 I'm back with the breakfast this morning, and to make sense of our conversation would have Ola Podeh show me who will join the conversation to talk about the issues, none. Notwithstanding, proposals and campaign promises to end fuel subsidy, organized labor have insisted that until the federal government provides both us an alternative for subsidy removal to workers, plans against the removal will be kicked against. organized labor said putting some of these measures in place would serve as an alternative to fuel subsidy removal. The federal government has allocated 3.36 trillion a year for fuel subsidy in 2023, as the country's debt profile hits one hundred and two billion dollars. The Minister of Finance Zyna Pakmet said the 2023 budget proposal has a budget deficit of 10.78 trillion. He also said that it would be funded through domestic and multi-lateral borrowings and proceeds from privatization, with about 11 trillion spent to so far on fuel subsidy in seven years. The federal government admitted that the facility was no longer sustainable. Therefore, advocating is removal. We have two gentlemen joining the conversation and to kick start the discussion on the breakfast. Thank you so much. He's an energy consultant in Abyukuta. Good morning. Thanks for having me. Thank you so much. So what do you make of the concerns of labor? To the extent that labor exists to protect its members, which in this case are comments of employees. What we are totally right in their objectives is a different thing. But in terms of what they are doing, they are doing what they are set up to do. So what normally governments will do is basically to engage them and allow them to see the reality that is on the ground. In the respect of the reality that is on the ground, that they will expect whether some understanding from labor to see the logic of things and then a way out of the fashion. I mean, Abyukuta said that the key things we do is are government and labor. It's like in our scenario. At some point, they don't need to sit down, be a big boy pants and do the things that needs to be done. I mean, I'd like you to be more detailed on some of the concerns that they have talked about. You're asking that there should be certain measures that should be put in place before, you know, fuel subsidy removal, however, so that you would cushion the effect. And I'd like you to talk about that. Now, one of such concerns is the issue of having a refineries functional. Do you think that that's doable? The issue of subsidy and refinery is that in number of times are not properly analyzed. The fact that they say refinery does not necessarily mean that the prices will go down. It's important to know that. However, the way subsidy things are calculated is why people are, I mean, are looking at that. Because refinery is still going to buy crude. The crude is not going to come to them for free. And they are going to buy it at the same price. The second part of the refinery is that they finally is actually at liberty to sell crude abroad. So in the NIRA show for, it came and it does not become competitive for them. They want to sell it abroad. So there are certain, and it's a private company. So there are certain realities that needs to be kept in perspective when we talk about the refinery coming in. As for labor demanding that certain things be in place before the forms of city happens, those are also legitimate concerns. Because you cannot leave the economy to the raw forces of demand and supply. The economy can collapse. So society has to know it can collapse. So there must be certain things that was being placed. So the government haven't determined that there's a need for increase. We will basically the idea of the first subsidy over. There will be balance in it. But what is more important is not so much that in the increase or the same first subsidy over. We need to realize that at least about four or five times in the past, government has to have removed first subsidy only to announce a few months down the line that there was under recovery or something was not in place. So when first subsidy is going to be fully removed, it is important that the whole thing is transparent. It's also important that the parameters for determining this, this remover and the figures they are clear to everyone. Because in the absence of that, we will just be running around and first subsidy removal will just be another need. So are you saying that it's not important that we have our refineries working, that we are not still talking about subsidy removal and still having to import the refined crude into the country? That's very far from what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that there is two more expectations on the refinery. The refinery is not going to be magic. So the refinery is going to also spend money to refine the crude. The main difference between the crude, I mean, the finished product that is coming from the refinery and the one that you are buying from outside is the transportation it takes to bring it to Nigeria. So the refinery is going to operate like any other refinery. The refinery is also going to buy crude. Now, in this refinery buys crude and they refine it. And for any reason, the crude, I mean, their cost of production, they are not able to meet it, just like we have in the power sector. They may be looking at, because the private company, they may be looking at selling abroad and then nobody will be really legitimately able to stop them. Or they will have a situation where there is uncertainty and crisis. These are facts. So it's important that in as much as we have this expectation to come from the refinery, which is good, we also need to also realize that it is not a government company. It is a government agency that is set out for development. A private company is set out to make profit. There's a big difference between the two. So, yes, we are optimistic, but we cautiously optimistic in this regard. That's my view. Well, it's already sounding like it would be preferred. It would be just be a preferable thing to have the product imported being bad. I mean, it's almost the same thing as saying you are having to import the product and refining the product to just buy yourself, especially when, you know, this agency does not exist for profit purpose, but just to render essential service. But we move away from that. I also like you to share your thoughts on, you know, there's been several promises and campaigns and we know, you know, the thoughts of this government prior to this particular time on the issue of subsidy. And up until this moment, we see the budget, what the federal government has allocated to fill subsidy, 3.36 trillion for 2023, despite the fact that the country's debt profile is