Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has rejected President Bola Tinubu’s claim that his proposed intervention in Nigeria’s oil sector is economically ignorant. Atiku accused the current administration of making life harder for Nigerians while boasting about increased government revenues.
Atiku made this known in a statement from his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, on Friday. He stated that the President is not in a position to teach Nigerians about managing the economy. This is after the removal of the petrol subsidy, the changes to the foreign exchange market, and the rise in inflation, transport costs, and household expenses.
“The real ignorance is believing that suffering is economic policy. Tinubu removed the subsidy from Nigerians’ pockets, but he is yet to remove the questions from his books,” he said.
The former Vice President explained that his proposal is not about bringing back the subsidy system that existed before Tinubu took office. Instead, it is a temporary support plan aimed at increasing local refining and protecting consumers from sudden price increases.
Atiku pointed out that the economic situation for Nigerians has changed a lot since Tinubu ended the petrol subsidy in May 2023. He believes it is time to rethink existing policies.
“Economic prescriptions respond to prevailing conditions,” Atiku said. “But other things are no longer equal in Tinubu’s Nigeria.”
He noted that removing the subsidy without proper measures to ease its effects caused a ripple effect throughout the economy. Petrol prices, transportation costs, and food prices have shot up, while the naira has lost value.
“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 continued.
Atiku's remarks followed President Tinubu's criticism of proposals to bring back or create another form of petrol subsidy. Tinubu called Atiku’s suggested model a “demonstration of serious ignorance on governance and economy.”
Atiku accused Tinubu's government of sticking to a rigid subsidy removal approach, even after the negative economic outcomes that followed.
“Tinubu pronounced first and searched for a plan afterwards. Atiku studied the consequences and produced a solution,” the statement added.
The African Democratic Congress presidential candidate also challenged the Federal Government to clarify the ongoing petroleum under-recoveries and energy-security costs reported by the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited.
He mentioned figures he claims total about ₦17.5 trillion, which includes around ₦7.13 trillion classified as energy-security costs and ₦8.67 trillion.
“If subsidy is dead, why are under-recoveries alive?” Atiku asked. “If corruption was eliminated, why has opacity survived?”
He argued that Nigerians are now paying the price for these reforms with higher petrol prices and living costs while questions linger about the financial responsibilities tied to the oil 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 said that petrol subsidy became too costly and that its removal was necessary to free up funds for development, boost public revenues, and reduce market distortions.
The administration also highlighted higher allocations from the Federation Account as one of the advantages of these reforms, especially for state governments that previously struggled to pay salaries and manage other expenses.
Atiku dismissed this argument. He said that increased allocations to governments should not be considered a sign of economic success if regular Nigerians are losing their purchasing power.
“You do not build a federation by impoverishing citizens so that Abuja can send bigger cheques to governors,” he argued.
He pointed out that the increased disbursements from the Federation Account Allocation Committee might encourage states to rely more on federal transfers instead of growing their economies and generating income locally.
“Why undertake difficult reforms, industrialise or expand productive capacity when Abuja provides an ever-growing monthly cheque?” he asked.
“That is not fiscal federalism. It is fiscal sedation and rascality.”
Atiku also renewed his call for an explanation of about ₦30 trillion in Federation Account revenues, deductions, savings, and transfers he has previously requested from the Federal Government.
He further questioned the ₦12.8 trillion Service-Wide Vote in the 2026 budget and said the administration should show the same urgency in addressing public finance questions as it does in responding to political criticism.
“If Tinubu can mobilise an army of propagandists to attack Atiku within hours, surely he can find one accountant to explain his books,” he said.
Atiku maintained that the success of economic reform should be measured by its effect on citizens, not by government revenues.
“Economic reform is not measured by how fat government accounts become while citizens grow poorer,” he said, stressing that “An economy exists to serve human beings, not family and friends.”
He described the government's economic policies as a test that has caused significant hardship for Nigerians. He accused the presidency of mistaking public endurance for evidence of policy success.
Atiku urged Nigerians not to accept what he described as another four years of policies that worsen hardship. He insisted his proposed intervention in the oil sector aims to support local production while gradually reducing the reliance on subsidies.
“Nigerians have paid enough for Tinubunomics. They should not be sentenced to another four years of the bitter experiment,” he stated.
Drop your comment
No comments yet — be the first to drop the gist 👇