CHRICED Replies Ben Bruce: The Money May Be in the States, But the Burden Was Created in Abuja
The debate over who bears responsibility for Nigeria’s worsening economic hardship has taken another turn, with the Executive Director of the Resource Centre for Human Rights and Civic Education (CHRICED), Comrade Ibrahim M. Zikirullahi, pushing back against comments by Senator Ben Murray-Bruce on rising transport costs and the role of state governments.
The latest response followed Senator Bruce’s defence of his proposal aimed at reducing the burden of transportation on Nigerians, particularly students and low-income earners. His recommendations include free bus rides for students, a ₦500 fare cap, retaining existing buses rather than purchasing new ones, and the use of GPS technology to verify and monitor the scheme.
Bruce had also argued that state governments now receive significantly higher allocations from the Federation Account and should use the additional resources to cushion the effects of rising transport costs. He further linked the present economic difficulties to challenges that predated the current administration, including the cost of fuel subsidy.
But Zikirullahi disagreed with the senator’s framing of the crisis, arguing that increased allocations to states do not absolve the Federal Government of responsibility for policies that, in his view, contributed significantly to the hardship Nigerians are facing.
“Senator Bruce and I are indeed looking at the same suffering. But we are not looking at it from the same angle. He is looking at the states. I am looking at the nation,” Zikirullahi said.
The CHRICED executive director maintained that while governors have a responsibility to provide relief to citizens, the Federal Government must also accept responsibility for national policies, particularly the removal of fuel subsidy and its impact on inflation, transportation and household purchasing power.
He rejected the argument that the states alone should shoulder the burden of responding to the economic crisis.
“States did not remove subsidy. States did not announce a policy without consultation. States did not trigger the inflation spiral. The Federal Government did,” he argued.
Bruce had defended the removal of subsidy as a difficult but necessary decision, maintaining that the previous arrangement was unsustainable and disproportionately benefited the wealthy. He also pointed to increased Federation Account Allocation Committee (FAAC) revenues, student loans and cash-transfer programmes as part of the Federal Government’s efforts to address the consequences of its economic reforms.
Zikirullahi, however, said the existence of such interventions did not automatically mean that the policies were achieving their intended impact.
“A policy is not judged by its announcement. It is judged by its impact. And the impact is clear: Nigerians are suffering,” he said.
The CHRICED director also challenged the use of older poverty and subsidy-related data to explain the current situation. He argued that while Nigeria’s economic problems existed before the present administration, the removal of subsidy without adequate cushioning measures accelerated the hardship.
“He says the house was already burning. But the Federal Government poured kerosene on the flames by removing subsidy without preparing fire exits for the people,” Zikirullahi said.
At the centre of the disagreement is therefore not necessarily Bruce’s transport proposal itself, but the question of where responsibility for the present hardship should lie.
Zikirullahi said he does not oppose Bruce’s proposals, including free student transportation, fare caps, GPS monitoring or continued use of existing buses. Rather, he objects to what he described as an attempt to shift responsibility for the economic consequences of federal policies to the states.
He further argued that rising transport fares cannot be treated as an isolated state-level problem when fuel prices, monetary conditions and major economic policies are largely determined at the federal level.
The disagreement comes against the backdrop of growing public concern over the cost of living, transport fares, food prices and the purchasing power of Nigerian households.
While Bruce has focused on practical measures that could help states reduce transportation costs, Zikirullahi insists that such interventions must be accompanied by accountability for the national policies that created the conditions requiring those interventions in the first place.
The CHRICED executive director acknowledged that governors must also be held accountable for how they spend increased allocations and whether such resources translate into tangible benefits for citizens. However, he maintained that accountability should be shared rather than shifted.
“Governors must act. But the Federal Government must lead responsibly. And leadership begins with acknowledging the consequences of one’s decisions,” he said.
