The federal government recently announced a fresh plan that seeks to cushion the effect of the widespread hunger in the country, with the approval of a 150-day window for importation of food items. Korede Abdullah, in this analysis raises critical questions begging for answers as concerns, doubts over its sustainability, equitable distribution and sharing to reach the targeted Nigerian masses trail behind the move.
Presidential Accelerated and Stabilization Advancement Plan (ASAP)
In a move poised to send shock waves through Nigeria’s agricultural sector, President Tinubu on July 9, 2024, announced a 150-day duty-free windows on imported grains. The suspension of duties, tariffs, and taxes affected some essential food items like Beans Maize, Husked Brown Rice, Wheat and Cowpeas imported through land and sea borders.
This surprise policy shift, when fully implemented, is expected to significantly alter the country’s food import landscape, with far-reaching implications for domestic farmers, food processors, and consumers.
The Minister of Agriculture and Food Security, Sen. Abubakar Kyari unveiled the policy to Nigerians in a press statement as part of the implementation of the Presidential Accelerated and Stabilization Advancement Plan (ASAP).
According to the report, the federal government hopes to quell the food security crisis in the next 180 days through the granting of 150days import window for certain essential food commodities, while the federal government will import 250,000 metric tonnes of wheat and maize to fill the depleted strategic grain reserve.
Under this arrangement, imported food commodities will be subjected to a Recommended Retail Price (RRP) across the 36 states of the federation, including the FCT. In addition to the importation by private sector, the Federal Government will equally import 250,000MT of Wheat and 250,000MT of Maize.
The imported food commodities in their semi processed state will target supplies to the small-scale processors and millers across the country. The government said it would engage relevant stakeholders to set a Guaranteed Minimum Price (GMP) and mop up surplus assorted food commodities to restock the National Strategic Food Reserve.
Even though the policy aims to increase food availability and reduce prices on the surface, critics, especially farmers, have warned of potential devastating consequences of the seemly Manna, for local agricultural production and the economy at large.
The farmers believe the policy will stifle local production of food in the country, and reduce the gains made in terms of self-sufficiency in the agricultural sectors.
Africa Health Report (AHR) had, in a special report publication, detailed the grim situation in the country in terms of acute surging inflation and sky-rocketed prices of food, as revealed by the National Bureau of Statistics gripping data.
Nigerians have continued to grapple with high food prices since President Bola Tinubu announced the removal of petrol subsidies and also floated the naira so that the value of the Nigerian currency can be determined by market forces in 2023.
Nigeria’s inflation figure has reached a new high, hitting 34.19 % for June 2024, according to the latest data from the NBS. The food inflation was also put at 40.87 percent on a year-on-year basis for the same period in review.
The resolve of President Ahmed Bola Tinubu on the 150-day duty-free window for importation of grains to the country may be the last card on the table to rescue the perilous situation.
Who Will Benefit from the Policy?
Mr Olayanju Kayode, a Senior agricultural economist who works with the Ekiti State Ministry of Agriculture, spoke with Africa Health Report. He stated that Nigerians who are the final consumers, will benefit from the policy in the short run. According to him, removal of tariffs indicates that the prices of those food items will come down when they get to final consumers.
“I think Nigerians will benefit from the policy immensely, at least, in the short run, if pursued with transparency. The benefit will be in terms of reduced prices due to eliminated tariffs, increased food availability, and improved access to diverse food products.
“You know, since the removal of the fuel subsidy by this present government, the effect has been felt on consumer goods, especially food whose prices have gone beyond the reach of the common man, who belongs to the economically disadvantaged group. The proposed duty-free imported food items will be a great relief for the final consumers – the people of Nigeria.” Olayanju explained.
The agricultural economist added that the importers will also reap bountifully from the policy. “The removal of these tax obstacles automatically lowers costs and increase profit margins for the importers, thereby simplifying import procedures.” he said.
However, Alhaji Moshood Suleiman, an Ilorin-based beans farmer sees the policy differently. To him, the policy is like using a small bandage to dress a big wound, especially with widespread hunger in the land coupled with high cost of food items.
