The Presidency on Sunday said former Vice President Atiku Abubakar is unqualified for the nation’s top seat and lost the 2023 elections due to “arrogance, insensitivity and disregard” for the country’s realities.
It faulted Atiku’s ideas, especially his call for an initial consultation period before subsidy removal and other hardline economic reforms, saying it “showed a troubling lack of awareness regarding the state of the economy.”
The Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, stated this in a statement he signed on Sunday.
Onanuga was responding to Atiku’s earlier thoughts in which he described Tinubu’s reforms as “trial-and-error economic policies,” blaming the President for inflicting “excruciating pain” on Nigerians.
The 2023 presidential candidate of the People’s Democratic Party also lamented that while he is not the president, his suggestions are “in the interest of Nigerians.”
Upon assuming office in May 2023, Tinubu discontinued the regime of fuel subsidy and unified the foreign exchange.
However, Nigerians have continued to feel the collateral impact of these and other economic reforms, including increased food prices, transport, fuel and other essentials.
In his tweet titled “What We Would Have Done Differently,” Atiku, who deputised for former President Olusegun Obasanjo from 1999 to 2007, outlined his recommendations for addressing issues such as insecurity and easing the effects of subsidy removal on the masses.
But the Presidency faulted Atiku, saying, “his narrative…indicates an inability to engage with the pressing economic realities being revitalised multidimensionally under President Tinubu’s leadership.”
Onanuga wrote, “Since his defeat in the last election, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has shown more interest in undermining President Bola Tinubu than in addressing his party’s implosion. We suspect he is envious of Tinubu’s position — an office he has unsuccessfully sought six times.
“It is perplexing that he would elevate his untested, hypothetical proposal, which Nigerians soundly rejected during the 2023 presidential election, and seek to present it as a superior alternative to the multi-faceted reform programmes implemented by the Tinubu administration.
“If his plan lacked popular appeal, he must acknowledge that merely repackaging it will not resolve the social and economic challenges his People’s Democratic Party bequeathed after 16 years in power.
“Atiku’s economic analysis demonstrates a significant misunderstanding of Nigeria’s realities.
“What reforms would Atiku propose at the onset of his hypothetical and fabled presidency? While he suggests a consultation period upon assuming office, the reality is that the Nigerian economy requires immediate and decisive action. A leader must be prepared to tackle challenges from Day One, as President Tinubu has done.”
It said Atiku, going further to accuse Tinubu of “stealing his presidency,” revealed a sense of entitlement and disconnect from the electorate.
“The truth is that Tinubu rightfully won the presidency, a position Atiku was simply unqualified for due to his arrogance, insensitivity to Nigeria’s diversity, and the decision to disregard his party’s power rotation arrangement between the North and the South after eight years of President Muhammadu Buhari,” it argued.
According to the Presidency, the idea of a consultation period upon entering office would not do much good for Tinubu in an economy in dire need of urgent action.
More so, it said, “The Tinubu administration came prepared with a firm action plan to address the shortcomings that persisted during President Olusegun Obasanjo’s time when Atiku was vice president.”
It continued, “We can only speculate what detrimental impact Atiku’s proposed lengthy town hall and village square meetings would have had on Nigeria’s economy if he had been elected president and taken such an approach.
“The country needed a proactive leader such as Tinubu, who immediately set to work on addressing economic challenges rather than one who would have squandered precious time on consultations and a questionable privatisation agenda.
“Atiku’s critiques of Tinubu’s presidency are mere harebrained propositions devoid of realistic alternatives. He must reckon with the decades of mismanaged economy inherited by the current administration, including exorbitant subsidy expenditures far exceeding government earnings from crude oil.”
Onanuga stated that as of mid-2023, the landing cost of fuel was between N500 and N600, while it was sold nationwide at an average of N200.
He noted that Nigeria was on life support as the 2023 budget allocated N3.36trn for fuel subsidies until June 2023, against a projected N2.23trn in oil revenue for the year.
The Presidency said instead of “conjuring imaginary scenarios,” it expected the former vice president to engage with these urgent realities and commend Tinubu’s efforts.
It also argued that the N54trn subsidy savings in 2024 had made more revenue available to the Federal Government and subnationals.
“The estimated N5.4trn savings from subsidy removal in 2024 are being actively directed toward infrastructure development and social intervention programmes, initiatives that will benefit all tiers of government and enhance Nigerians’ quality of life.
