Former Deputy National Publicity Secretary of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Comrade Timi Frank, has challenged President Bola Tinubu to apologise to former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar and Nigerians over petrol subsidy removal, accusing the administration of embracing an intervention similar to a proposal it previously criticised.
Frank said the Federal Government’s introduction of a 30-day petrol discount at Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPC Ltd) retail outlets had reignited questions about its position on fuel subsidy and the need for sustained relief for Nigerians battling rising living costs.
In a statement issued in Abuja on Friday, the former APC spokesman described the discount as a belated acknowledgement of the need for government intervention in the petroleum market.
He argued that Nigerians deserved an explanation for the economic hardship that followed the removal of petrol subsidy in May 2023.
Frank also urged Tinubu to acknowledge Atiku’s position on fuel subsidy management, rather than dismiss proposals aimed at reducing the burden of high petrol prices on households and businesses.
“We expect Tinubu and his government to first apologise to Atiku Abubakar for its previous attacks on his position to return fuel subsidy if voted into office as President,” he said.
He added that the President should recognise Atiku’s proposal as an option for addressing the economic difficulties confronting the country.
According to Frank, governments genuinely concerned about citizens’ welfare should be willing to consider workable economic proposals irrespective of their political origins.
The Federal Government announced the 30-day petrol discount on Thursday as part of measures to cushion the impact of rising fuel prices, with public transport operators expected to receive priority.
The Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister of the Economy, Taiwo Oyedele, said the arrangement was not a return to the abolished blanket subsidy but an offer to sell petrol at cost for an initial period of 30 days.
However, Frank questioned the distinction between the new intervention and the subsidy arrangement the administration previously scrapped, arguing that the decision represented a shift from its earlier position.
“Simply put, Tinubu, who maintained a hardline stance on fuel subsidy removal, has gone back to his vomit,” he declared.
The former APC spokesman said subsidy removal had contributed to rising transportation and logistics costs, increasing the cost of moving goods, running businesses and meeting basic household needs.
He noted that traders, manufacturers, farmers and small-business owners had also been affected by rising fuel prices, while many households had experienced a decline in purchasing power.
Frank argued that a one-month discount would not reverse the cumulative economic pressures Nigerians had faced since 2023, particularly for workers and business owners whose incomes had struggled to keep pace with rising expenses.
Demands details of petrol discount
The political activist also questioned the scope and implementation of the government’s intervention, demanding clarity on the number of NNPC retail outlets participating in the programme, the volume of petrol available at discounted rates and the arrangements that would follow the expiration of the 30-day period.
He urged the government to explain how the initiative would deliver meaningful relief to transport operators, traders, workers and low-income households beyond the temporary discount.
The development has also renewed debate over Atiku’s position on petrol subsidy ahead of the 2027 presidential election.
In August, the former vice-president reiterated his support for restoring petrol subsidy if elected president, declaring: “On the question of subsidy, my position has not changed and will not change: I will restore it!”
Atiku had argued that government resources should be deployed to protect Nigerians from severe economic hardship.
The Presidency, however, challenged the proposal, raising questions about its fiscal and legal implications and how a restored subsidy could avoid the problems associated with the previous arrangement.
Frank maintained that the latest government intervention supported his argument that measures were needed to cushion Nigerians against the effects of rising fuel and transportation costs.
“But now, having seen the light in Atiku’s proposal, Tinubu simply came down off his high horse and adopted the idea without any acknowledgments,” he said.
He warned that the temporary discount should not be treated as a sufficient response to public concerns over the economic consequences of subsidy removal.
“Nigerians are no fools. They know how their present economic predicament started with ‘fuel subsidy is gone’ in 2023. They will definitely use their votes to reclaim their country and set it on the path of economic progress come 2027,” Frank stated.
He stressed that the central issue was not the terminology used to describe the intervention but whether it would provide meaningful and lasting relief to citizens.
Frank therefore called on the Tinubu administration to outline a sustainable strategy to reduce transportation and energy costs, ease the cost-of-living crisis and protect vulnerable households from further economic pressure.
He insisted that Nigerians needed a coherent, long-term economic response rather than an intervention that would expire after 30 days.
Frank is the United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP) Ambassador to East Africa and the Middle East and Senior Adviser to the Global Friendship City Association, United States.
