Monday 13 April, 2026

Tinubu asked ministers to "look into" fuel price mitigation on Friday. The TUC named a specific plan weeks ago. These are not the same thing.

There's a specific moment that tells you how Nigerian governance responds to crises.

It's not the moment the crisis arrives. It's the moment the president acknowledges it.

On Friday, April 11, Tinubu was in Yenagoa commissioning projects: a 60-megawatt power plant, a 630-metre bridge, a new city road. At the civic reception afterward, someone in the crowd pushed back on the fuel prices. Tinubu acknowledged it. "The fuel prices are biting hard," he said. He told his Finance and Budget ministers, who were present, to look into mitigation measures.

No named measure. No timeline. No named beneficiary. No budget line.

Compare that to what the Trade Union Congress put on the table weeks earlier. The TUC president, Comrade Festus Osifo, stood in front of journalists in Abuja and explained the arithmetic precisely. The 2026 budget benchmarks crude at $64.85 per barrel. Crude is currently trading above $100. That's roughly $35 per barrel in excess revenue above the government's own budget assumptions. At Nigeria's production volumes, that windfall is substantial. The TUC's ask was specific: take 60% of that excess, approximately $20 per barrel, and use it to subsidise crude supply to Dangote and modular refineries. Osifo said this would bring pump prices down within two weeks.

You can argue with the proposal. You can question whether Dangote's pricing structure makes the maths work exactly as claimed. But a specific, costed plan is sitting in the public record, unaddressed.

The contrast between these two responses is not accidental. It is what Nigerian governance does when it encounters a crisis it cannot directly control. The state cannot stop the Iran war. It cannot reopen the Strait of Hormuz. So it responds to the parts of the crisis it can name. The suffering. Without committing to the parts that require a decision.

Acknowledging that fuel prices are "biting hard" is not a policy. It's an observation. The TUC made the same observation and then named a plan. The government made the observation and named an intention to think about a plan. Nigeria is currently living inside the gap between those two positions.