My administration delayed petrol subsidy removal to allow Tinubu win election — Buhari

As the discourse over the discontinuation of payment of subsidy on Premium Motor Spirit (PMS) attract more controversies, immediate past President, Muhammadu Buhari, on Monday, broke his silence on why he left the decision of fuel subsidy removal to his successor, saying sustaining subsidy payment on premium motor spirit (PMS) till the end of his administration was deliberate to save the All Progresives Congress (APC) and President Bola Tinubu, who he handed over to, from losing the election.

Speaking through his erstwhile spokesman, Garba Shehu, via a statement, the immediate past president, who, commended the steps taken so far by the new administration in implementing the removal of petrol subsidy and attempt to unify the Naira exchange rate, said payment for petrol subsidy was sustained till the end of his administration to give the party and its candidate a playing ground to win.

Subsidy removal on petroleum products had taken controversial narratives under the Buhari’s administration. Although there were various consequential adjustments, the administration kept budgetary provisions for subsidy on petrol till the termination of its two terms.

Tinubu, in his inaugural speech on May 29, had immediately upon been sworn in, declared the discontinuation of subsidy payment.

In the statement on Monday, Shehu, in response to questions from some quarters on why Buhari left the challenge of subsidy removal to his successor, when under his administration the discussion was ripe for a concrete decision, said successive polls indicated that the ruling party would have lost the 2023 election if the Petroleum Industry Act, containing the petrol subsidy removal, was implemented before then.

He said, though the APC should have been in better position to respond to the critics, he explained that other burdensome subsidies on a number of other products were discontinued under his administration.

He called on the organised labour and civil society to work with the new government to ensure that the palliative efforts to cushion the impacts of the subsidy removal, are successfully implemented as promised.

In the statement titled “Buhari didn’t fail to remove subsidy,” Shehu wrote: “Why did it take the new Tinubu/Shettima presidency weeks to remove the petrol subsidy when Buhari didn’t do so for years, fails to ask the right question.

“The massive electricity subsidy. The fraudulent fertilizer subsidy. Hajj/Christian pilgrim subsidies. Remember them?

“The diesel subsidy. The aviation fuel subsidy. LPFO. Kerosene. Cooking gas and the other subsidy policies we found in place, and put them firmly on the ground. Remember them?

“For those with short memories, many of those subsides were all in place when President Buhari was elected to office in 2015: all those in place were gone by May 2023 – including the annual fertilizer subsidy that weighed N60-100 billion (that’s trillion naira in about 10 years – yes, you read that right) heavy on the federal budget each year.

“So no, Buhari didn’t remove the petrol subsidy – but in vitally important stages he removed every other budget-busting, egregious, economic-growth-crushing subsidy along the way.

“So far, I have refrained from answering these repeated questions on the removal in Nigeria of subsidies on PMS and that arising from the dual rates of the Naira in the Central Bank and the parallel market: Why did Buhari ‘fail’ to do these?

“First of all, my thinking is that instead of the former President answering this question, it is the party, the APC, that is best suited to speak and failing to do this, we are forced to say what will follow here.

“Secondly, we are mindful of the fact that with a Tinubu/Shettima presidency now in place and for which there is a ‘New Sheriff in Town,’ we do not want to distract them from the onerous tasks facing them and the nation.

“Neither is it our wish to take the spotlight away from them in any way.

“In terms of the timings of the decisions to remove fuel subsidy and unify the currency, the Tinubu/Shettima administration has done overwhelmingly well.

“Even more importantly, they have been most dexterous in managing the aftermath of the decisions by successfully avoiding any crisis.

“To this extent, our wish and prayers are that fellow countrymen will continue to support the new leadership in these very laudable decisions and, in particular, for the Labour leadership and civil society to work with them to ensure that the palliative efforts as promised are successfully implemented.

“The decision to remove subsidies, as in our case – and we believe in all situations – was not for the President to take all by himself.

“That’s why it’s important to remind ourselves – and all those who have conveniently forgotten – that Buhari administration had been on this pathway from the very beginning in 2015.

“Removing subsidies for the Naira and PMS was cued and put on hold. Look for example in the Petroleum Industry Act. The important decision was kept for a better time.

“It could not have come at a time when tensions were high in the country and no responsible leader would have added fuel to the fire.

“In the view of many – including those in the security circles – only a new administration with goodwill that fills a warehouse can attempt this, and here now comes in the wit and grit of the Tinubu government.

“Finally, we must be politically honest with ourselves. The Buhari administration in its last days could not have gone the whole way because the APC had an election to win.

“And that would have been the case with any political party that was seeking election for another term with a new principal at its head.

“Poll after polls showed that the party would have been thrown out of office if the decision as envisaged by the new Petroleum Industry Act was made.

“With the election now behind us, a capable leader as we now have in place is best positioned to move forward.

“We have nothing but confidence that the new administration will carry the nation and all its constituents into a stable future in the aftermath of these major economic and financial decisions.

“As they say, there are times when you have to lose in order to win.”