government must show Nigerians exactly how the savings from subsidy removal are being spent. Detailed, publicly available reports on investments in critical sectors would go a long way in rebuilding trust.

In a similar vein, it is germane to remind the government that the distribution of palliatives has been inconsistent and poorly managed. Therefore, a more systematic approach is needed to ensure that relief measures reach those who need them most.

Also, to combat inflation and reduce dependence on imports, the government should invest heavily in agriculture and manufacturing. This will not only stabilize prices but also create much-needed jobs.

Again, there is no denying the fact that mismanagement and corruption have historically undermined Nigeria’s development efforts. Therefore, strengthening accountability mechanisms will ensure that public funds are used effectively.

Added to the above-suggested steps to be taken by the government in this context is that labour unions, civil society groups, and private sector players should be included in policy discussions to ensure reforms are socially inclusive and economically viable.

Without a doubt, Nigerians deserve more than rhetoric. For decades, Nigerians have endured economic policies that promise much but deliver little. The Tinubu administration has an opportunity to change this narrative, but time is running out. The people are tired of rhetoric and demand action that leads to measurable improvements in their lives.

WhileMr. Edun speaks of stopping the economy’s bleeding, Nigerians see no signs of recovery. Instead, they witness a government seemingly out of touch with their struggles. If this administration is serious about building a stable and sustainable economy, it must address the haemorrhaging head-on and prioritize the welfare of its citizens over lofty declarations.

The road to recovery is long, but it begins with acknowledging the reality of the situation. Only then can the government take the decisive steps needed to turn rhetoric into results. Until then, Nigerians will continue to question whether their economy is truly stabilising or still haemorrhaging.