The Presidency accuses Atiku Abubakar of being envious of President Tinubu’s position and misinterpreting the current state of Nigeria. Explore the latest comments and political dynamics between the two leaders.
The Presidency claims that former Vice President Atiku Abubakar is envious of President Bola Tinubu’s position, an office the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) candidate has unsuccessfully pursued six times in past elections.
The former Vice President faced criticism from the Presidency after suggesting economic reforms and anti-corruption measures in a recent tweet titled, “What We Would Have Done Differently.”
A press release from the State House on Sunday, signed by Bayo Onanuga, the presidential Special Adviser on Information and Strategy, alleged that since Atiku’s defeat to Tinubu, he has been more focused on undermining President Bola Ahmed Tinubu rather than dealing with his party’s internal issues. It suggested that Atiku might be envious of Tinubu’s position—an office he has unsuccessfully attempted to secure six times.
The statement partly stated, “It is puzzling that he would promote his untested and hypothetical proposal—which Nigerians decisively rejected in the 2023 presidential election—as a better option compared to the comprehensive reform programs introduced by the Tinubu administration. If his plan failed to gain popular support before, he must understand that rebranding it will not solve the social and economic issues left behind by his People’s Democratic Party (PDP) after their 16 years in power.”
The statement also pointed out that Atiku’s economic analysis showed a considerable lack of understanding regarding Nigeria’s present situation. It commented, “His narrative, ‘What We Would Have Done Differently,’ reveals an unawareness of the urgent economic needs currently being tackled under President Tinubu’s leadership.”
What reforms might Atiku propose if he were to become president? Although he plans for a consultation period upon taking office, the Nigerian economy demands prompt and assertive measures. A leader must be prepared to address challenges from the outset, as President Tinubu has demonstrated.
Atiku accused President Tinubu of ‘stealing his presidency,’ revealing a sense of entitlement and alienation from the electorate. However, Tinubu legitimately won the presidency—a role for which Atiku was considered unsuitable due to his perceived arrogance, lack of sensitivity towards Nigeria’s diverse population, and disregard for his party’s power rotation agreement between North and South following eight years under President Muhammadu Buhari.
The Presidency suggests that Atiku’s proposal for a consultation period upon assuming office indicates a concerning unawareness of the economy’s critical condition, which necessitated immediate action.
It praised Tinubu’s administration for establishing a strong action plan to tackle the shortcomings that existed during President Olusegun Obasanjo’s era, when Atiku served as vice president.
Atiku’s plan to initiate a consultation period upon taking office highlights his concerning unawareness of the economy’s urgent need for immediate intervention. Unlike Atiku, the Tinubu administration arrived with a decisive action plan aimed at addressing ongoing issues that had remained unresolved since President Olusegun Obasanjo’s tenure, during which Atiku served as vice president.
We can only conjecture about the negative effects Atiku’s proposed extensive town hall and Village Square meetings might have had on Nigeria’s economy if he had been elected president. The nation required a proactive leader like Tinubu, who promptly tackled economic issues instead of spending valuable time in consultations and pursuing a questionable privatization agenda.
Atiku’s criticisms of Tinubu’s presidency are simply impractical ideas lacking in viable alternatives. He needs to acknowledge the decades of economic mismanagement inherited by the current administration, including subsidy costs that surpass government revenues from crude oil.
By mid-2023, the landing cost of fuel ranged from N500 to N600, but it was sold across the country at an average price of N200. The 2023 budget earmarked N3.36 trillion for fuel subsidies up until June, compared to a projected oil revenue of N2.23 trillion for that year. This situation left Nigeria’s economy in a precarious state.
It suggested that the former vice president should focus on addressing these urgent realities rather than creating hypothetical scenarios.
The statement also mentioned that the anticipated savings of N5.4 trillion from subsidy removal in 2024 are being purposefully allocated to infrastructure development and social intervention programs, initiatives designed to benefit all levels of government and improve the quality of life for Nigerians.
We anticipate that Atiku will praise the Tinubu administration’s efforts in boosting revenue generation for the Federation. Excluding oil sales, revenues collected by the Federal Inland Revenue Service nearly doubled during the first half of 2024 compared to what was recorded in 2023 when Tinubu took office. This has led to greater prosperity for states and councils, with many states having raised their workers’ minimum wage to a range between N70,000 and N85,000.
