The President says the former vice-president’s proposal to restore petrol subsidies shows “serious ignorance” of governance and the economy
President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has sharply criticised former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar over his pledge to restore Nigeria’s fuel subsidy if elected president in 2027, describing the proposal as evidence of “serious ignorance” about governance and the economy.
Also read: Jubril Tinubu urges stronger governance for African firms
Tinubu made the remark on Thursday, August 20, 2026, while receiving Osun State Governor Ademola Adeleke at the Presidential Villa in Abuja, where the President reflected on the economic consequences of his administration’s decision to remove the petrol subsidy in 2023.
“I saw one of my opponents now say he will go back to subsidy. I read it. That is a demonstration of serious ignorance in governance and economy,” Tinubu said.
The President’s comments followed Atiku’s declaration that he would restore the petrol subsidy if elected president, placing the controversial policy at the centre of the emerging 2027 presidential contest.
Atiku, the presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress, has argued that Nigerians have not seen sufficient benefits from the removal of the subsidy and has questioned how the resulting savings and additional revenues have been used.
“I did not oppose the removal of the oil subsidy, but where is the money? Where did it go?” Atiku said in an interview on Wednesday.
He added that, if elected, he would restore the subsidy and ensure that anyone who had misappropriated the funds was made to refund them.
The former vice-president’s position marks a significant change from his stance during the 2023 presidential campaign.
In December 2022, while seeking the presidency on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party, Atiku said he would remove the fuel subsidy within his first 100 days in office.
The reversal has since become a major point of attack for the Tinubu administration and its supporters, who argue that restoring the subsidy would undermine the reforms introduced since May 2023.
Tinubu, defending his fuel subsidy decision, pointed to the financial difficulties faced by state governments before he assumed office.
“Before I came here, 27 states were unable to pay salaries, not even to talk of pensioners, salary of workers,” the President said, arguing that the removal of the subsidy had increased resources available to governments.
The government has maintained that the policy released substantial funds for the Federation and helped strengthen public finances.
Finance Minister and Coordinating Minister of the Economy Taiwo Oyedele said this week that subsidy removal generated N15.8 trillion in resources for the federation between June 2023 and December 2025.
The administration has also argued that the reforms helped improve government revenues and public finances, although their immediate impact on households has been severe.
The removal of the subsidy triggered a sharp rise in petrol prices and contributed to higher transportation and living costs.
The wider economic reforms introduced by Tinubu, including exchange-rate changes, have been praised by investors and international lenders while also attracting sustained criticism over their effect on household purchasing power.
Atiku has used those economic pressures to challenge the government’s handling of the savings generated by the reforms.
On Wednesday, his camp demanded an explanation for approximately N30 trillion in Federation revenues, deductions, savings and transfers, arguing that Nigerians deserved greater transparency over the financial gains associated with subsidy removal.
The former vice-president has said the resources should have produced more visible improvements in areas such as security, education, infrastructure and employment.
The dispute therefore goes beyond whether petrol subsidies should return. It reflects two sharply different arguments about Nigeria’s economic direction ahead of the 2027 election.
Tinubu’s position is that subsidy removal was necessary to free government resources and prevent the continuation of an expensive system that distorted public finances.
Atiku’s argument is that the hardship imposed by the reform has not been matched by sufficiently visible benefits for Nigerians, and that government must account more clearly for the resources released by the policy.
The disagreement is likely to remain a defining economic issue as the presidential contest develops, particularly as voters weigh the long-term benefits claimed for the reforms against their continuing impact on household finances.
The subsidy debate also gives opposition candidates an opportunity to offer voters a clear alternative to Tinubu’s economic programme.
For the President, however, reversing the policy would represent a dangerous retreat from reforms he considers essential to Nigeria’s economic recovery.
Also read: Wike slams Atiku over fuel subsidy u-turn
With the 2027 campaign season now underway, the increasingly pointed exchange between Tinubu and Atiku suggests that the future of petrol subsidies will be one of the most consequential economic questions placed before Nigerian voters.
Oreoluwa is an accountant and a brand writer with a flair for journalism.