Suleiman man said what the government needs to do is to formulate a proper agriculture policy that will encourage domestic farmers to grow what Nigerians can eat.
According to him, “It’s important to note that local farmers and food producers might face challenges due to increased competition from imported products, potentially affecting their livelihoods. This doesn’t augur well for us as a nation in the 21st century.”
“Our mantra should be ‘we should eat what we grow and grow what we eat, rather than relying on foreign food. For how long are we going to do this as a solution to our food crisis?” Suleiman asked rhetorically.
Another pertinent question is who are the importers?
AHR can authoritatively reveal that the federal government is yet to officially work out the final details on the importers of the grains as at the time the newspaper was filing this report. But some stakeholders who spoke with our correspondent believed that Rice Millers Importers Association of Nigeria (RIMIDAN) will be actively involved.
“I know that RIMIDAN, which is the umbrella body for importers of rice and other stakeholders across the food value chain will be involved. Government may also authorize other stakeholders to be involved in the importation activities.”, said Kayode Oriola, a member of association.
How far can it go to address hunger, food crisis?
Many critics have advised President Tinubu to take a decisive action against the pervasive hunger, affecting millions of individuals and families across the country, rather than the temporary measure. Despite being Africa’s largest economy and a major oil producer, Nigeria struggles to provide adequate food security for its citizens.
The United Nations recently predicted that 82 million Nigerians, about 64 per cent of the country’s population, may go hungry by 2030. The prediction came in the wake of a persistent hike in food prices in the country.
In a swift reaction, President Tinubu dismissed the cynics who posited that it cannot address the chronic hunger in the country. At the public presentation of Olusegun Osoba’s book “My Life in the Public Eye” in Lagos on Saturday, Tinubu, represented by Vice President Kashim Shettima, said that these measures are designed to address food shortages and enhance affordability for consumers.
“We are taking steps to address food shortages by temporarily removing tariffs on imported grains and other food items,” President Tinubu stated.
How Transparent is the Policy?
Those who spoke with the newspaper said that the duty-free importation of grains, while intended to address food insecurity, poses a risk of creating an unfair advantage for wealthy and influential importers and potentially perpetuating corruption.
According to Dr Bashir Ikudanikansi, a Canadian-based Nigerian economist who spoke to our correspondent on the phone: “Duty-free imports could flood the market with cheap, imported food, undercutting local farmers and producers who pay taxes and duties on their products, as a result of unfair competitions from wealthy importers.”
The economst added that without proper regulation and oversight, the duty-free importation policy might be exploited by corrupt individuals or groups, who could abuse the system for personal gain.
To avoid “food for the boys” (a Nigerian idiom for corruption and cronyism), Ikudanikansi suggested that the government should implement strict regulations, proper monitoring and eliminate unfair advantages.
“The government should ensure transparency in the importation process and support local farmers and producers through initiatives like subsidies, training, and infrastructure development.”, he suggested.
How Will the Federating States Share?
Another contending issue is the sharing formula to be adopted by the federal government in the distribution of the imported grains to the 36 states and the FCT. But an insider in the Tinubu government who didn’t want his name mentioned said the items will be distributed equally among the states.
“Irrespective of the size and population, when the federal government commences the importation of the grains, each state of the federation and the Federal Capital Territory, (FCT) will get an equal share.
“Remember that on July 15, government distributed 20 trucks of rice each to the 36 states of the Federation and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), without consideration of the size and population. This is what will also happen in the case of the imported food.” the source told the newspaper.
Akinwunmi Adesina Faults the Policy
The President of the African Development Bank, AFDB, Dr. Akinwunmi Adesina also recently raised concerns over the federal government’s plan to import food, stating that the policy is depressing.
According to him, Nigeria cannot rely on food imports to stabilize prices, and resorting to it could destroy the country’s agricultural policy. He explained that the country should be producing food to keep prices stable and reduce pressure on the foreign exchange front whilst creating jobs.
The majority of those speaking with AHR were of the view that, the duty-free importation of food in Nigeria may provide temporary relief to the country’s food insecurity challenges, they said that it is not a sustainable solution. The policy risks undermining local agricultural production, perpetuating corruption, and creating dependency on foreign food sources.