Atiku’s plan to privatize the four government-owned refineries, which together can only fulfill a small portion of the country’s daily fuel needs when operational, is not an original idea.
READ ALSO: Count Me Out’: Atiku Abubakar Clears the Air on PDP Leadership Crisis Involvement
In 2007, investors proposed $160 million for a 51% stake in the Port Harcourt Refinery and offered $102 million for the Kaduna Refinery. Industry experts and then-President Umar Musa Yar’Adua deemed these bids as merely scrap value. As Nigeria’s Head of State at that time, President Yar’Adua canceled the Obasanjo-Atiku government’s plan to sell off the refineries based on this valuation assessment.
During his tenure as vice president, Atiku managed the privatization of national assets, selling them to private individuals and associates at undervalued prices. Currently, many of these public enterprises have been dismantled and turned into non-productive assets.
The approach taken by Tinubu’s administration to lease fully rehabilitated refineries to private sector managers under a mutually agreed rate of return is both practical and beneficial. This strategy prevents the outright sale of these national assets to potentially unqualified private entities. The government emphasizes revitalizing existing refineries while also promoting modular refineries and supporting the higher-capacity Dangote Refinery.
This strategy will ensure domestic production and stabilize retail prices by addressing foreign exchange difficulties. By selling crude oil to refineries in Naira, it may lead to cost reductions that could be reflected in retail pricing.
Atiku has raised concerns about corruption within the NNPC, pointing out that the fuel subsidy has traditionally been a major driver of corrupt practices in the state-owned oil company. By abolishing this subsidy, President Tinubu removed a key opportunity for corruption at the NNPC. While Atiku served as Vice President for eight years, alongside his superior, they had chances to tackle these issues but did not implement meaningful reforms in the oil sector.
Isn’t it ironic that Atiku, who has faced corruption allegations himself—such as the indictment of his wife and the 13-year imprisonment of his business associate, former US Congressman William Jefferson—is now discussing issues related to corruption?
The idea of gradually removing subsidies is an outdated strategy that has historically resulted in fiscal issues for countries such as Indonesia, which Atiku mentions. Nigeria has been phasing out subsidies incrementally since 1978, making multiple adjustments along the way. From 1978 to 2020, fuel prices were adjusted 22 times. Instead of advocating for unrealistic timelines, Atiku should acknowledge the importance of President Tinubu’s bold reforms.
Interestingly, although Atiku promotes his economic ideas, he has not criticized President Tinubu’s decision to remove the fuel subsidy. This suggests that even he recognizes the necessity and correctness of this reform. We can only encourage him to move beyond petty politics and divisiveness associated with a sore loser mentality.
To mitigate the impact of removing fuel subsidies on the poorest and most vulnerable citizens, the Tinubu administration has launched a proactive social intervention campaign that includes cash transfers and distributing relief aids. Currently, 20 million Nigerians are identified as recipients for direct cash assistance—a recognized social protection strategy deemed economically transformative by both the World Bank and numerous development partners. Within its first year, this administration has crafted well-targeted social inclusion initiatives such as student loans, consumer credits, and introduced the Presidential CNG Initiative.
In his proposal for foreign exchange management, Atiku stated that a fixed exchange rate system was not an option. However, his suggestion of a managed float approach is essentially similar to the previous fixed exchange rate system. This old method stalled national economic growth by providing up to $1.5 billion monthly in subsidized forex benefits to a select few individuals.
Atiku should keep in mind that a managed float is often referred to as a dirty float due to its inherent shortcomings. This system blends aspects of both fixed and floating exchange rates, meaning the CBN will still need to determine the exchange rate and provide it for individuals and businesses. However, unlike now, access won’t be guaranteed for everyone.
In summary, Atiku’s economic plans do not offer a compelling alternative to Tinubu’s bold reforms. We urge him to reevaluate his strategy and restore his standing as a statesman. The dismissal of his proposals in the 2023 election suggests that Nigerians may hesitate to support any future political endeavors he pursues.
“President Tinubu continues to dedicate himself to guiding Nigeria toward a prosperous future and tackling the nation’s genuine challenges. Atiku Abubakar should steer away from diversionary tactics and unrealistic notions, instead concentrating on engaging in constructive dialogue.”
