Atiku Doubles Down on Plan to Restore Fuel Subsidy

Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has strongly reiterated his proposal to reinstate a targeted petrol subsidy, directly accusing President Bola Tinubu of implementing contradictory economic policies. Abubakar contends that the current administration has removed support for ordinary Nigerians while simultaneously providing tax credits, concessions, and other incentives to major players in the petroleum industry.

Abubakar, through his spokesperson Phrank Shaibu, labeled the federal government's assertion that the petrol subsidy has been abolished as a significant economic deception. He argued that public funds are still being used to manage costs and support investments within the same sector. The former vice president asserted that the Tinubu administration has shifted the burden of economic adjustments onto households, while offering fiscal support to large petroleum investors.

“

Tinubu stood at Eagle Square and declared that subsidy was gone. Petrol prices exploded, transportation costs soared, food prices followed, businesses buckled and household purchasing power collapsed. Nigerians were told there was no alternative and that enduring this pain was the necessary price of economic reform.

"Tinubu stood at Eagle Square and declared that subsidy was gone. Petrol prices exploded, transportation costs soared, food prices followed, businesses buckled and household purchasing power collapsed. Nigerians were told there was no alternative and that enduring this pain was the necessary price of economic reform," Abubakar stated. He contrasted this with the government's approach to oil investors, adding, "But when major oil investors knock on Tinubu’s door, the sermon changes. Suddenly, government intervention is good economics; tax credits are necessary; fiscal concessions are strategic; and private investment must be ‘de-risked.’ Apparently, subsidy is only evil when poor Nigerians benefit from it."

Abubakar questioned the rationale behind providing fiscal incentives to petroleum investors while rejecting targeted interventions aimed at easing the financial strain of high energy costs on households. He specifically pointed to the government's Deep Offshore Oil and Gas Projects Incentives framework, which offers production tax credits for qualifying developments, as evidence that government intervention remains a part of the administration's economic strategy. Furthermore, he challenged the administration's explanations for energy-security expenses recorded by the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPC), citing figures that suggest public resources continue to absorb petroleum price differentials despite the official declaration of subsidy removal.

“

But when major oil investors knock on Tinubu’s door, the sermon changes. Suddenly, government intervention is good economics; tax credits are necessary; fiscal concessions are strategic; and private investment must be ‘de-risked.’ Apparently, subsidy is only evil when poor Nigerians benefit from it.