“We expect Atiku to commend what the Tinubu administration has done concerning revenue generation for the Federation.
“Without factoring in oil sales, revenue proceeds generated by the Federal Inland Revenue Service almost doubled in the first half of 2024, compared with the level Tinubu met in 2023.
“The states and councils are more prosperous because of it, as many states have increased the minimum wage for their workers to between N70,000 and N85,000,” the statement read.
It faulted Atiku’s proposal to privatise the four government-owned refineries, which collectively can only meet a fraction of the nation’s daily fuel consumption when activated, saying it lacked originality.
“In 2007, investors were only willing to offer $160m for 51 per cent equity in the Port Harcourt Refinery, while the Kaduna Refinery had an offer of $102m.
“According to industry experts and the late President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, Nigeria’s Head of State at the time, who cancelled the sale of the refineries by the Obasanjo-Atiku government, the offered bids were considered scrap value.
“As vice president, Atiku oversaw the sale of the nation’s assets to private individuals and cronies at low prices. Today, most public enterprises Atiku sold have been stripped and become dead assets,” Onanuga said.
It said the model of farming the completely rehabilitated refineries to private sector managers at an agreed-upon rate of return to the government, as adopted by Tinubu’s government, is more practical and value-laden than selling our national patrimony to some private interests that are not technically capable of operating the refineries.
“The Tinubu administration focuses on revitalising these refineries while supporting modular refineries and the Dangote Refinery, which has greater capacity.
“This approach will guarantee domestic production and stabilise retail prices by reducing foreign exchange challenges.
“It includes selling crude oil to the refineries in Naira, enabling potential cost reductions that could reflect in retail prices,” it argued.
Regarding Atiku’s allegations of corruption within the NNPC, the Presidency said fuel subsidy has historically been the leading corruption enabler in the state-owned oil company.
It said Tinubu’s removal of subsidies eliminated the most significant incentive for corruption within the NNPC.
It, however, accused the former Vice President and his boss of failing to make any significant reforms in the oil sector during his eight-year tenure when they had the opportunity.
“In any case, is it not ironic that an Atiku, who was entangled in corruption allegations, including one in which his wife was indicted and his business associate, former US Congressman William Jefferson, was jailed for 13 years, is now talking about corruption matters?” the statement read.
It also described Atiku’s suggestion of phased-out subsidy removal as an outdated approach that has historically led to fiscal challenges for countries like Indonesia.
Nigeria has gradually phased out subsidies since 1978, with numerous adjustments made. Fuel prices were adjusted 22 times between 1978 and 2020.
The presidency said, “Rather than pushing for unrealistic timelines, Atiku should recognise the necessity of President Tinubu’s bold reforms. Notably, while Atiku peddles his economic fantasies, he has yet to denounce President Tinubu’s removal of the fuel subsidy because he knows that the reform was necessary and correct. We can only urge him to purge himself of the petty, derisive politics of a sore loser.
“To alleviate the effect of the fuel subsidy removal on the very poor and vulnerable, the Tinubu administration has embarked on an active social intervention campaign involving cash transfers and the distribution of palliatives.
“So far, 20 million Nigerians are being targeted for direct cash transfers, an established social protection mechanism described as economically transformative by the World Bank and many development partners.”
It added that the administration has designed well-targeted social inclusion programmes, including student loans, consumer credits, and the Presidential CNG Initiative, all initiated within the first 12 months.
In his foreign exchange management proposal, Atiku had declared that a fixed exchange rate system was out of the question.
“Yet his managed float proposal, another gradualist approach,” the Presidency says, “is still the same as the old fixed exchange rate system, which stagnated the national economy by subsidising forex up to $1.5bn monthly to a privileged few.”
It noted that a managed float is also known as a dirty float because of its inherent flaws. The system combines elements of fixed and floating exchange rates.
The CBN will still have to set the exchange rate and make it available to people and businesses. Access is not guaranteed to all, as it is now.
In conclusion, the Presidency said Atiku’s economic proposals “fail to present a viable alternative to Tinubu’s decisive reforms.
“We encourage him to reassess his approach and repair his reputation as a statesman. The rejection of his proposals in the 2023 election indicates that Nigerians will be reluctant to entertain his future political ambitions.
“President Tinubu remains focused on leading Nigeria toward a prosperous future and addressing our nation’s real challenges.
“Atiku Abubakar should abandon his politics of distraction and fantasies and focus on constructive discourse,” the statement concluded.
