Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has rejected President Bola Tinubu’s criticism of his proposal to reintroduce petrol subsidy, accusing the administration of worsening Nigeria’s cost-of-living crisis despite increased government revenues.
Atiku, in a statement issued on Friday by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, said Tinubu was in no position to lecture Nigerians on economic management after the removal of petrol subsidy, the liberalisation of the foreign exchange market and the resulting surge in inflation, transport fares and household expenses.
The African Democratic Congress presidential candidate had on Wednesday said he would restore petrol subsidy if elected.
“If elected, I will bring back the oil subsidy, and whoever stole the money must refund it,” he said.
Tinubu, however, dismissed the proposal, describing Atiku’s position as evidence of “serious ignorance on governance and economy” during a meeting with Osun State Governor Ademola Adeleke at the Aso Rock Villa on Thursday.
Responding, Atiku said the real ignorance was “believing suffering is economic policy,” arguing that the administration had removed subsidy support without adequately addressing the consequences for Nigerians.
He clarified that his proposal was not a return to the previous subsidy regime but a targeted, temporary and transparent production-support mechanism aimed at increasing domestic refining capacity and shielding consumers from excessive price shocks.
According to Atiku, Nigeria’s economic circumstances have changed significantly since Tinubu announced the removal of petrol subsidy in May 2023, making a review of existing policies necessary.
“Economic prescriptions respond to prevailing conditions. But other things are no longer equal in Tinubu’s Nigeria,” he said.
He argued that the subsidy removal, without sufficient measures to cushion its impact, triggered a chain reaction across the economy, leading to sharp increases in petrol, transportation and food prices, alongside significant naira depreciation.
“Atiku is not proposing the resurrection of the corrupt, open-ended subsidy bazaar. He proposes a targeted, capped, budgeted, time-bound and independently audited production-support mechanism tied to domestic production and protected against arbitrage,” the statement said.
Atiku also accused the Tinubu administration of maintaining a rigid approach to subsidy removal despite its economic consequences.
“Tinubu pronounced first and searched for a plan afterwards. Atiku studied the consequences and produced a solution,” the statement added.
The ADC candidate further challenged the Federal Government to explain what he described as continuing petroleum under-recoveries and energy-security costs recorded in the accounts of the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited.
He cited figures totalling approximately ₦17.5tn, including about ₦7.13tn classified as energy-security costs and ₦8.67tn in other petroleum-related obligations.
“If subsidy is dead, why are under-recoveries alive?” Atiku asked. “If corruption was eliminated, why has opacity survived?”
He maintained that Nigerians were bearing the cost of the reforms through higher petrol prices and living expenses while questions remained about the financial obligations surrounding the petroleum sector.
“Tinubu has given Nigerians the worst of both worlds: he removed the relief but retained the opaque costs. Nigerians got the pain; government kept the bill,” he said.
The Federal Government has consistently defended the removal of petrol subsidy, arguing that the policy had become financially unsustainable and that ending it was necessary to free resources for development, strengthen public revenues and eliminate distortions in the petroleum market.
The administration has also highlighted increased allocations from the Federation Account as one of the gains of the reform, particularly for state governments that previously struggled to meet salary obligations and other recurrent expenditures.
