Share!
Former Senator representing Bayelsa East, Ben Murray-Bruce, has rejected calls for the restoration of Nigeria’s fuel subsidy, urging state governors and the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) to instead deploy part of their increased revenues to subsidise intra-state transportation.
Bruce, in a policy intervention on the country’s rising cost of living, argued that reviving the fuel subsidy would return Nigeria to a system that had persisted for decades without adequately benefiting ordinary Nigerians.
According to him, the former subsidy regime created opportunities for corruption, smuggling and rent-seeking, while failing to provide sustainable relief to households.
“Atiku Abubakar is wrong. Bringing back the fuel subsidy is not the answer. We tried it for forty years,” Bruce said, arguing that Nigeria should focus on targeted interventions that directly reduce the cost of living.
He acknowledged the political difficulty associated with the removal of the subsidy by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, saying the Federal Government had also significantly increased allocations to state governments through the Federation Account.
Bruce therefore challenged the 36 state governors and the FCT Minister to assume greater responsibility for transportation within their respective jurisdictions.
“Now the states must do theirs,” he said, insisting that subsidising intra-state transportation should primarily be addressed by state governments rather than the Federal Government.
He argued that the constitutional framework gives state governments significant responsibilities over transportation within their territories, particularly following constitutional amendments that expanded the role of states in the transport sector.
Bruce said the sharp rise in transport fares had become a major component of Nigeria’s cost-of-living crisis, noting that the cost of a single bus journey within Nigerian cities had risen dramatically in recent years.
He warned that when workers cannot afford transportation to their workplaces, the impact goes beyond mobility to affect employment, productivity and household income.
“A man who cannot afford to reach his workplace does not really have a job. A child who cannot afford to reach school does not really have an education,” he said.
To address the problem, Bruce proposed a four-point transport subsidy model for state governments and the FCT.
First, he called for free transportation for students travelling to and from school.
Second, he proposed a maximum fare of ₦500 for intra-city journeys, with lower fares in smaller cities and towns.
Third, he advised governors against purchasing new government-owned buses, taxis or boats for the scheme.
Instead, he recommended that governments register existing commercial transport operators, regulate fares and reimburse drivers for the subsidised portion of each journey.
“We have seen those vehicles rusting in government yards from Sokoto to Yenagoa,” he said, arguing that governments could achieve better results by working with transport operators already on the roads.
Fourth, Bruce called for technology-driven verification to prevent fraud.
He proposed the use of GPS-enabled vehicles and digital or tap-card ticketing systems to ensure that governments only pay for journeys that can be verified.
“If a trip did not happen, nobody gets paid. That is how you kill fraud before it is born,” he said.
According to him, the model would also provide greater income stability for commercial drivers, who currently depend largely on daily passenger volumes.
Under the proposed arrangement, he said, drivers could receive predictable payments from government while maintaining ownership and responsibility for their vehicles.
Bruce further argued that targeted transport subsidies would leave more disposable income in the hands of households, allowing citizens to spend the savings on food, rent, healthcare, education and other necessities.
He also proposed that states dedicate no more than five per cent of their Federation Account Allocation (FAAC) receipts to the programme.
“Five per cent. Ninety-five per cent remains untouched for everything else,” he said.
Bruce maintained that the intervention could be introduced before 2027 because it would not require the construction of new transport infrastructure.
Instead, he suggested that states begin with the busiest routes, publish their expenditure and gradually expand the scheme based on measurable results
The former senator also urged President Tinubu not to assume responsibility for funding or administering state transport subsidy programmes.
Rather, he called on the President to write to the 36 governors and the FCT Minister, reminding them of their responsibility to address transportation challenges within their jurisdictions.
“I am not asking you to fund this. I am not asking you to run it,” Bruce said, addressing the President.
“I am asking you to write to all 36 governors and the FCT Minister and tell them plainly that this one is theirs and that the Federal Government has sent them the money, and the Constitution has given them the power, and there is nothing left to wait for.”
Bruce’s proposal comes amid continuing public debate over how Nigeria can cushion households from the effects of fuel price increases without returning to the costly and controversial fuel subsidy regime.
His central argument is that government intervention should shift from subsidising petrol consumption to directly reducing the cost of essential services, particularly transportation, which he considers one of the most immediate pressures on household incomes.