on the high. We're looking at 102 billion dollars. What are your thoughts? I believe that there was a community within the hands of reps that investigated the subsidy. I think it is important for members of the media to try to get the percentage of currency. I think in there, there is some analysis on the cost of the subsidy and how the subsidy comes about. Subsidy is not the enemy. I think it is the nature of the subsidy that makes an issue. It is not so much about the amount of subsidy. Into what is the issue is that the amount of that subsidy is not going to the subsidy activity that is what we need to look into. And that's the responsibility for all of us. The other side of it is that we can ensure 100% deregulation, where there's important for it to be balanced. It has to be important for everybody and only limited to a few people. But that also has its own issues. So at the end of the day, it is our own responsibility. And when I say our, I'm talking about every Nigerian, particularly the media, to understand in figures in NARA and combo subsidy. Because for now, when we talk subsidy, it is not an educational term. Who do we understand the basic? So those are the things that we need to look at. We need to understand the figures. We need to understand how any people can get figures. We need to understand how the ministry of finance approves those figures. And on the basis of that, we can now actually discuss this subsidy in a more intelligent parameters. When you mean more intelligent parameters, what do you mean? Because over time, there's been argument that, you know, who is the federal government subsidizing for? Some people are in support of the removal of subsidy. And one is still questioning why subsidy hasn't been removed. Even despite all of the campaigns prior to 2023, the government has said, hey, we're going to take out subsidy. And we're here now. So what aspect are you talking about? You know, what points are we saying? What intelligence are we talking about? Who are we subsidizing for? So let me ask something with three questions. How much is our subsidy? I mean, you know what I'm saying? How much of that in terms of the amount of subsidy is actual cash? How much of it goes into transportation? Let's not talk about the cash now. No, no. You know why that is important. So I'm asking, who are we subsidizing for? When we talk about subsidy, there was subsidizing. Who exactly benefits from subsidy? You benefit from subsidy. How do I benefit? Do I own a car? I mean, so you begin to look at how many persons own cars in Nigeria. Madam, whether you own a car or not, you enter a car. Even if it is Uber, even if it is the bus, as long as you enter a car, you benefit from subsidy. So the idea that subsidy belongs to a certain class is just so people don't understand it. And that is why I talk about a more intelligent, deep dive into one subsidy issue. Subsidy is really discussed as an exotic term because when you talk about subsidy, people don't really understand what it is. And until we understand the fundamentals, we will still continue to go into the circles. You cannot become a medical doctor if you go into physics and chemistry. If we don't understand these fundamentals, these viral figures, things, we will not really understand the subsidy. It is understanding the fundamentals that will allow a more intelligent discussion on the subsidy issue. And that is the point I'm trying to make. No, so as much as, I mean, you are here now. So I think it would be great for you to explain tonight. Durants, what subsidy is, maybe they need to understand. So the issue about subsidy being an organized crime, even when this administration had even alluded to that. So maybe you tell us what subsidy is and what we need to understand that we're missing. Well, I'm not sure anybody has said subsidy is an organized crime. I think what you are referring to, or what you may be referring to, was a comment by one of the enemies of the IOCs that talked about fuel cuts being organized crime, fuel cuts to being organized crime. What could be, is not peculiar to the petroleum industry. What could be as a term is an economic term. It's a petroleum term. It's a term referring to the fact that certain products or services may not be afforded to the general public, through the way to move to the process of demand and supply. And as a search, and as a result, what government does is that they take in part of the cost. And so it's like a distance. And when they now sell it at that, subsidy exists in every nation of the world. However, like I said, it is not the economic term subsidy. It is how the subsidy is being implemented. And if you don't understand how this petroleum subsidy is being implemented, you cannot have an intelligent discussion on it. That is my point. So how does it work? That's the question. I mean, you're here and we're asking that, you know, you tell us how it works. Apparently, we're having an intelligent conversation. You can go ahead. I mean, there's time. So we can talk about it. That's a simplistic question. It's like saying that tell me how to become a journalist in five minutes. I mean, there are certain, what I'm saying is that there are fundamentals to this thing. So what are the fundamentals? Yes, the fundamentals include understanding how it works. Understanding how it works is not something I can explain to you in five minutes. We have responsibilities as Nigerians to understand governance. Because in essence, everybody is part of the system. My point is that it is not enough to be talking about this thing on the surface. There is a responsibility to understand the things of how it works. And that's investigative journalism. And that is not going to happen by explaining in five minutes how it works. I can explain the framework for you. But you know, you're not just talking to me. You're talking to a lot of persons who are listening, not just in Nigeria, across different parts of Africa. So I mean, you have an opportunity, you have a shot at that. It would be important to just put us through it. So just ignore that I'm not here. You're speaking to some persons. However, it is there's also some part where you're supposed to do summary. You know, it's also part of it. I'm still saying that you cannot understand the details of how something works in five minutes, in ten minutes. It's not possible. And I am saying that it is the responsibility of every citizen to at least try in their own private time, understand the fundamentals. And it is when two, three, four people understand the fundamentals, that you can have a critical mass of people having intelligent discussions on this matter, so do you agree? The thing is, the conversation that we're having now, we're not talking about