Atiku Fires Back at Tinubu in Fiery Subsidy Clash

Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has strongly criticized the Tinubu Presidency, accusing it of deliberately misrepresenting concerns raised by Dangote Refinery. According to Atiku, the Presidency's actions are a desperate attempt to discredit his proposed production subsidy model. He asserts that the refinery's warning against arbitrary pump-price controls actually highlights the dishonesty inherent in the government's current economic arguments.

In a statement delivered by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, Atiku acknowledged the legitimacy of Dangote Refinery's stance. He agreed that a private refinery, having invested billions, cannot be compelled to absorb losses by selling indefinitely below cost due to government-imposed prices. However, Atiku lambasted the Presidency for dishonestly portraying his production subsidy plan as advocating for such an economically destructive and unfair practice. He clarified that Dangote's concern was a legitimate business issue, which the Presidency then twisted into a "campaign of fear."

Atiku articulated a clear distinction between his proposed production subsidy model and the import subsidy model. He explained that an import subsidy involves using public funds to support petrol refined abroad and imported into Nigeria. In contrast, a production subsidy channels support towards crude oil refined within Nigeria. This approach aims to enable Nigerian refineries to produce fuel more cheaply, thereby allowing Nigerians to pay less at the pump. He drew an analogy to rice production: just as supporting local farmers to reduce production costs makes rice cheaper and benefits the economy, a production subsidy for fuel would lower prices, create jobs, strengthen local businesses, and retain economic activity within Nigeria. The core principle is simple: "We are restoring subsidy, but moving it from importation to production."

The former Vice President detailed how his production subsidy proposal would function. It involves reducing the cost of crude feedstock supplied to qualifying domestic refineries through a transparent, capped, and independently verified mechanism. This reduction in input costs would lead to lower petrol production costs, and subsequently, lower prices for the average Nigerian consumer, all while ensuring legitimate refining costs and a reasonable commercial margin are preserved. Atiku emphasized that there is a fundamental difference between assisting a producer in reducing costs and forcing them to sell at a loss, a distinction he believes the Tinubu Presidency deliberately obfuscates.

Atiku further accused the government of a "brazen, dishonest and crude distortion" by equating every subsidy with import dependence, designed solely to mislead Nigerians in the policy debate. Under his proposed plan, support would be exclusively tied to crude refined in Nigeria, ensuring that Nigerian refineries, workers, businesses, and consumers are the sole beneficiaries. He firmly stated, "If you do not refine in Nigeria, you do not qualify." This model, he affirmed, is not a subsidy for foreign refineries, importers, or middlemen, but explicitly for "Nigerian production."

The Presidency's reaction to Dangote's concerns, Atiku argued, demonstrates its desperation to defend an economic model that has made life painfully expensive for millions. He characterized the government's response as "melodrama from the Villa," where legitimate warnings about margins and price controls were inexplicably converted into prophecies of economic collapse. Atiku maintained that a refinery's reluctance to sell at a loss underscores the necessity for an intelligently structured intervention, which his policy aims to provide.

Atiku assured that his administration would not impose arbitrary pump prices and burden domestic refineries with financial losses. He stated that if additional relief beyond what lower crude-input costs can sustainably deliver is deemed necessary, the government must openly and transparently pay for it. Such relief, he insisted, must be budgeted, capped, audited, and fully disclosed to Nigerians. He condemned the practice of announcing a politically convenient petrol price and covertly shifting the cost onto refineries as "confiscation by another name," not policy.

To ensure accountability and prevent fraud, Atiku's production subsidy would incorporate strict safeguards. These include a hard fiscal ceiling, a maximum support level per barrel, independent verification of supported crude, electronic tracking of crude intake and refined output, domestic-supply obligations, transparent pricing, independent audits, and severe penalties for diversion or fraud. This framework would ensure transparency, allowing Nigerians to know precisely how many barrels receive support, which refineries benefit, what is produced, the cost to taxpayers, and the benefits received by consumers, eliminating "mystery barrels, endless claims, and blank cheques."

Recognizing the critical role of private capital in Nigeria's refining future, Atiku stressed the importance of protecting the commercial viability of domestic refineries, including Dangote Refinery and modular refineries, to encourage more investment, competition, and refining capacity. Crucially, he insisted that Nigerian consumers must also reap the benefits of the country's crude oil production. He rejected the notion of a false choice between profitable refineries and affordable pump prices, stating that a competent government should protect both producers and consumers.

Atiku accused the Tinubu administration of elevating hardship to an ideology, calling it reform, where every new hardship is presented as proof that reforms are working. He highlighted the hypocrisy: while the current government routinely grants waivers, tax credits, incentives, and concessions to powerful business interests, it predicts catastrophe when a policy designed to reduce the cost of petrol, transport, and food for ordinary Nigerians is proposed. He found it baffling that a government could be "terrified by a policy designed to make production cheaper and life more affordable."

In conclusion, Atiku reiterated the clarity of his proposal: restoring subsidy through a production model, not an import subsidy, and not forcing Nigerian refineries to sell below cost. His plan offers targeted support for crude refined domestically, fostering competitiveness, capacity expansion, job creation, and affordable fuel prices for Nigerians. He challenged the Presidency to engage in an honest debate, free from fabricated interpretations of his policy. Atiku affirmed that Dangote's warning ultimately strengthens the case for the production subsidy model, as it addresses both refinery viability and the unbearable cost of living for Nigerians. He emphasized a clear choice for the country: either continue with a system where Nigerians suffer and the government merely offers explanations, or transition to a production model that deliberately lowers costs and empowers citizens financially. Atiku's choice is unequivocally for Nigerian production, Nigerian refining, Nigerian jobs, and affordability, rejecting foreign importation in favor of domestic value creation.