CPPE Urges FG to Expand Relief Beyond Fuel Discounts

The Centre for the Promotion of Private Enterprise (CPPE) has urged federal and state governments to expand relief measures beyond petrol price discounts, recommending subsidised mass transit, support for agricultural production and targeted assistance for vulnerable households to cushion the impact of rising energy costs.

The organisation said limited fuel price relief would have a similarly limited effect on household welfare, making broader interventions necessary to protect purchasing power, reduce business operating costs and ease pressure on food prices.

In a policy brief issued on Tuesday, October 13, 2026, CPPE Chief Executive Officer, Muda Yusuf, said governments should prioritise affordable public transportation, lower agricultural production costs and targeted social protection rather than rely predominantly on fuel price discounts.

The recommendations come amid a rise in global petroleum prices, driven principally by geopolitical tensions that have pushed crude oil prices above $100 per barrel.

CPPE said the price increase represents an external economic shock affecting both oil-producing and oil-importing countries, rather than a consequence of Nigeria’s removal of petrol subsidies.

The organisation argued that the Federal Government’s recent fuel price relief initiative through the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPC) should be treated as a temporary response to exceptional circumstances, not a reversal of the petroleum subsidy removal policy.

“Economic policies are instruments for promoting citizens’ welfare; they should not become rigid doctrines that prevent governments from responding to exceptional social and economic difficulties,” Yusuf said.

However, CPPE warned that the limited reach of the intervention made it necessary for the government to address other channels through which higher energy prices affect households and businesses.

Mass transit, agriculture take priority

CPPE identified affordable mass transportation as one of the most immediate ways to reduce the effect of higher fuel prices on household spending and business costs.

It called on federal and state governments to prioritise high-capacity buses, including compressed natural gas (CNG), electric and other economically viable alternatives.

READ ALSO:

• IMF to Tinubu: Protect Poor Nigerians With Cash Transfers
• Nigeria at 66: CPPE Calls for Productivity-Driven Growth
• CPPE to Tinubu: Debt Relief Not Enough, Fix Aviation Costs Now
• FG Offers 30-Day Petrol Discount, Caps Cost at ₦1,350
• Petrol Discount: Alliance Seeks Weekly Data, Clear Exit Date

According to the organisation, investment in subsidised public transportation could deliver broader benefits than limited petrol price discounts by reducing commuting costs for low-income workers, students and small business operators.

Such interventions, it said, could also improve labour mobility, lower operating costs for small enterprises and stimulate economic activity.

CPPE further recommended targeted support for agricultural inputs, including fertilisers, agrochemicals and machinery, to reduce the cost of food production and distribution.

It explained that rising energy prices increase expenses associated with land preparation, irrigation, mechanisation, transportation, storage and food distribution.

The organisation said government policy should therefore focus on reducing production and distribution costs rather than depending mainly on general consumption subsidies.

“ The priority should be to reduce the cost of food production and distribution rather than rely predominantly on general consumption subsidies,” CPPE said.

The organisation also called for stronger interventions by state and local governments, arguing that the responsibility for cushioning the economic shock should not rest exclusively with the Federal Government.

It said states could introduce designated discounted fuel outlets, subsidised public transport and targeted assistance for vulnerable households.

However, CPPE stressed that such programmes should have clear eligibility criteria, defined timelines, transparent funding arrangements and safeguards against diversion.

Defends subsidy removal policy

While advocating broader relief measures, CPPE maintained that the removal of the former petroleum subsidy was a necessary structural reform and warned against reinstating a broad-based consumption subsidy.

Under the previous arrangement, the government effectively carried a substantial fiscal burden on nationwide petrol consumption, estimated at various times at between 50 million and 90 million litres daily.

The organisation said the former regime placed enormous pressure on public finances, crowded out development spending and contributed to macroeconomic instability.

By comparison, reported figures indicate that the current intervention covers approximately 70 million litres of NNPC fuel supply monthly, against estimated national petrol consumption of 50 million litres daily.

CPPE said the difference in scale, alongside the design of the intervention, was important in assessing whether the initiative represented a reversal of the subsidy removal policy.

It noted that the current measure does not reinstate an administered national petrol price, impose a general subsidy obligation on private operators or dismantle the market-oriented framework for petroleum product pricing.

According to the organisation, a broad-based subsidy would recreate serious fiscal vulnerabilities in an economy already facing substantial infrastructure deficits, debt-service commitments and competing development priorities.

It nevertheless cautioned against treating every temporary intervention as evidence of weakening reform credibility.

“CPPE’s position is that the current fuel price relief initiative should be understood as a limited response to an extraordinary global energy shock, not a reversal of the policy on petroleum subsidy removal,” Yusuf said.

NNPC intervention must remain temporary

CPPE also defended the use of NNPC for the intervention, arguing that its commercial status does not remove the government’s responsibility to respond to exceptional public-interest concerns.

The organisation said NNPC, as a government-owned commercial enterprise with a diversified petroleum business portfolio, could accommodate temporary public-interest interventions within an appropriate governance framework.

However, it stressed that such measures must be transparent, proportionate, time-bound and financially sustainable.

Government ownership, it said, provides an opportunity to deploy public assets strategically during exceptional circumstances but does not justify an indefinite departure from commercial discipline.

CPPE urged the government to balance legitimate public-interest obligations with NNPC’s commercial sustainability rather than treat the two objectives as incompatible.

Investor confidence and market reforms

The organisation warned that reinstating a broad-based petrol subsidy could undermine fiscal sustainability, but said a narrowly targeted emergency measure need not weaken investor confidence if it does not distort market operations.

It said investors were principally concerned about policy predictability, market access, commercial viability, fiscal sustainability and the protection of legitimate investments.

CPPE maintained that the private sector remained the dominant participant in Nigeria’s downstream petroleum market and that the current initiative need not undermine confidence if government avoided imposing commercially unviable prices, discriminating against private operators or introducing restrictive market measures.

It also urged the government to preserve market-based pricing, fair competition, transparent regulation and a trade policy framework that supports domestic refining investment.

The organisation said the wider objective should be to protect vulnerable citizens while maintaining the sustainability of public finances and the credibility of ongoing economic reforms.

“Nigeria does not need a return to the fiscally destructive subsidy regime. What it needs is a credible framework for temporary, targeted and transparent social protection during exceptional economic shocks,” Yusuf said.