YARI’S SUBSIDY REVISIONISM: How Political Ambition Is Being Used to Rewrite Buhari’s Record
MAIN POINTS:
*Buhari Rejected IMF, World Bank Pressure
*Why Attack Atiku Over Subsidy?
*Subsidy Debate Must Not Become a War of Political Propaganda
*Nigerians Will Decide
By KEMI KASUMU
For the millions who now pay more for transportation, food, electricity and virtually every basic necessity, fuel subsidy is not an abstract economic theory. It is a question of survival. That is why politicians should stop rewriting yesterday to defend today. If Tinubu’s subsidy removal is good for Nigeria, defend it with facts. If Atiku’s proposal to reduce the burden on Nigerians is wrong, expose it with facts.
Former Zamfara State Governor, Abdul’Aziz Yari, appears to have opened another front in the desperate attempt to defend President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s controversial fuel subsidy removal, this time by dragging the administration of former President Muhammadu Buhari into the argument.
Yari, who has now been appointed Director-General of President Tinubu’s Presidential Campaign Council for the 2027 election, reportedly sought to dismiss the argument that fuel subsidy could be restored, with a claim that there was no budgetary provision for subsidy in Buhari’s 2023 budget.
That argument, if that is indeed the basis of Yari’s position, deserves to be challenged because the absence of a conventional budget line does not automatically mean that a subsidy policy did not exist or that the government had abolished the policy.
It is precisely this kind of political interpretation of economic history that Nigerians must reject.
Earlier on Saturday, United Kingdom-based Abanikanda Olumoro, in an article published by The DEFENDER Newspaper, offered an explanation that directly challenges the narrative being promoted around Buhari’s 2023 budget and fuel subsidy.
A critic who reacted to Yari’s statement put the matter more bluntly: Buhari did not implement a fuel-subsidy-removal policy before leaving office.
According to the critic, the Buhari administration had placed the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL) at the centre of petrol importation and supply, with the company absorbing the financial burden associated with maintaining regulated petrol prices.
Whether one agrees with the economic wisdom of that arrangement or not, it is fundamentally different from claiming that Buhari had already embraced Tinubu’s policy of completely removing petrol subsidy.
Buhari Rejected IMF, World Bank Pressure
There is another part of the argument that Yari’s critics believe should not be erased from Nigeria’s recent economic history.
Buhari publicly explained his reluctance to implement some of the economic prescriptions associated with international financial institutions, including pressure for fuel subsidy removal and naira devaluation.
His position, as recalled by the critic, was that Nigeria’s national interest should take precedence over external prescriptions.
That position may be debated by economists and political commentators, but it cannot simply be rewritten after the fact to create the impression that Buhari and Tinubu pursued the same economic programme.
They did not.
Tinubu, immediately after his inauguration on May 29, 2023, announced the removal of fuel subsidy. His administration subsequently undertook major foreign-exchange reforms that led to a sharp depreciation of the naira.
The consequences have been enormous.
Fuel prices rose dramatically. Transportation costs increased. Food prices followed. Household purchasing power collapsed for millions of Nigerians. Businesses faced escalating operating costs, while workers struggled to survive on incomes that could not keep pace with inflation.
The question therefore is not whether subsidy was perfect. It was not.
The question is whether the manner, timing and economic consequences of its removal justified the enormous burden subsequently transferred to ordinary Nigerians.
That is a legitimate political and economic question which Nigerians have every right to ask.
Why Attack Atiku Over Subsidy?
More troubling is the political dimension of Yari’s argument.
Atiku Abubakar and the African Democratic Congress (ADC) have made economic hardship, including the consequences of fuel pricing policies, part of their political message ahead of 2027.
If Atiku or the ADC is proposing a return to a system that reduces the burden of petrol prices on Nigerians, the proper response should be an economic debate.
Where will the money come from?
How will the policy be funded?
How will corruption and smuggling be prevented?
How will domestic refining be incorporated?
What mechanism will guarantee that the benefit reaches consumers rather than middlemen?
Those are legitimate questions.
But simply declaring that a promise to restore subsidy is a “lie” because of an interpretation of Buhari’s 2023 budget does not answer them.
Indeed, it may raise an even bigger question: Is Yari defending an economic policy or defending a political camp?
His current position as Director-General of Tinubu’s 2027 Presidential Campaign Council makes that question particularly relevant.
Nigerians are not fools.
They understand that politicians frequently reinterpret history when elections approach. Yesterday’s policy becomes today’s mistake; yesterday’s mistake becomes today’s achievement; and suddenly every economic argument is measured against the political interest of the moment.
But Nigerians who are struggling to buy food and transport themselves to work are less interested in political gymnastics.
They want affordable living.
They want food on their tables.
They want fuel prices that do not consume their incomes.
They want a naira that retains meaningful purchasing power.
And above all, they want politicians to tell them the truth.
Subsidy Debate Must Not Become a War of Political Propaganda
There is nothing inherently dishonest about proposing a return to subsidy, just as there is nothing inherently dishonest about opposing subsidy.
What would be dishonest is presenting a political interpretation of an old budget document as conclusive proof of what Buhari’s administration did or intended to do, without examining the actual mechanisms through which petrol prices were maintained during that period.
If Yari believes subsidy cannot be restored, he should make the economic argument.
If he believes the government cannot afford it, he should present the figures.
If he believes Atiku’s proposal is economically unsustainable, he should explain why.
But Nigerians deserve better than political name-calling.
The former governor should also remember that a presidential campaign appointment does not confer ownership of Nigeria’s economic history on anyone.
Buhari’s record should be judged by what his administration actually did, just as Tinubu’s record should be judged by what his administration has actually done.
The attempt to use Buhari’s 2023 budget as a political weapon against Atiku’s subsidy argument should therefore be subjected to rigorous scrutiny.
Nigerians Will Decide
Ultimately, the subsidy debate will not be settled by Yari, Atiku, Tinubu or any political campaign organisation.
It will be settled by Nigerians.
They will decide whether the hardship resulting from subsidy removal has been justified by the benefits promised.
They will decide whether the government’s alternative social and economic interventions have adequately compensated them.
They will decide whether they prefer the present system or a different arrangement under another government.
And when that decision comes, politicians should not underestimate the memory of the Nigerian people.
For the millions who now pay more for transportation, food, electricity and virtually every basic necessity, fuel subsidy is not an abstract economic theory. It is a question of survival.
That is why politicians should stop rewriting yesterday to defend today.
If Tinubu’s subsidy removal is good for Nigeria, defend it with facts.
If Atiku’s proposal to reduce the burden on Nigerians is wrong, expose it with facts.
But do not manufacture a convenient version of Buhari’s economic record simply because an election is approaching.
Nigeria deserves an honest debate—not political revisionism dressed up as economic analysis.
CLICK HERE TO WATCH YARI’S STATEMENT
