Atiku Confused On Petrol Subsidy, Third U-Turn In One Week Shows He’s Simply Playing Politics –Presidency

The Presidency has accused former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar of making contradictory statements on petrol subsidy, saying his three different explanations in one week show a lack of clarity and amount to “playing politics” with a sensitive economic issue.

In a statement Wednesday, the Presidency said Atiku’s latest comments raise a fundamental question about whether he is proposing a serious economic policy or responding to the “temporary discomfort Nigerians face.”

The Presidency outlined what it described as shifting positions from Atiku’s camp:

Paul Ibe, Atiku’s spokesperson, said Atiku would restore petrol subsidy if elected and later phase it out as a temporary intervention to give Nigerians and businesses room to recover.

Phrank Shaibu, another senior aide, later described Ibe’s statement as an “unauthorised and misleading characterisation.” According to Shaibu, there would be no predetermined end date. The subsidy would remain until domestic refining expands, supply stabilises, competition deepens, and the market can deliver affordable prices without government support.

Atiku himself then intervened hours later, saying his position “has not changed” and that he would restore what he called a “targeted subsidy” if elected. “I will restore targeted subsidy and put purchasing power back in the hands of Nigerians,” he said.

“This is not merely a matter of semantics. It is a serious policy contradiction,” the Presidency said. It asked why one aide called it temporary, another tied it to market conditions, and Atiku reaffirmed the original position.

The Presidency argued that petrol prices are influenced by multiple factors beyond subsidy, including international crude oil prices, exchange rates, refining costs, transportation and distribution.

It also faulted the simplification that rising petrol prices alone drive food inflation.

“Petrol prices alone have never caused food inflation. Nigerians experienced rising food prices even during the years when petrol subsidy was in place,” it said, adding that agriculture, insecurity, logistics, exchange rates and supply constraints also matter.

The Presidency urged Atiku to clarify what he means by “targeted subsidy,” including: How much it will cost?, Who will benefit and how beneficiaries will be identified?, How it will be funded and What economic conditions will determine its termination?

“Nigerians cannot afford another opaque and potentially costly subsidy regime dressed up in new language,” it stated.

The statement also referenced Atiku’s remark that his subsidy would “follow the barrel of crude.”

The Presidency noted that petrol accounts for about 45 per cent of a refined barrel, with other by-products including diesel, aviation fuel, kerosene, asphalt, lubricants and petrochemical feedstock, many of which were deregulated years ago.

It asked whether Atiku’s proposed subsidy would also cover other by-products such as diesel and kerosene, and how refineries supplied with discounted crude would handle profits from the remaining 55 per cent of products.

“We therefore urge Atiku to stop shifting positions and be honest with Nigerians: either he has a coherent, costed, and workable petroleum policy, or he is simply playing politics with a policy that has significantly restored fiscal health to the three tiers of government and stabilised the macroeconomic environment,” the Presidency said.

It concluded that “the economy is too serious for policy somersaults, incoherence, destructive populism and election gimmicks.”