Atiku: I’ll restore targeted subsidy to cut Nigerians’ cost of living

Former Vice President and African Democratic Congress, ADC, presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, has said his proposed petroleum intervention is aimed at reducing the cost of living and supporting domestic production, rather than returning Nigeria to the former fuel import subsidy regime.

Mr Atiku’s position was contained in a statement issued by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, following comments attributed to another member of his media team, Paul Ibe, suggesting that an Atiku administration would restore fuel subsidy and later remove it.

Mr Shaibu described the comments as an “unauthorised, imprecise and materially misleading characterisation” of Atiku’s policy position.

He stressed that Atiku had not proposed a return to the previous import-subsidy system or promised to remove subsidy on a predetermined date.

“For avoidance of doubt, policy belongs to the candidate, not the spokesperson. Our responsibility as communicators is to explain Atiku’s position accurately, not create formulations capable of confusing Nigerians or handing opponents convenient talking points,” Shaibu said.

According to him, Mr Atiku’s proposal is for a targeted, capped and transparently budgeted intervention designed to support domestic refining and production while reducing costs for consumers.

“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,” he said.

Mr Shaibu said the proposed intervention would be independently audited and subject to measurable conditions that would determine when government support would no longer be necessary.

“What Atiku proposes is a targeted, capped, transparently budgeted and independently audited subsidy that supports domestic refining and production, with measurable exit conditions built in from day one,” he said.

He explained that the intervention would gradually become unnecessary as domestic refining capacity expands, fuel supply stabilises, competition increases and the market becomes capable of delivering affordable prices without government support.

“There is no arbitrary withdrawal date. As domestic refining expands, supply stabilises, competition deepens, and the market becomes capable of delivering affordable prices without government support, the intervention progressively becomes unnecessary,” Shaibu said.

Using an analogy, he added: “You do not remove scaffolding because the calendar says so. You remove it when the building can stand securely on its own.”

Mr Shaibu said the debate should focus less on the terminology surrounding the policy and more on the economic challenges facing Nigerians.

“The real question is simple: Why has everything become so expensive, and what will Atiku do to make life affordable again?” he asked.

He accused the administration of President Bola Tinubu of transferring the burden of its economic reforms to Nigerian households.

“Tinubu transferred the shock of his reforms to Nigerian families. Atiku will reduce production and transportation costs, strengthen domestic refining, and restore purchasing power,” he said.

Mr Shaibu said the proposed policy should therefore not be framed simply as a choice between removing and restoring fuel subsidy.

“The choice is not removal of subsidy versus restoration of subsidy. It is expensive Nigeria versus affordable Nigeria,” he said.