moRGANABLE politics/Governance
The National Chairman of the APC, Prof. Nentawe Yilwatda, warned that a return to the subsidy regime could reverse the gains recorded under ongoing economic reforms and plunge the country back into fiscal instability.
KaNo—
The controversy over the removal of the petrol subsidy has intensified ahead of the 2027 general elections, with sharp exchanges between the ruling All Progressives Congress and opposition figures over the policy’s future and its economic implications.
While the APC has criticised calls to reinstate the subsidy, the African Democratic Congress has challenged the Federal Government to explain how Nigerians have benefited from what it described as N15.8 trillion in additional revenues generated since the policy was scrapped in 2023.
The renewed debate follows recent comments by former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar, who pledged to restore fuel subsidy if elected president in 2027. This proposal has drawn both support and criticism across political and economic circles.
Reacting, the National Chairman of the APC, Prof. Nentawe Yilwatda, warned that a return to the subsidy regime could reverse the gains recorded under ongoing economic reforms and plunge the country back into fiscal instability.
APC Chairman Warns Against Return To Subsidy Regime
In a statement issued on Sunday by his Special Adviser on Media and Information Strategy, Abimbola Tooki, Yilwatda said reinstating the subsidy would have far-reaching consequences for government finances and public services.
He argued that while subsidy might appear attractive due to its promise of cheaper petrol, it comes with high costs that could undermine key sectors such as education, healthcare, and infrastructure.
“The proposal to restore fuel subsidy raises fundamental questions about how such a policy would be financed and sustained without returning Nigeria to the cycle of fiscal pressures that characterised the previous arrangement,” Yilwatda said.
“A policy cannot be judged only by its immediate benefit at the pump. Nigerians must examine its impact on government revenues, salaries, pensions, education, healthcare, infrastructure and the overall capacity of government to meet its obligations.”
Although the removal triggered a sharp increase in the cost of living, the Federal Government has consistently maintained that it has freed up resources for development and strengthened public finances.
Yilwatda echoed this position, noting that increased federal allocations to states following the removal of subsidy had improved their financial capacity.
He recalled that before the reform, many states struggled to pay salaries and pensions, with some resorting to partial payments.
He also raised concerns about the potential impact on the education sector, warning that a reduction in government revenues could affect funding for schools and universities.
“Nigerians should be concerned about policies that could weaken the capacity of governments to finance education and other essential public services,” he said.
APC Chairman Call For Workers Welfare
On workers’ welfare, the APC chairman stressed the need to consider the sustainability of the new minimum wage in the context of subsidy debates.
He argued that higher wages must be supported by stable government revenues, warning that reintroducing subsidy could strain public finances and make it difficult to sustain salary increases.
Yilwatda further linked the ongoing economic reforms to improvements in Nigeria’s digital and financial systems, noting that they have expanded opportunities for young people to participate in the global economy.
He said reforms had made it easier for freelancers, content creators, and professionals to engage in international transactions, adding that such progress could be undermined by policies that weaken the country’s financial stability.
Chairman Lauds NELFUND Initiative
The APC chairman also highlighted the role of the Nigeria Education Loan Fund, describing it as a key intervention aimed at improving access to tertiary education by reducing the financial burden on families.
He emphasised that sustainable funding for such programmes depends on prudent fiscal management, which could be jeopardised by a return to costly subsidy payments.
While acknowledging the hardship caused by the removal of subsidy, Yilwatda maintained that the solution lies in targeted interventions rather than a reversal of the policy.
“The hardship Nigerians have experienced is real, and government must continue to respond to it,” he said. “But the answer cannot simply be to return to a system whose long-term fiscal implications created serious distortions in our economy.”
He urged Nigerians to critically evaluate proposals to reintroduce subsidy by asking key questions about cost, funding sources, and long-term sustainability.
However, the ADC has pushed back against the government’s narrative, insisting that Nigerians deserve transparency on how the savings from subsidy removal have been utilised.
ADC Challenges Tinubu’s Campaign DG Yari
The opposition party specifically challenged the Director-General of President Tinubu’s 2027 re-election campaign, Abdulaziz Yari, to explain how citizens have benefited from the additional revenues generated since 2023.
According to the ADC, the removal of subsidy and related economic reforms have resulted in trillions of naira in extra income for the federal, state, and local governments, yet the impact of these funds on ordinary Nigerians remains unclear.
The party argued that while the government continues to defend the policy based on fiscal gains, there is little visible evidence that the additional revenues have translated into improved living conditions.
It called for a detailed account of how the reported N15.8 trillion has been spent, including allocations to key sectors such as infrastructure, healthcare, education, and social protection.
The ADC’s position reflects a broader concern among sections of the public about the transparency and accountability of government spending in the wake of subsidy removal.
Many Nigerians have continued to grapple with rising prices of fuel, transportation, and basic goods, leading to growing demands for relief measures and clearer communication from the government.
Analysts say the subsidy debate is likely to remain a central issue in the build-up to the 2027 elections, as political parties seek to position themselves on economic policy and cost-of-living concerns.
While some stakeholders view subsidy as an unsustainable burden that distorts the economy, others see it as a necessary intervention to protect vulnerable citizens from the impact of market-driven fuel prices.
The sharp divergence in views underscores the complexity of the issue and the challenge facing policymakers in balancing fiscal responsibility with social welfare.
As political campaigns gradually take shape, the question of whether to sustain or reverse subsidy removal is expected to dominate discussions, with parties under pressure to present clear and credible economic plans.
