Follow Us on Google
From Ndubuisi Orji, Abuja
Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has unveiled the details of his proposed petroleum subsidy reform, stating that his administration would replace the old import subsidy model, with a new architecture targeted at independently audited production subsidy.
Atiku, who is also the 2027 Presidential Candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), the production subsidy would operate within a predetermined annual fiscal ceiling approved through the federal budget, ending the culture of open-ended subsidy liabilities.
The former Vice President, in a statement by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, said the Atiku Economic Recovery Plan (AERP) 2027 “recognises that the choice before Nigeria is not simply between subsidy and no subsidy, but between an opaque intervention that breeds waste and a disciplined economic instrument that delivers measurable benefits to citizens.”According to him, the proposed model is designed to lower energy costs while accelerating domestic refining.
He explained that under the AERP, qualifying public and private Nigerian refineries would receive domestic crude at a preferential price, subject to strict production, efficiency, transparency and domestic-supply conditions.
Atiku, while acknowledging that supplying crude below its market-equivalent value represents a real opportunity cost to the Federation said his plan would account for that cost openly rather than pretend it does not exist.
“My proposal is not to resurrect the old subsidy regime. We will move subsidy from importation to production, from middlemen to Nigerian refineries, and from unverifiable claims to verifiable barrels. The principle is simple: the subsidy will follow the barrel.
“The cost will be known. The ceiling will be known. The beneficiaries will be known. And, most importantly, the benefit delivered to Nigerians will be measurable. We will determine what Nigeria can afford before we subsidise. We will not subsidise first and discover the bill afterwards,” he stated.
The ADC candidate stated that the AERP would specifically prevent refinery owners from pocketing the benefit of preferential crude without passing it to consumers, noting that eligibility would be open and rules-based for all qualifying public and private refineries.
He said this would prevent the programme
from becoming a vehicle for enriching any particular refinery or politically connected operator.
“No refinery would receive subsidised crude without a corresponding, independently verified quantity of petroleum products being supplied to the Nigerian market under a transparent pricing formula reflecting the benefit of the preferential crude price.
“Crude allocation, refinery intake, production yields, inventories and domestic deliveries would be reconciled, ensuring that every subsidised barrel can be followed from allocation through refining to the Nigerian consumer.
“No phantom cargoes. No fictitious imports. No unverifiable under-recoveries. No retrospective claims. If you receive subsidised Nigerian crude, you must refine it in Nigeria, supply the agreed products to Nigerians and pass the benefit to Nigerians. Otherwise, you do not qualify.”
Atiku said the transparency built into his proposal stands in stark contrast to President Bola Tinubu’s handling of subsidy removal, noting that after the President declared on May 29, 2023 that subsidy was gone, Nigerians were immediately handed the bill, with cost of living skyrocketing.
However, he noted that ” after Nigerians paid that price, the government’s own accounts created questions that President Tinubu has still not satisfactorily answered.”
The former Vice President noted that Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited’s (NNPCL) audited financial statements recorded approximately ₦4.84 trillion in Energy Security Expenses in 2023 and ₦7.13 trillion in 2024.
According to him, Nigerians deserve a precise explanation of the economic substance of those expenses and the extent to which they incorporate under-recoveries, pricing differentials or other costs associated with petroleum supply.
“We are not interested in playing games with accounting terminology. If government continued absorbing differences between the economic cost of petroleum products and what was recovered from the market, then Nigerians are entitled to ask how that differs economically from the subsidy they were told had disappeared.
“You cannot abolish subsidy at Eagle Square and allow subsidy-like costs to resurface in government accounts without explaining the contradiction. Nigerians cannot pay for subsidy removal twice — through punishing pump prices and through unexplained subsidy-like costs against their commonwealth.”
