A nongovernmental organisation under the auspices of Plan International has said that President Bola Tinubu’s speech of Sunday, August 4, on the ongoing #EndBadGovernance protests failed to address the issues leading to the street campaigns.
The organisation’s country director, Charles Usie in a statement yesterday, said although the president’s speech was heavy on efforts his government is making to address some of the socio-economic challenges the country is confronted with, it did not address the issues among which is how inflation and hunger in the land affect the mass of the people.
Usie said the speech looked more like a campaign outing full of elitist terminologies, as it failed to address issues of poor governance.
“Nothing was said about hunger and illiteracy. The level of pillage down to the smallest item that bore the semblance of iron by little lads is a testimony of what lies ahead if quick measures are not taken by the government.
“We expected the president to address issues bordering on bad governance, high inflation, and the attendant high cost of living and hunger by the commoners especially women and young people.
“We thought the president would address how the government was dealing with corruption in high places and the general insecurity in the land including kidnapping and abduction by criminals,” he said.
Usie further said that kidnapping is the single most daring challenge to Nigeria’s food security at the moment, that the country’s livelihood is generally tied to subsistence farmers who have been forced off their farms at the moment by kidnappers.
“There are scientific predictions that have been made on the impact this would have on the nation’s economy and they are coming to pass. If the millions of farmers cannot till the land for fear of being killed or abducted, how can the nation feed?” he said.
He further called on the president to bring down transportation and fuel costs; the two elements that directly impact every citizen, young or old, rich or poor.
“The fuel subsidy was removed with a promise to channel the gains into people-oriented projects. That does not seem to be happening yet and the question then arises: What is the point of subsidy removal if it will cost an arm and leg of the people?” he asked.
