The Poor Are Hungry & We Were Busy Feeding On Them – Former Bauchi Gov, Isa Yuguda Reveal

Former Bauchi State Governor, Mallam Isa Yuguda, has expressed his support for the decision made by the Bola Tinubu administration to completely end the controversial fuel subsidy payments. This comes as Nigerians continue to face economic hardships due to the high cost of Premium Motor Spirit (PMS) nationwide.

During an interview on Channels TV’s ‘Sunrise Daily’ on Monday morning, Yuguda, who also serves as the Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the All Progressives Congress (APC) Professionals Forum, emphasized the rampant corruption that has surrounded the fuel subsidy payments over the years. He stated that this corruption has had severe consequences, resulting in the loss of lives among the poor Nigerians while benefiting the nation’s political elite.

Additionally, Yuguda alleged that President Buhari had knowledge of the corruption involved in fuel subsidies but may have lacked the necessary political will to address the issue and remove the subsidy.

Yuguda suggested that former President Buhari may not have taken action to remove the fuel subsidy due to the powerful interests involved and the potential risks associated with such a move. However, he noted that as the President of Nigeria, Buhari had adequate security measures in place. If he were in Buhari’s position, Yuguda stated that he would have courageously made the decision to eliminate the subsidy. He emphasized the dire situation faced by the impoverished population, as they suffer while the political elite, in collaboration with foreign entities, exploit their circumstances. The robust security measures in place for the Nigerian President raise questions as to why the fuel subsidy was not removed earlier. This situation leaves one to speculate that there may have been undisclosed complexities surrounding the issue. In many professions, individuals are required to make decisions on a daily basis, acknowledging that they can be either right or wrong. In this particular case, the former president recognized the merit of a beneficial decision but did not act upon it. This raises the question of why there was a hesitation to take action.