subsidy as a semantics part of English, you know, just the word. We're not just having it independently. We're talking about field subsidy and the fact that, you know, labor has raised some concerns. And that's what we're talking about. And they're also different, you know, perspective. You have different civil society organization who understand the dynamics or the fundamentals that you have raised. And a lot of them have come out to say, especially, I mean, you have that of policy alert, saying that Nigeria has constantly fostered corruption through petrol subsidy. So you're saying that, no, it's not, we can't constantly say that, we're saying that on the surface because we don't understand. So would you be saying that, you know, all this civil society organization are not in the know of what they are saying? My question again to you at this point would be, do you agree with policy alert that, you know, the subsidy regime and the entire subsidy conversation is shredded, you know, in corruption? Madam, I believe in speaking to the fact that anybody can see anything because that a question part of the Constitution does not mean the question is saying the truth. The point is, what I am saying is that people need to speak to figures and facts. The figures and facts are there to speak for themselves. However, there are very few who understand the figures and facts. What civil society is discussing is the political aspect of subsidy. What I am talking about is the technical aspect of subsidy and without understanding the technical aspect, you will not be able to have an intelligent discussion on the political aspect. Then if you don't give up on politics, do I feel right? Do I don't feel right? Do I want it? Do I don't want it? And that will not be in progress. I have asked you, and this would be, you know, another time I'm asking that maybe you can give us maybe just a line, a sentence. It's not a problem if it's in five minutes, you don't have to. But let's understand what the technical aspect of subsidy is that Nigerians don't understand. Okay, so let me, how is the subsidy calculated? You have to look at the cost of food. That is a public field. You have to look at the cost of transportation to the refinery. That's also public. You have to look at the cost of refinery, refinery and petroleum. That's the public cost as well. The second transportation, and that when it arrives on the ship, there's cost comes, duties, there's cost duties and all that. Anyway, you have all of these things and they come to a certain cost. What NNPC is saying is that that cost comes to a certain amount, maybe 800 Naira per litre or whatever. And we are saying that the account is selling it at 150. And that they want to, and they want to remove that 500 Naira that they are currently bearing. I mean, that figure is hypothetical because I'm not talking about figures now. And that figure, 500 Naira that they are moving per litre is what is coming to that 2.7 trillion that you are talking about. What I am saying is that it is the responsibility of every Nigerian to actually understand if with figures that they are quoting for us is authentic. It is not enough to just say that there is crime. That's an accusation. You have to understand and be able to point to the areas where there are issues. And if you don't understand and cannot point to the areas where there are issues, it's just an accusation. So what I'm saying is that for us to have intelligent discussions on this matter, we need to understand and be sure of those figures. Does that make sense? So the consent of Labour, I bring it to you again. Labour has asked the federal government to stop fuel subsidy and its importation. Do you think that that's not intelligent enough? That has nothing to do with what I said. The Labour is coming to a conclusion with their own interests. Is that the best interest in this industry? It doesn't matter. What Labour is doing is what they should be doing. But my own job is not to support anybody. My job as an analyst is to save the things as they are. The media has a responsibility. Labour has a responsibility. Government has a responsibility. Everybody does their job. So in other words, you have nothing to say as to the consent of Labour. You don't think it's okay for us to stop... No, I want to understand. No, the thing is, I really want to understand. You are an analyst and we're here to share your thoughts. I mean, we know that, you know, with fuel and, you know, it's products we have to import because our refineries are not functional. And we've also had the Minister of Finance saying that over time we have had to borrow, you know, to import because we don't really have, you know, funds. And now Labour has a concern. And Labour is saying we can't continue this way, you know, make the refineries functional. Let's stop the entire process. Whatever it is. So I'm asking you, do you think that the concerns that Labour have asked or have raised asking the government, you know, to stop the importation of petrol and also, you know, the removal of substance. Do you think it's rational? Whether or not is what they should be doing? That's not the point. The question is, is it rational? Why would anybody say it's not rational? There's a difference between what is rational and what is right or what is rational and what is wrong. What is wrong can be rational. What is right can also be rational. So the issue, I believe what we are trying to say is that whether it is the right thing. And I think that what I'm saying, I think you are looking at this thing in terms of lack of right. There are multifactorial issues and multifacial issues that are involved here. And I keep mentioning that what Labour is doing and saying in terms of their own objective is right. Labour has a purpose and their purpose as Labour is different from the purpose of government and NNPC as an organisation. Labour cannot be there to protect the interests of the NNPC. That is not their job. Labour is there to protect the interests of their own organisation and they will do that. The NNPC is there to protect the interests of the industry and what they do and they will do that. So I don't understand what exactly you want me to say. What I am saying is that everybody should do their job so that society can function. Labour is not just representing the interests of Labour. They are representing the interests of the people. That's why they are calling it because it's not just that. But we need to go away. I'm being prompted that we have no time. Thank you so much. Olupa, thank you so much for being part of the show this morning. You're welcome. Thank you very much. All right then, Olupa, show me energy consultant all the way. He joined us from Abiyakuta. Many thanks.