The Presidency on Monday criticized the 2023 Labour Party presidential candidate, Peter Obi, over his recent remarks on the handling of fuel subsidy savings by President Bola Tinubu’s administration.
Obi had appeared on Arise News, where he questioned the federal government’s management of funds generated from the removal of petroleum subsidy. He called for transparency and accountability regarding the billions reportedly saved.
Obi acknowledged that removing the fuel subsidy was a necessary decision and was both included in his campaign manifesto. However, he argued that the Tinubu administration implemented these policies in a “haphazard” manner.
“I have consistently maintained that I would have removed the fuel subsidy,” Obi said. “It is clearly stated in my manifesto, along with the steps I would have taken in an organized way.”
He continued, “There is nothing wrong with removing the subsidy. What is wrong is the manner in which it was done—without proper planning. We were told the funds saved would be invested in critical infrastructure. Billions have reportedly been saved—so where is the money? Where has it been invested?”
In response, the Special Adviser to the President on Policy and Communication, Daniel Bwala, took to his official X (formerly Twitter) handle to accuse Obi of lacking depth in economic and governance matters.
“Is anybody watching @PeterObi on Arise TV?” Bwala posted.
“He agreed with our policy of subsidy removal and the unification of foreign exchange. He claimed he would have done it better in an ‘organized manner.’
“He was asked what that ‘organized manner’ was. He played with words but eventually agreed with our approach. Anyone with a rational mind can see these people are only interested in grabbing power—they have no viable alternative agenda.”
Bwala added, “He seems to have a very shallow knowledge of economics and governance. Remember, this interview was even anchored by a member of his Obidient movement. That’s why you don’t hear ‘I put it to you,’ no barking like a Rottweiler. Yet, ‘if it no dey, it no dey.’”
