Public affairs commentator, Obunike Ohaegbu, has said former Vice President Atiku Abubakar’s proposal to reintroduce a targeted fuel subsidy has placed the Bola Tinubu-led Federal Government under pressure to defend the economic impact of subsidy removal.
Ohaegbu, in a statement titled “Beyond Party Lines: Atiku’s Subsidy Uppercut—Let the Policy Debate Begin,” argued that Atiku’s position should be treated as a serious policy proposal rather than dismissed through political rhetoric.
Atiku, a presidential aspirant ahead of the 2027 general election, has advocated a targeted subsidy aimed at cushioning the effect of fuel prices on ordinary Nigerians, rather than a return to what critics described as the corruption associated with the former subsidy regime.
According to Ohaegbu, the commercialisation of the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited does not resolve the broader question of whether government should intervene to reduce the cost of essential commodities whose prices directly affect transportation, food production, education and businesses.
He challenged the Federal Government to provide evidence that the savings from subsidy removal have translated into improved living conditions for Nigerians.
“Has subsidy removal made food cheaper or more expensive? Is transportation cheaper today than it was before subsidy removal?” he asked, adding that Nigerians also deserve to know whether their purchasing power and ability to run businesses have improved.
Ohaegbu further criticised the argument that state governments now receive more revenue following the removal of subsidy, saying increased government allocations should not be equated with improved welfare for citizens.
Using his community, Ukpor, in Nnewi South Local Government Area of Anambra State, as an example, he cited the abandonment of the Ukpor-Ozubulu road and reported deterioration of key infrastructure linking communities in the area.
He also raised concerns over the collapse of a bridge on the Federal Government spur connecting the Onitsha-Owerri Road to Ukpor and Ezinifite, as well as flooding around the Owerri Anude bridge in Uhu Ebe, Ukpor.
According to him, the situation has forced community members and private individuals to intervene in areas that should ordinarily be handled by government.
Ohaegbu noted that previous administrations in Anambra State had undertaken major road projects affecting Ukpor, citing projects associated with former governors Chris Ngige, Peter Obi and Willie Obiano.
He questioned whether the additional revenue accruing to governments since subsidy removal was being adequately reflected in infrastructure and social services at the grassroots.
He argued that a national economic policy should not depend solely on the discretion of individual governors, but should include transparent mechanisms for ensuring that citizens directly benefit from government revenue.
Ohaegbu said Atiku’s proposal had therefore opened an important policy debate ahead of the 2027 elections, urging the All Progressives Congress-led Federal Government to respond with facts rather than political attacks.
He asked the government to explain how much had been saved through subsidy removal, where the funds had gone and what measurable improvements they had produced in the lives of Nigerians.
“Campaigns are opportunities for political parties and candidates to explain how they intend to govern, what policies they will pursue and how those policies will improve the lives of the people,” he said.
Ohaegbu maintained that Atiku had placed an alternative policy on the table and challenged the Federal Government to defend its own approach with verifiable evidence.
A public affairs commentator, Obunike Ohaegbu, has said former Vice President Atiku Abubakar’s proposal to reintroduce a targeted fuel subsidy has placed the Bola Tinubu-led Federal Government under pressure to defend the economic impact of subsidy removal.
Ohaegbu, in a statement titled “Beyond Party Lines: Atiku’s Subsidy Uppercut—Let the Policy Debate Begin,” argued that Atiku’s position should be treated as a serious policy proposal rather than dismissed through political rhetoric.
Atiku, a presidential aspirant ahead of the 2027 general election, has advocated a targeted subsidy aimed at cushioning the effect of fuel prices on ordinary Nigerians, rather than a return to what critics described as the corruption associated with the former subsidy regime.
According to Ohaegbu, the commercialisation of the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited does not resolve the broader question of whether government should intervene to reduce the cost of essential commodities whose prices directly affect transportation, food production, education and businesses.
He challenged the Federal Government to provide evidence that the savings from subsidy removal have translated into improved living conditions for Nigerians.
“Has subsidy removal made food cheaper or more expensive? Is transportation cheaper today than it was before subsidy removal?” he asked, adding that Nigerians also deserve to know whether their purchasing power and ability to run businesses have improved.
Ohaegbu further criticised the argument that state governments now receive more revenue following the removal of subsidy, saying increased government allocations should not be equated with improved welfare for citizens.
Using his community, Ukpor, in Nnewi South Local Government Area of Anambra State, as an example, he cited the abandonment of the Ukpor-Ozubulu road and reported deterioration of key infrastructure linking communities in the area.
He also raised concerns over the collapse of a bridge on the Federal Government spur connecting the Onitsha-Owerri Road to Ukpor and Ezinifite, as well as flooding around the Owerri Anude bridge in Uhu Ebe, Ukpor.
According to him, the situation has forced community members and private individuals to intervene in areas that should ordinarily be handled by government.
Ohaegbu noted that previous administrations in Anambra State had undertaken major road projects affecting Ukpor, citing projects associated with former governors Chris Ngige, Peter Obi and Willie Obiano.
He questioned whether the additional revenue accruing to governments since subsidy removal was being adequately reflected in infrastructure and social services at the grassroots.
He argued that a national economic policy should not depend solely on the discretion of individual governors, but should include transparent mechanisms for ensuring that citizens directly benefit from government revenue.
Ohaegbu said Atiku’s proposal had therefore opened an important policy debate ahead of the 2027 elections, urging the All Progressives Congress-led Federal Government to respond with facts rather than political attacks.
He asked the government to explain how much had been saved through subsidy removal, where the funds had gone and what measurable improvements they had produced in the lives of Nigerians.
“Campaigns are opportunities for political parties and candidates to explain how they intend to govern, what policies they will pursue and how those policies will improve the lives of the people,” he said.
Ohaegbu maintained that Atiku had placed an alternative policy on the table and challenged the Federal Government to defend its own approach with verifiable evidence.
