Mr. Onanuga, your piece makes a spirited case that President Tinubu took hard, necessary decisions in May 2023 and deserves credit for changing Nigeria’s fiscal trajectory.
On substance, you are right on the diagnosis of what was inherited: subsidy was unsustainable, multiple FX rates enabled arbitrage, debt service was choking revenue, and many states could not meet salary obligations. Removing subsidy and unifying exchange rates were decisive breaks. They restored policy credibility and that matters. International investors and institutions have acknowledged that shift. For that, the administration earns acknowledgement, not just applause.
Where an objective reply must part ways with your essay is on the link between policy intent and lived experience. You argue that claims of hardship lack “empirical proof.” Yet the data and the market tell another story. NBS data for 2023-2025 showed food inflation and transport costs spiking after subsidy removal and FX harmonization. Households felt it immediately. Businesses reported higher operating costs and some exited. That is not opposition propaganda; it is the short-term cost of adjustment. Reforms can be correct and still hurt. The honest position is to admit both: the policy direction is clearer, and the social pain has been real. Credibility grows when government owns both sides.
You cite the stock market as proof of success: ASI from ∼53,000 to ∼250,000 and market cap from ₦30tn to ₦160tn. Those numbers are verifiable and they signal confidence in direction. But markets and citizens are different audiences. A rising ASI does not automatically mean more jobs, lower food prices, or better clinics. An objective assessment separates financial market performance from household welfare. Both are important, but conflating them weakens the argument.
On infrastructure, the ambition of the Sokoto-Badagry and Lagos-Calabar coastal highways is undeniable. Successive governments avoided them. If delivered to standard, on budget, and on time, they will alter Nigeria’s economic geography. Critics asking about loans, cost, and procurement are not “myopic.” Borrowing for capital projects is normal, but Nigerians have a right to transparent bill of quantities, competitive bidding, and published timelines. The caution about past projects like the Port Harcourt monorail is fair. The same caution should apply now so that “roads that outlast this generation” are not just rhetoric.
On power, your clarification of the President’s campaign quote is useful. Discos, privatized in 2013, bear direct responsibility for end-user supply. Government’s role is to enable. Siemens grid intervention, activating idle GENCOs, clearing legacy debts, and deploying over 2.5 million meters are concrete steps. GAMCO is a structural reform. Objectively, progress should be measured by fewer outages and reduced estimated billing, not by promises alone. Nigerians will judge 24/7 power by meters that run, not by press releases.
On education, NELFUND and CREDICORP are tangible. ₦282bn committed and about 1.6 million students accessing loans and stipends is direct impact. Keeping universities open by renegotiating the 2009 ASUU agreement is also significant. Technical school allowances and renewed TETFUND research grants address long-neglected gaps. These deserve credit without qualification.
On security, you are candid that “it has not been all rosy.” Armed forces have neutralized leaders and foot soldiers, but banditry, kidnapping, and attacks on vulnerable communities continue. Equipment and intelligence support are necessary but not sufficient. The political economy of insecurity — local conflicts, weak governance, and sponsors — requires sustained, coordinated action. Hope from foreign partners is not a plan. Citizens measure security by whether they can farm, travel, and sleep without fear.
Finally, tone. Calling critics “blind” or “myopic” closes space for dialogue. A government that says it took bullets for reforms should also have the resilience to absorb criticism. Opposition will scrutinize. That is democracy. Government’s job is to answer with data, timelines, and correction when things go wrong.
Objectively, the record at three years reads like this:
President Tinubu made hard fiscal choices Nigeria avoided for decades. The economy is more transparent, states have more fiscal room, and investment signals are stronger. Those are achievements. At the same time, cost of living rose sharply, job creation lags population growth, infrastructure must prove durability, power is still unreliable for most Nigerians, and security remains the most urgent crisis.
The “bullet” metaphor captures courage. Survival will be judged by whether the average Nigerian feels safer, earns more, and lives better by 2027. If the administration matches bold policy with equal boldness in transparency, execution speed, and targeted social protection, then “Renewed Hope” will rest on results Nigerians can touch. That is the fair standard for government, and the fair standard for those of us responding to it.
May God bless Nigeria!
Peter Agi (FCA)
Public Affairs Commentator writes from Ijegu-Ojor, Yala LGA.