By Kayode Oladele

Public speaking can sometimes be a delicate engagement, especially in a volatile political clime like Nigeria, where the opposition likes to make mountain out of a molehill. The only safeguard against deliberate misinterpretation is for speakers to be circumspect in navigating through complex issues and connecting with the audience.

Much as Senator Solomon Olamilekan Adeola (popularly known as Yayi) tried to stay within the ambit in his address to the audience at the second edition of his Town Hall Meeting, Mega Empowerment, and Thank You Tour held at Ayetoro in Yewa North Local Government Area of Ogun State at the weekend, some section of the media still misrepresented his clear and objective analysis and explanation of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s audacious policy reforms, notably subsidy removal and floatation of the naira vis-à-vis the lack of political will by the successive administrations in the country to take the bull by the horns even when it was the right policy direction in order to salvage the country’s economy and prevent it from sinking further into doldrum. It is important to note that I was present at the occasion and Senator Adeola, in his speech did not single out any particular previous administration for being responsible for this let alone mentioning the administration of the former President Muhammadu Buhari.

While lamenting the corruption and wasteful spending that characterized the disbursement of fuel subsidies to oil marketers, Senator Adeola decried the subsidy regime. He stated that the fiscal reality meant that the subsidy regime which had become unsustainable while it had also plunged the country into unavoidable debts running into trillions of Naira.

He stated further that President Tinubu’s policy on the removal of subsidy has unbounded funds that the government is presently deploying more productively to capital investments. In his opinion, this would also reduce the country’s overburdened fiscal deficit.

He also made similar remarks on Naira flotation and noted that the combination of the forces of supply and demand for foreign exchange now determines the exchange rate as opposed to the Central Bank of Nigeria.

However, some print media and online platforms sensationalized the story and quoted him as blaming the immediate past regime of former President Muhammadu Buhari for borrowing over $400 billions to sustain the stability of the naira and payment of fuel subsidy.

As stated above, there was nowhere Sen. Adeola specifically singled out Buhari for the nation’s debt burden and economic woes. He rather noted with dismay how successive governments in Nigeria had ignored the negative economic implications of subsidy payment to racketeers in the downstream subsector of the oil industry, who literally milked the nation dry. And as I stated above, he then went further to commend President Tinubu for the courageous reforms he had initiated in the overall interest of the survival of the nation’s economy. Therefore, it is imperative to correct the twisted narrative and put things in proper perspectives.

Happily, Sen. Adeola himself has taken immediate steps to clarify this mischaracterization. In a quick reaction to the inaccurate narration, a statement signed by Adeola’s Media Adviser, Chief Kayode Odunaro, debunked the report accusing former President Mohammadu Buhari of borrowing $400 billion to stabilize the naira against the dollar during his tenure.

The statement reads in part: “Contrary to the report in some major newspapers and some online blogs on Saturday April 26, 2025, the senator at his Town Hall Meeting/Mega Empowerment Programme with constituents in Ayetoro, Ogun State, speaking mostly in local Yoruba language, justified the removal of oil subsidy and the floating of the exchange rate by the incumbent administration of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, saying without these bold fiscal policies, Nigerian economy was headed for a collapse.

“Senator Adeola stated that previous administrations have been spending trillions of naira on fuel subsidy and defending the naira against the dollar, adding that this was to the benefit of a very negligible number
of Nigerians while Nigeria accumulated huge national debt.
“At no point did the senator mentioned the name of the former President Buhari or made specific reference to his administration as incurring a debt of $400billion. It is therefore clear that the debt figure attributed to former President Buhari administration is a misquotation from reporters’ translation of the senator’s speech from Yoruba to English language.

There is no denying the fact that fuel subsidy removal has been a hard nut to crack for all previous governments, including the military and civilian administrations. As expected, the decision by President Tinubu to abolish subsidy payment has both supporters and critics, with some arguing it’s a step towards economic reform and others claiming it burdens the citizens. Yet, he maintained his firm position on the reform not minding its political implications,
Today, not only that the removal has eliminated unnecessary government’s expenditure, freeing more funds to address the pressing needs, it has also enhanced efficient allocation of resources and reduced market distortions.

The funds released from the removal has also been deployed to infrastructure development as well as provision of safety net for the vulnerable populace to reduce poverty and inequality.
For obvious reasons, the decision to remove fuel subsidies is a very complex one. It is partly the reason the previous governments borrowed money to subsidize fuel prices and stabilize the naira against the dollar.

This approach had endured for so long before the Buhari administration took over in 2015. Nearly all successive governments before it borrowed to stabilize the naira, maintain economic stability and confidence in the country’s currency. But the approach has been found to be superficial and unsustainable, hence the imperative of the removal. The removal has far reaching implications, short and long-term consequences, on the economy. Borrowing to fund subsidies and stabilize the currency has led to the current accumulation of huge debt burden, which has now become challenging to manage and repay. Borrowing to fund subsidy payment has also perpetuated unsustainable economic practices. President Tinubu took a different path because he did not want to sustain the legacy of borrowing which has accounted for our stunted economy and financial insatiability.

Senator Adeola also observed that the inevitable reason for the removal of the fuel subsidy by President Tinubu’s administration was to address some of the challenges of corruption, allegations of inflated landing costs and padding of fuel import bills which had plagued the old regime of fuel subsidy.

This in a nutshell, is the major thrust of Senator Adeola’s submission at the Town Hall Meeting which has been misrepresented by the media. Hence the need to make this clarification.

*Oladele is a former Chairman of the House of Representatives Committee on Financial Crimes and currently serves as member of the Federal Character Commission, representing Ogun State.

​