Former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar has offered further clarification on his proposal to restore fuel subsidy, insisting that the policy he has in mind would be fundamentally different from the subsidy arrangement that previously supported imported petroleum products.
Atiku said his proposal is centred on strengthening domestic refining, reducing the cost of producing petrol in Nigeria and ensuring that consumers benefit from lower production expenses.
The former vice-president gave the explanation in a series of posts on his X platform on Saturday while responding to discussions surrounding his position on fuel subsidy.
Rather than using public funds to make imported petrol cheaper, Atiku said his proposed policy would focus government support on petroleum products refined within the country.
He described the approach as a “production subsidy”, stressing that the objective would be to encourage local production while making the eventual cost of petrol more affordable to Nigerians.
According to Atiku, supporting domestic refineries could help reduce the cost associated with producing petrol locally. He said the savings should ultimately be transferred to consumers through lower pump prices.
His argument is that government intervention should be directed towards strengthening Nigerian production capacity instead of continuously relying on imported petroleum products.
To explain the difference, Atiku drew an analogy from the shoemaking industry.
He said the government could choose to spend money making imported shoes cheaper for consumers, but another option would be to support shoemakers in Aba by helping them reduce their production costs.
Such support, he argued, would enable local producers to remain competitive, create employment opportunities and make their products available to consumers at more affordable prices.
“I choose the Aba shoemaker,” Atiku said.
He said the same principle should guide government intervention in the petroleum sector.
Under his proposed arrangement, the focus would be on crude oil processed by Nigerian refineries, with government assistance designed to reduce the cost of domestic production.
Atiku’s explanation comes against the background of the significant impact fuel prices have on the wider Nigerian economy.
Petrol costs do not only affect motorists; they also influence transportation fares, the movement of agricultural products, the operations of small businesses and the prices of goods and services.
For Atiku, reducing the cost of petrol could therefore have a wider economic effect.
He argued that when transportation becomes expensive, the additional cost is eventually reflected in the price of food and other commodities.
Farmers and traders have to spend more to move goods, while businesses that depend on petrol or other forms of energy face higher operating expenses.
The former vice-president said his proposed policy is intended to ease some of those pressures.
“I want the bus fare you pay every morning to come down. I want the cost of taking food from the farm to the market to come down. I want the trader to spend less. I want the barber, tailor, welder and small business owner to spend less on energy,” he said.
Atiku further explained that the ultimate objective is to put more money back into the hands of Nigerians.
He said households currently spending a substantial portion of their income on transportation and energy would have more resources available if those costs were reduced.
He also linked lower transportation and energy expenses to the broader challenge of food affordability.
The movement of food from farms to urban markets involves transportation costs, while many small-scale businesses rely on petrol-powered generators and other energy sources to operate.
Atiku’s argument is that reducing these expenses could provide some relief for both businesses and consumers.
“I will make life affordable again. I will make Nigeria affordable again. It is a promise,” he said.
The former vice-president later returned to the issue in another post after a follower offered a prayer concerning his political aspirations and policy proposals.
In his response, Atiku urged Nigerians to help explain what he means by a production subsidy and why he believes the approach could make a difference in the lives of ordinary people.
He particularly drew attention to women and families, noting that the consequences of high fuel and transportation costs are felt across households.
For women operating small businesses, he argued, lower transportation and energy expenses could make it easier to move goods, serve customers and manage operating costs.
He also maintained that the impact could extend to household expenditure if the cost of transporting food and other necessities is reduced.
“That is what my production subsidy is about: support what we refine here, create jobs here, reduce the cost of fuel here, and make everyday life more affordable for Nigerian families,” Atiku said.
The former vice-president’s explanation therefore places local refining at the heart of his proposed fuel policy.
Rather than describing subsidy simply as government intervention to reduce what motorists pay at filling stations, Atiku is presenting his approach as a way of supporting production within Nigeria while attempting to achieve lower consumer prices.
His position also places emphasis on job creation and the development of domestic productive capacity.
The argument is that supporting local refineries could generate economic activity within the country while reducing dependence on imported petroleum products.
However, the effectiveness of such a policy would ultimately depend on how it is designed, implemented and financed, as well as how efficiently domestic refineries can produce and supply petroleum products.
For Atiku, the central issue remains affordability. He said the intention is not merely to announce a cheaper price for petrol but to reduce some of the costs that fuel prices impose on families, workers, traders and businesses.
By focusing on domestic refining, the former vice-president said government support could simultaneously target local production, employment and consumer affordability.
He maintained that his proposal represents a different way of approaching the subsidy debate, with the emphasis placed on what Nigeria produces rather than what it imports.
As the debate over fuel prices and the cost of living continues, Atiku’s latest comments are aimed at presenting his proposed production subsidy as an economic intervention that would benefit not only motorists but also commuters, traders, farmers, small-business operators and households.
His message is that supporting what is refined locally could help lower production costs and, in turn, make everyday life less expensive for Nigerians.
About The Author
