Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has hit back at President Bola Tinubu, accusing his administration of worsening economic hardship while celebrating rising government revenues as evidence that its policies are working.
In a statement issued by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, and made available to The News Chronicle on Friday, August 21, Atiku described Tinubu’s criticism of his proposed intervention in the petroleum sector as the “insolent sermon” of a failed economic experimenter who has mistaken Nigerians’ ability to endure hardship for proof that his policies are working.
Shaibu said Tinubu had no moral standing to lecture Nigerians on economic management after his administration implemented fuel price and foreign exchange reforms that, according to Atiku’s camp, have sharply reduced citizens’ purchasing power.
“If economic ignorance had a presidential seal, Tinubu and his family would be its official logo,” Shaibu said, accusing the administration of triggering fuel-price, exchange-rate and cost-of-living shocks across the economy.
He said the increase in allocations to states through the Federation Account could not be described as economic success while households and businesses struggle with rising living costs.
“Hungry Nigerians cannot boil FAAC figures for dinner. Businesses cannot power factories with presidential speeches, workers cannot pay transport fares with macroeconomic grammar, and parents cannot settle school fees with statistics manufactured for State House applause,” he said.
Atiku also rejected claims that his proposal amounted to a return to the subsidy regime, saying he was advocating a targeted, capped, budgeted and time-bound production-support mechanism tied to domestic production and subject to independent auditing.
According to him, the proposal was designed in response to the economic conditions created by the Tinubu administration’s policies.
“Tinubu pronounced first and searched for a plan afterwards. Atiku studied the consequences and produced a solution,” Shaibu said.
The former vice president’s camp also questioned the government’s claim that petrol subsidy had been completely removed, citing what it described as energy-security costs and petroleum under-recoveries contained in NNPC’s audited accounts.
“So what exactly did Tinubu remove? If subsidy is dead, why are under-recoveries alive? If corruption was eliminated, why has opacity survived?” Shaibu asked.
He further criticised Tinubu’s argument that subsidy removal had strengthened state finances by increasing monthly FAAC allocations.
Shaibu argued that transferring more money to state governments while households struggle with food inflation, transportation costs and reduced purchasing power amounted to shifting the burden of government solvency onto ordinary Nigerians.
“You do not build a federation by impoverishing citizens so that Abuja can send bigger cheques to governors,” he said.
He accused the administration of encouraging dependence on federal allocations rather than pushing states to expand their productive economies, attract investment and broaden their tax bases.
Shaibu also challenged the Presidency to explain what he described as approximately N30 trillion in Federation Account revenues, deductions, savings and transfers, as well as the N12.8 trillion Service-Wide Vote contained in the 2026 budget.
“If Tinubu can mobilise an army of propagandists to attack Atiku within hours, surely he can find one accountant to explain his books,” he said.
Atiku’s camp maintained that economic reform should ultimately be measured by improvements in citizens’ welfare rather than the size of government revenues.
“The real ignorance is believing suffering is economic policy. Tinubu removed the subsidy from Nigerians’ pockets, but he is yet to remove the questions from his books.” Shaibu said.
He urged Nigerians not to accept what he described as another four years of the administration’s bitter experiment.
