Informal Sector Workers Disappointed with Insufficient N8,000 Amid Fuel Subsidy Removal

Spread the love

Informal Sector Workers Disappointed with Insufficient N8,000 Amid Fuel Subsidy Removal

Informal sector workers, represented by the Federation of Informal Sector Workers (FIWON), have expressed their dissatisfaction with the recently announced N8,000 allocation for 12 million households by President Bola Tinubu. They argue that the amount is inadequate given the removal of fuel subsidy and its detrimental impact on micro and small businesses, resulting in job losses.

In a statement issued by the General Secretary, Gbenga Komolafe, FIWON highlighted the adverse consequences of fuel subsidy removal, including a significant increase in the cost of essential items such as food and transportation. The N8,000 monthly grant, as reported in the media, will be disbursed through the Conditional Cash Transfer mechanism, but FIWON asserts that this amount is meager and insufficient to sustain individuals, let alone support the basic needs of vulnerable Nigerians.

Furthermore, FIWON questions the basis for identifying 12 million households as beneficiaries, considering the country’s large population of over 130 million people experiencing multidimensional poverty. They raise concerns about the potential exclusion of deserving individuals, citing past programs like “MarketMoni,” where privileged Nigerians were credited with N10,000 while the less privileged had limited awareness and access to the initiative.

FIWON highlights the Federal Government’s National Social Investment Programme (NSIP) as a significant financial intermediation effort in recent years. They emphasize that similar programs were implemented between 2017 and 2019, attracting substantial investments, including billions of dollars.

In summary, informal sector workers express disappointment with the N8,000 grant, considering its inadequacy in the face of fuel subsidy removal and the associated economic challenges faced by micro and small businesses. They also raise concerns about the identification process for beneficiaries and draw attention to previous programs that exhibited disparities in distribution.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *