Opinion

CBN, MPR and Nigeria’s challenged economy

5 Mins read

The highlight of the decisions of the Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) at its meeting held on July 18 and 19, 2022, was the raising of the Monetary Policy Rate (MPR) from 13 per cent to 14 percent; a month earlier, it had raised the rate from 11.5 percent to 13 percent: essentially in an effort to tame or check the ‘rampaging’ rate of inflation that has practically gone haywire, rising from 15.6 percent in January 2022 to 18.6 percent in June 2022—the highest level since January 2017. MPR is the interest rate at which CBN lends to commercial banks; it therefore serves as benchmark against which other lending rates in the economy are pegged. A raised MPR signals to commercial banks to accordingly hike their interest rates on loans/advances to their customers, and vice versa. The MPR therefore is a key monetary policy instrument, and its alteration (or manipulation) is usually targeted at influencing some macroeconomic variables, including rate of inflation.

In the face of the ‘rampaging’ inflation in recent times, therefore, the CBN hardly had any other choice than resort to the hiking of the MPR—as the magic wand to tame (the rising Consumer Price Index, CPI) inflation. Acknowledging this challenge in its communique, the MPC said “the Committee noted with concern the persisting uptick in headline inflation…this continued increase in inflation was driven by increases in both the core and food components…the considerable rise in core inflation resulted largely from the rising cost of production due to high energy prices associated with the persistent disruptions to power supply, hike in electricity tariff, continued scarcity of Premium Motor Spirit (PMS), and rising price of Automotive Gas Oil (AGO)”.

The Committee, however, expressed confidence in the CBN’s sustained intervention programmes, noting that inflation is expected to abate as food supply improves and the fiscal authority sustain its efforts to tame the legacy structural challenges which put upward pressure on domestic price levels.

It must be noted, however, that the MPC’s confidence that inflation could abate in the near future is completely unfounded. In point of fact, the monetary authority’s inflation target has been a high single digit level of seven to nine per cent; but today the rate is already at more than twice the target.

Indeed, at no time in recent memory has the inflation rate hit single digit, yet, optimistic projections are being bandied around. The point must be made that not many economic agents share the optimism of the apex bank—given the persistent rise in inflation rate and its scorching effect on the polity. It must also be put on record that the causes or drivers of the rate of inflation are almost entirely beyond the purview or grip of the CBN.

Unsurprisingly, the MPC’s communique did mention, though in passing, the ravaging and lingering insecurity in the land—and this is one of the major drivers of inflation rate and uncertainty in Nigeria. The truth is that Nigeria and Nigerians are facing an existential threat, such that existing and potential investors are scared stiff. Huge potential investments are either withheld or diverted elsewhere, and many existing businesses have either packed up or relocated outside the country. In this milieu, the entities at which the altered MPR are targeted are really endangered species—buffeted all round by myriad challenges.

There are hardly new businesses, business expansion nor products diversification to warrant massive loan requests in volumes or value to significantly impact the economy. If anything, business entities are focusing more on ‘survival strategies’ in the persisting adverse environment. Only Government dominates the credit scene!
Today, even as the apex bank might be ‘beating its chest’ for swiftly pulling the country out of two recessions in four years (2016 and 2020), the threat of another recession is palpable.

The fiscal ‘recklessness’ of the Government of the day which reflects in part on practically endless resort to ‘Ways and Means’ financing is obviously beyond the control of the CBN itself. Despite the alarms and alerts of the multilateral funding institutions like the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to the dangers of the ‘incestuous’ borrowing from the apex bank, the Nigerian Government exceeded all known boundaries in ‘borrowing’ from the Central Bank.

In the face of all these, what can the apex bank do to curtail the dangerously high borrowing propensity of the Federal Government? Indeed, in recent times, it has become difficult or very costly for the Government to borrow, especially via Eurobond issuance. This is because the servicing of existing huge loans and country risk profile are already becoming counterproductive to the economic health of the country. Coincidentally, available report is already showing that the cost of servicing debt has surpassed the Federal Government’s retained revenue—by as much as 310 billion Naira in the first four months of this year.

According to the Federal Government’s 2022 fiscal performance report (January to April 2022), its total revenue for the period was N1.63 trillion, while debt service gulped N1.94 trillion. Minister of Finance, Budget and National Planning, Zainab Ahmed who released these figures in Abuja, said “urgent action is required to address revenue underperformance and expenditure (in)efficiency at the national and subnational levels.”

It is also pertinent to ask: as the CBN is raising the MPR to tame inflation, what becomes of the unfathomable havoc being done by the effectuation of the fuel subsidy? From a mere 434 billion Naira budgeted for the subsidy early in the year, the incubus now gulps up to five trillion Naira. Minister Zainab Ahmed has also said the Federal Government would make provision for fuel subsidy to the tune of N6.72 trillion in its 2023 Appropriation Bill. She stated this during the 2023—2025 Medium Term Expenditure Framework and Fiscal Strategy Paper (MTEF and FSP) public consultation in Abuja. Mrs Ahmed said the N3.09 trillion deficit in the Federal Government’s budget implementation between January and April underscored the subsisting fiscal challenges.

She also announced that the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Ltd, which had funded the fuel subsidy until last month, would henceforth leave that responsibility to the Federation, stressing that this would even create a greater strain on the fiscal position of the Federal Government. She described the fuel subsidy as “unsustainable.”

While this ineluctable danger looms, the CBN is also in no position to predict how long or the dimensions the Ukraine war would take, nor the magnitude and impact of the ‘punitive’ measures the US and its allies are taking against the ‘aggressor’—Russia. Already the disruptions and distortions the war is causing to supply chains and global trade generally are fast spilling over into Nigeria. MPR is, for sure, no instrument to address these deleterious impacts. Of course, one of the obvious effects of the war has been the spike in the prices of crude oil in the international market—a development that would have favoured Nigeria as an oil producing/exporting country.

Unfortunately, the expected windfall has turned a ‘curse’, given the country’s peculiarities. It has been unable to produce/export up to the quota allocated to it by the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) of which it is a key member, owing to motley issues including the worrisome spate of oil theft, vandalism on oil facilities and wilful sabotage. The self-inflicted importation of all refined petroleum products (and closure of Government-owned refineries) at high and rising ‘landing costs’ is also ‘fouling’ the economy to no end.

In this regard, the MPC merely said: “the considerable rise in core inflation resulted largely from the rising cost of production due to high energy prices associated with the persistent disruptions to power supply, hike in electricity tariff, continued scarcity of Premium Motor Spirit (PMS), and rising price of Automotive Gas Oil (AGO).”

How the apex bank intends to address these very serious issues with tight monetary policy, using MPR as arrowhead is yet to be seen. Granted, the CBN is trying to be seen as reacting to so many domestic and external headwinds that are outside its purview, MPR raising per se, cannot tame inflation one bit. The monetary authority must be told without mincing words that most fiscal measures of the Federal Government at this point in time are rather counteractive to its monetary stance. Alas, the CBN’s lone ubiquity or omnipresence can only attract sympathy even as the economy keeps wobbling.
Okeke, an economist, sustainability expert and business strategy consultant, lives in Lekki-Lagos. He can be reached at: obioraokeke2000@yahoo.com

   

About author
Time Nigeria is a general interest Magazine with its headquarters in Abuja, the nation’s Capital.
Articles
Related posts
Abuja FileDevelopmentEconomyEnergyFinanceInside LagosOpinionPerspective

The Missing Middle of Infrastructure Finance: Why Capital Still Fails to Become Infrastructure

6 Mins read
  By Chidi Nwafor  In October 2023, a Gulf sovereign wealth fund quietly closed a $2 billion allocation to global infrastructure, earmarked in part for emerging-market energy and transport assets. The announcement drew the usual applause: another sign, commentators said, that institutional capital was finally waking up to the infrastructure opportunity in the Global South. Eighteen months later, less than a tenth of that allocation had actually left the fund’s balance sheet. Not because the mandate had changed. Not because the fund had lost appetite. According to two people familiar with the portfolio, the constraint was simpler and more uncomfortable: there were not enough investable projects to put the money into. This is not a story about a reluctant investor. It is a story about capital that wants to move, cannot find enough places willing and able to receive it in a form it can underwrite, and quietly waits instead. Multiply that fund by the hundreds of pension schemes, sovereign wealth vehicles, commercial banks and infrastructure funds now carrying dedicated allocations for emerging-market infrastructure, and a pattern emerges that rarely makes it into a headline: the world is not short of capital for infrastructure. It has capital in historic abundance, sitting adjacent to a historic infrastructure gap, unable to cross the distance between the two. The Comfortable Explanation  The explanation on offer at every major infrastructure summit is a familiar one. Global infrastructure investment needs run into the tens of trillions of dollars over the coming decade; committed capital falls well short; therefore, the problem is one of insufficient funding, and the solution is more of it: more pledges, more blended-finance facilities, more climate funds, more multilateral capital increases. It is a comfortable explanation because it assigns responsibility clearly to governments who under-fund, institutions who under-commit, and it offers a clean remedy: raise more. It is also, on close inspection, not what the evidence shows. Pension funds globally hold trillions in assets under management with explicit infrastructure allocations that remain structurally underweight, not because trustees have rejected the asset class but because deal flow meeting their risk and governance thresholds has not materialised at the pace their mandates assume. Sovereign wealth funds report the same pattern. Commercial banks with dedicated project finance desks describe pipelines that look full at the term-sheet stage and thin dramatically by financial close. Development finance institutions, whose entire purpose is to absorb risk that commercial capital will not, routinely report that their binding constraint is not capital adequacy but the volume of bankable transactions their teams can originate and structure in a given year. None of this fits the scarcity narrative. All of it fits a different one. Availability Is Not Deployability  Capital availability and capital deployability are not the same condition, and the conflation of the two is doing real damage to how the world thinks about the infrastructure gap. Availability asks whether money exists somewhere with a mandate that could, in principle, be pointed at infrastructure. Deployability asks something much narrower and much harder: whether a specific project, at a specific moment, has been engineered, structured, documented and de-risked to the point where an investment committee can approve it without exception. The first condition is met, overwhelmingly, across nearly every category of capital that matters to infrastructure. The second is met by only a small fraction of the projects competing for it. The result is a market that looks, from the outside, like a financing gap, and functions, from the inside, like a conversion problem: an abundance of capital on one side, an abundance of infrastructure need on the other, and an underbuilt set of mechanisms in between capable of turning one into the other at any meaningful scale. Where the Conversion Breaks  The break does not happen at the ends of the process. It happens in the middle, in the unglamorous sequence of work that turns a plausible concept into an instrument a fiduciary can sign. A promising transmission project needs a feasibility study rigorous enough to survive institutional scrutiny rather than optimistic enough to attract early interest. It needs offtake arrangements that hold up under real counterparty and currency risk, not the counterparty risk assumed in a base case. It needs environmental and social documentation calibrated to the standards of the institutions being asked to fund it, not the standards of the jurisdiction hosting it. It needs a legal and commercial structure that allocates risk in ways a commercial lender, not only a development financier, will accept. It needs a sponsor capable of executing what has been proposed, not merely capable of proposing it. Each of these is ordinary project finance discipline. None of it is exotic, and in mature infrastructure markets it happens as a matter of course, absorbed into systems built over decades: specialist advisers, standard-form contracts, established procurement norms, deep pools of transaction expertise. What is missing in the markets where the infrastructure gap is largest is not the standard itself but the machinery that meets it. Projects arrive at investment committees with ambition intact and preparation incomplete, and that gap is treated, again and again, as an individual project’s failure rather than what it actually is: a structural absence in the systems responsible for producing investable transactions at scale. The Missing Middle  This is the Missing Middle of Infrastructure Finance: the institutional architecture that sits between capital that wants to move and infrastructure that needs building, and whose incompleteness explains far more of the global infrastructure gap than any shortfall in committed funds. It consists of project preparation facilities able to fund feasibility and structuring work before commercial viability has been proven. Transaction advisers capable of building deals that satisfy development mandates and commercial return thresholds at once, rather than treating the two as separate constituencies to be managed sequentially. Risk-sharing and guarantee instruments that convert political, regulatory and currency risk into something a commercial balance sheet can underwrite. Aggregation platforms that bundle smaller, individually sub-scale projects into portfolios large enough to justify institutional transaction costs. Standardised documentation that reduces the bespoke legal cost of every new deal. And coordination across ministries, regulators and financiers robust enough that a technically sound project does not die in bureaucratic sequencing after the money has already been found. None of these are new ideas in isolation. What is missing is their assembly into a coherent system, deliberately funded and institutionally accountable, rather than scattered across donor-funded pilots that end when the grant does. The African Dimension  Africa makes this dynamic unusually visible, and consequently offers an unusually clear opportunity to correct it. The continent’s infrastructure financing need, by any measure, is vast. Less understood is that the shortfall is disproportionately one of preparation rather than capital. Nigerian gas-to-power, off-grid solar and mini-grid developers have each demonstrated that individual projects can clear the bankability bar; what has not emerged is systemic pipeline scale, a steady stream of comparably prepared projects large enough to absorb the capital already circling the sector. The pattern repeats, with local variation, from grid infrastructure in East Africa to transport corridors in West Africa. Interested capital is rarely the scarce input. Investment-ready projects are. The Global Comparison  Mature markets solved this problem gradually and mostly invisibly, through decades of institution-building that predates the current infrastructure conversation: specialist project finance units inside banks, standardised PPP frameworks, established regulatory playbooks, deep benches of transaction lawyers and engineers who move between deals rather than between one-off assignments. Emerging and frontier markets are not being asked to meet a lower standard. They are being asked to meet the same standard without having built the same machinery, and then being told, when deals fail to close, that the problem is insufficient funding….
Abuja FileCover StoryOpinionPerspectivePolitics

Tinubu’s Reforms Deserve Continuity, Second Term Crucial — Onuigbo

4 Mins read
The President of Globe Legislators International, Rt. Hon. Sir Sam Onuigbo, has called on members and stakeholders of the All Progressives Congress…
Cover StoryHealthOpinionPerspective

Nigeria’s AMR Blind Spot: We Cannot Defeat Resistance Without Knowing Its True Scale

2 Mins read
  By Pharm. Mercy Aransiola Here is an uncomfortable truth about antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in Nigeria: we do not fully know how…
Stay on the loop!

Subscribe to our latest news.

Leave a Reply

WP2Social Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com