By Chesa Chesa
The Presidency has criticised former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar over his position on petrol subsidy, accusing him of policy inconsistency and playing politics with the economic challenges facing Nigerians.
In a statement on Wednesday, Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, said Atiku and his aides had offered three different explanations of his proposed petrol subsidy policy within one week.
Onanuga said the conflicting positions had raised questions about whether the former Vice-President had a coherent economic policy or was merely responding politically to the temporary discomfort being experienced by Nigerians.
According to him, Atiku’s spokesperson, Paul Ibe, initially said the former Vice-President would restore petrol subsidy if elected and later phase it out as a temporary measure to enable Nigerians and businesses recover.
He said another aide, Phrank Shaibu, subsequently described Ibe’s position as an “unauthorised and misleading characterisation” of Atiku’s policy, insisting that subsidy would remain until domestic refining expanded, supply stabilised and competition deepened.
“Just hours later, Atiku himself intervened and effectively overruled that clarification. He insisted that his position ‘has not changed’ and that he would restore what he called a ‘targeted subsidy’ if elected president,” Onanuga said.
He quoted Atiku as saying: “I will restore targeted subsidy and put purchasing power back in the hands of Nigerians.”
The presidential aide described the conflicting explanations as a serious policy contradiction, arguing that Nigerians deserved clarity rather than what he called “policy by trial and error.”
Onanuga also challenged Atiku’s argument that restoring petrol subsidy would automatically ease the cost of living, noting that pump prices were influenced by several factors, including international crude oil prices, exchange rates, refining costs, transportation and distribution expenses.
He said while energy and transportation costs affected food prices, petrol prices alone could not explain Nigeria’s food inflation.
“Agricultural productivity, insecurity, exchange rates, logistics, storage, flooding, input costs, money supply and supply constraints also matter,” he said.
The presidential aide said the Tinubu administration had been addressing these structural issues rather than reducing the country’s cost-of-living challenges to petrol prices.
Onanuga challenged Atiku to explain the details of his proposed “targeted subsidy,” including its projected cost, beneficiaries, funding mechanism and the economic conditions that would determine when the policy would end.
“Nigerians cannot afford another opaque and potentially costly subsidy regime dressed up in new language,” he said.
The presidential aide further questioned Atiku’s proposal to link subsidy to the price of crude oil, arguing that a barrel of crude produces several refined petroleum products besides petrol.
According to him, petrol accounts for about 45 per cent of the products derived from a refined barrel, while diesel, aviation fuel, kerosene and other products account for significant portions.
He noted that diesel was deregulated in 2004 under the administration in which Atiku served as Vice-President, while kerosene and aviation fuel were subsequently deregulated.
Onanuga also listed other products derived from crude oil refining, including petrochemical feedstocks, asphalt, hydrocarbon gas liquids, lubricants, waxes, petroleum coke and sulphur.
He questioned whether Atiku intended to subsidise those products as well if his proposed policy was based on the price of crude.
“Will Atiku subsidise all these by-products of the barrel as well, since kerosene is used by the underprivileged to cook, and many homes and factories use diesel to power generators and delivery trucks?” he asked.
Onanuga further questioned whether refineries receiving discounted crude under such an arrangement would retain profits from the other products derived from the same barrel.
He concluded by accusing the former Vice-President of lacking clarity on the economics of his proposed subsidy policy.
“The economy is too serious for policy somersaults, incoherence, destructive populism and election gimmicks,” Onanuga said.
