Atiku’s Subsidy Push and Echoes of Desperation
By Tunde Rahman
Atiku Abubakar’s new policy shift toward bringing back the fuel subsidy is a welcome return to proper political debate and the path of rectitude. It contrasts sharply with his futile search for forged certificates and drug indictments in the run-up to the 2023 election and his latest goof about President Tinubu’s age.
Alhaji Atiku stated last week that if elected in 2027, he would “bring back fuel subsidy” by subsidising fuel production. He even repudiated his media aide who tried to embellish the proposal, not meaning to call it what it truly is – reinstating the ill-conceived fuel subsidy scheme. That alone is a telling indicator of what his inner circle thinks of his populist gambit.
Atiku’s economic idea may sound compassionate, which is what the ADC candidate really wants to achieve, hoping such will win him enough votes to be the country’s president in 2027 in his seventh attempt.
But a closer look shows the proposal is a return to the same failed economics that kept Nigeria down for 40 years. President Bola Ahmed Tinubu took the difficult decision in May 2023 to end the fuel subsidy regime.
It was not popular. But it was necessary, indeed expedient. And three years on, the results prove why turning back the wheels should not even be contemplated.
The old subsidy bled the treasury dry. From January to May 2023 alone, when the subsidy ended, the Buhari administration spent over N3 trillion.
According to official figures, between 2006 and 2023, Nigeria spent over ₦15 trillion on fuel subsidy. The government financed the bill through debts and “ways and means”.
That is money that should have built schools, roads and bridges, and financed education. Instead, it subsidised smuggling to neighbouring countries and made a few marketers billionaires overnight.
“Production subsidy”, as ex-VP Atiku coined it, is still a subsidy. If government must pay the difference between cost and pump price, then we are back to borrowing to fund fuel consumption. We cannot build a $1 trillion economy on that model.
Since the removal of subsidy, we have seen real change. Deregulation is finally working. Local refining has been substantially enhanced. The Dangote Refinery is now fully on stream.
Port Harcourt, Warri, and Kaduna are now under pressure to produce and compete. That would never happen if the government were still paying people to import. Foreign exchange pressure is easing. We no longer spend $10 billion yearly to import fuel we cannot account for.
Importantly, the government is redirecting resources. The savings are funding student loans, Creditcorp, CNG buses, wage awards, defence spending, and national and sub-national infrastructure. That is subsidy to the people, not subsidy to the middlemen.
Read Also:
Reversing this now is telling investors: “Nigeria’s policy can change with every election.” No serious investor will build a refinery or depot under such uncertainty.
The alternative is targeted relief, not blanket subsidy.
President Tinubu understands Nigerians are feeling the pain of higher pump prices. But he also understands that the answer is not a return to 2012.
The Tinubu administration chose a better path: CNG conversion to cut transport costs, conditional cash transfers, and support for local production like the Naira-for-crude policy adopted for Dangote Refinery and other local producers.
These are targeted, scrupulous interventions. They help the poor directly without creating a black hole in the budget. These initiatives need to be intensified and further expanded.
Indeed, those ends were the primary focus of President Tinubu’s meeting with the governors last Thursday in Abuja.
Subsidising production will still distort the market. It is still a pathway to fraud. And it will still mean less money for education, security, healthcare, and infrastructure.
Subsidy removal is already delivering. The country’s GDP growth rate at 3.89% is the biggest economic expansion in recent times. Nigeria’s annual inflation rate eased for the second month to 15.43% in July 2026.
The Nigerian currency is stabilising against major currencies, the stock market is expanding, and the country’s foreign reserves have grown exponentially and presently stand at over $53 billion.
If these favourable macroeconomic indicators have not fully impacted the living standards of our people, it is only a matter of time, in my view, given the ongoing positive trajectory.
Leadership sometimes entails tough choices. President Tinubu’s removal of subsidy was not a whimsical decision. He did it because it was the right thing to do.
Real reform requires courage. The easy thing is to return to a failed regime and buy temporary applause as Atiku seeks to do. That would be sheer populism.
Nigeria tried subsidy for four decades, and we ended up importing fuel while exporting crude. We tried it, and it led to a debt pile-up. We tried it, and our refineries collapsed.
2027 should not be about going back to fuel subsidy as Atiku is canvassing. It should be about staying the course until local refining, competition, and CNG fully drive prices down.
We respect Alhaji Atiku’s right to propose alternatives. But Nigerians must ask: do we want relief today that creates crisis tomorrow, or do we endure a little longer to build a Nigeria that works without fraud and waste?
President Tinubu chose reform over rhetoric. He chose a promising future over a decadent past. Returning to subsidy is not progress. It is a U-turn Nigeria cannot afford.
