Atiku Abubakar’s camp has rejected Kayode Fayemi’s criticism of the former vice-president’s plan to reduce petrol and diesel prices through government intervention if he wins the 2027 presidential election.
Fayemi, a former Ekiti State governor, made his assessment on Arise Television’s Prime Time on Monday. He compared Atiku’s subsidy position with the APC’s Muslim-Muslim presidential ticket in the 2023 election.
“My take on that is that Atiku’s proposal of subsidy is politically equivalent to our own Muslim-Muslim ticket in 2023. It’s a political strategy. It’s not an economic construct,” Fayemi said.
Paul Ibe, Atiku’s media aide, responded in a statement shared on Tuesday by disputing the basis of the comparison. He said Atiku was not proposing to restore the subsidy arrangement that operated before its removal in 2023.
That earlier system relied heavily on imported refined petroleum and faced allegations over opaque transactions, inflated import claims and corruption. Ibe said Atiku instead wants government assistance tied to petroleum refined within Nigeria.
Under the proposed arrangement, Ibe said support for local production would lower the price of petrol and diesel while encouraging investment in refining facilities. He also linked the policy to higher domestic output, employment and lower distribution expenses.
The plan therefore places the performance of Nigerian refineries at the centre of the proposed intervention. Its ability to reduce pump prices would depend on whether local producers can supply petroleum products at competitive prices and whether the government can fund the intervention without creating another large financial obligation.
Ibe challenged Fayemi to quantify the projected cost of the plan and identify the specific problems he expects it to create. He also asked him to demonstrate whether a production-linked intervention would produce inflationary pressures or distort the petroleum market.
“Every major economic policy has political consequences, particularly when it directly affects the welfare of millions of Nigerians. The real question is whether the proposal makes economic sense,” Ibe said.
The disagreement comes three years after President Bola Tinubu announced the removal of the petrol subsidy in 2023. The decision led to a substantial increase in petrol prices, while transport operators and households faced higher costs.
Atiku’s camp has cited those effects in arguing for measures that address the price of petroleum products beyond subsidy removal itself. Ibe identified refinery capacity, energy expenses, transportation and distribution as factors that affect what consumers ultimately pay.
The proposed intervention would also require rules determining which producers receive assistance and the amount available to them. Government would need mechanisms to track production, calculate eligible support and prevent payments from recreating the weaknesses associated with the former import-based system.
Ibe said shifting assistance towards local refining could reduce reliance on imported refined petroleum. The policy would also depend on sufficient domestic output to meet demand, since limited production could leave the country reliant on imports despite the new subsidy structure.
He urged Fayemi to present an alternative if he considers Atiku’s plan unsuitable.
“If it is bad economics, show Nigerians the numbers. If it is fiscally unsustainable, demonstrate why. If there is a better way to reduce the cost of petrol and diesel while protecting consumers and encouraging domestic production, put it on the table,” he said.
