The Presidency has accused the African Democratic Congress (ADC) presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, of simply playing politics with the temporary discomfort Nigerians face over the removal of the subsidy regime by the present administration.
The Presidency’s declaration is on the heels of contradictory remarks by media aides of the ADC Presidential candidate.
Checks revealed that Paul Ibe, one of the spokespersons of Atiku Abubakar, had said petrol subsidy would be restored and later phased out if the ADC presidential candidate won the forthcoming general election, a position that was disclaimed by Phrank Shaibu, another media aide of the former vice-president, who said, “Atiku has never proposed restoring the import-subsidy regime and subsequently removing it on some predetermined date. That is not his policy and should not be attributed to him.”
ALSO READ: 2027: NANS tackles Atiku on fuel subsidy proposal
Responding to the glaring contradictions, Bayo Onanuga, Special Adviser to the President, Information and Strategy, in a statement noted that the varied submissions on the subsidy regime by Atiku’s aides “are not merely a matter of semantics. It is a serious policy contradiction.”
The Presidency maintained that the ADC presidential candidate lacks understanding of the dynamics of the petroleum market.
The statement pointedly asked Atiku Abubakar to explain precisely what he means by ‘targeted subsidy’.
The statement read: “The latest comments by former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar on petrol subsidy raise a fundamental question: is he seriously proposing an economic policy, or is he simply playing politics with the temporary discomfort Nigerians face?
“Within a week, Nigerians have heard three different explanations of what an Atiku administration would do about petrol subsidy. The confusion has now become impossible to ignore.
“First, Atiku’s spokesperson, Paul Ibe, said Atiku would restore petrol subsidy if elected president and later phase it out. Ibe described it as a temporary intervention intended to give Nigerians and businesses room to recover.
“Then came a clarification from another senior aide, Phrank Shaibu, who said Ibe’s statement was an
“unauthorised and misleading characterisation” of Atiku’s position. According to Shaibu, Atiku would not set a predetermined date for ending the subsidy. Instead, it would remain until domestic refining expands, supply stabilises, competition deepens, and the market can deliver affordable prices without government support.
“But 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. He also said, “I will restore targeted subsidy and put purchasing power back in the hands of Nigerians.” This is not merely a matter of semantics. It is a serious policy contradiction.
“If Atiku’s position has not changed, why did one of his principal aides say the subsidy would be temporary and phased out? Why did another senior aide have to publicly disown that explanation and introduce a completely different framework based on market conditions? And why did Atiku then step in to reaffirm the original position?
“Nigerians deserve clarity, not policy by trial and error. More fundamentally, Atiku’s argument appears to misunderstand the dynamics of the petroleum market.
“Petrol does not become cheap simply because government orders a subsidy or because competition is expected to emerge. Several factors, including international crude oil prices, exchange rates, refining costs, transportation, distribution, and other market costs, influence pump prices.”
The Presidency further cautioned the former vice-president to “stop playing politics with a policy that has significantly restored fiscal health to the three tiers of government and stabilised the macroeconomic environment.
“The economy is too serious for policy somersaults, incoherence, destructive populism and election gimmicks.
Atiku says his subsidy will follow the barrel of crude. Is he aware that refined petrol only constitutes 45 per cent of the by-products of a barrel of crude? A barrel yields other products, such as aviation fuel, kerosene, and diesel, which were deregulated many years ago.
“Diesel, which the Obasanjo-Atiku administration deregulated in 2004, accounts for roughly 25% of the barrel. Jet Fuel and Kerosene make up about 9% of the barrel. Kerosene and jet fuel were deregulated in 2009, and subsidies were removed in 2016.
“About 10% to 15% of the barrel creates base ingredients for synthetic rubber, nylon, polyester, and plastics used in everyday goods like toothbrushes, cups, and packaging.
“Asphalt makes up about 2% to 4% of the barrel. Hydrocarbon Gas Liquids (HGL), like propane and butane, make up about 4%. Lubricants and Waxes constitute about 1% to 2%. Petroleum coke and sulfur form the solid residue left from refining.
“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? And will he allow the refineries he will supply discounted crude oil to profit from 55 per cent of the by-products, while focusing subsidy only on petrol, his obsession?
“The former Vice President is definitely suffering from a lack of basic understanding of his newfound policy prescription.“