Atiku accuses Tinubu of using a 90-day economic relief plan to court voters, demanding clarity on food prices and taxation.
Former Vice President and African Democratic Congress (ADC) presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, has described President Bola Tinubu’s 90-day economic relief plan as an electoral inducement designed to secure votes in the 2027 presidential election, questioning the timing of the initiative and demanding concrete answers on food affordability, taxation and household support.
Atiku also criticised the reported plan by the Minister of Works, David Umahi, to mobilise 4,000 social media influencers to promote Tinubu’s re-election campaign.
Speaking through his spokesman and Director of Strategic Communication of the ADC Presidential Campaign Council, Phrank Shaibu, at a press conference at the party’s secretariat in Abuja on Friday, Atiku accused the administration of attempting to substitute fresh promises for measurable improvements in Nigerians’ living conditions.
He argued that the 90-day deadline announced by the National Economic Council would extend beyond the presidential election, describing the timing as evidence that the initiative was politically motivated.
“The arithmetic is plain: the plan ends after Nigerians have voted. After three and a half years of hardship, this government is asking families to carry another promise into the polling booth and wait for relief until the votes are counted,” he said.
“This is election bait. Tinubu is offering hungry Nigerians the promise of affordable food, but the promised relief comes with a deadline that outlasts the election. The message is simple: vote first; relief later.”
Atiku urged Nigerians to assess the administration on its record rather than its latest commitments.
“Nigerians should refuse the bait and judge this government by the three and a half years they have already lived through,” he added.
The former Vice President identified five priorities in the government’s plan: food affordability, tax harmonisation, completion of important projects, removal of investment bottlenecks and household support.
He maintained that these were longstanding challenges which the administration should have addressed earlier.
“Families have cut meals. Workers spend more of their wages getting to work. Manufacturers struggle to produce, and businesses have closed. Tinubu cannot erase three and a half years of hardship with a 90-day announcement,” he said.
Atiku also linked the cost-of-living crisis to the removal of petrol subsidy, arguing that measures to protect vulnerable households should have accompanied the decision.
“When he removed the petrol subsidy, the impact on transport, food and production costs was predictable. Protection for vulnerable households should have come alongside that decision,” he stated.
“A government cannot put a 90-day deadline on hunger, the cost-of-living crisis and insecurity and call it an economic policy.”
The ADC presidential candidate further challenged Tinubu to account for the administration’s response to security incidents and natural disasters in Kaduna State ahead of his planned re-election campaign launch there.
He cited the December 3, 2023, military drone strike on civilians attending a Maulud celebration in Tudun Biri, which he said killed at least 85 people.
Atiku criticised Tinubu for sending the Vice President to visit survivors rather than personally meeting the affected families.
He also referenced a reported military airstrike in Giwa in September 2024, which he said killed at least 24 civilians, alongside attacks and abductions affecting communities in Kajuru and Kachia.
According to Atiku, an incident involving kidnapping in Kachia in September 2025 affected 152 people, with eight deaths and nine injuries recorded.
He further cited storms and flooding in Kaduna, saying severe weather affected 6,172 people across five local government areas in July 2025, while flooding in Zaria affected another 476 people in September.
The figures and incidents were presented as part of Atiku’s criticism of the administration.
“Tinubu can find his way to Kaduna for a wedding. He can find his way there for votes. Why was he absent when grieving families needed their President?” he asked.
He urged the President to explain what had been done for victims of the Tudun Biri strike, the outcome of investigations into civilian deaths and measures to protect communities facing abductions.
“He must not turn those families into a backdrop for a campaign celebration,” Atiku said.
Turning to petrol prices, the former Vice President questioned the effectiveness of a discount promotion introduced by the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPC) on October 1.
Shaibu, speaking on Atiku’s behalf, recounted visiting NNPC Retail stations where attendants allegedly said no discount was available, despite the advertised promotion.
“I visited NNPC Retail stations myself. Attendants told me there was no discount, and I bought petrol at ₦1,405 per litre,” he said.
He demanded that NNPC disclose how many motorists benefited from the promotion, the participating stations and the volume of petrol sold at reduced prices.
“If NNPC says motorists can access a discount through an app, it must explain why customers arriving at its stations were told there was none. How many customers received the discount? At which stations? How many litres were sold at the reduced price? Publish the figures,” he said.
Atiku also questioned the reach of the promotion, arguing that a ₦66-per-litre discount across NNPC’s approximately 900 retail stations would offer limited relief in a country served by thousands of fuel outlets.
He maintained that the initiative did little to address the wider burden of transportation and food costs.
“Tinubu announces relief at a podium. Nigerians arrive at the pump and pay more. Now his government expects the country to trust another announcement, this time with a 90-day deadline,” he said.
On the administration’s five economic priorities, Atiku demanded specific implementation details and measurable outcomes.
Regarding food affordability, he asked which costs would be reduced for farmers, transporters and traders, when consumers should expect lower market prices and how any improvements would be sustained beyond the 90-day period.
On tax harmonisation, he challenged the government to identify the charges that would be removed or consolidated and publish a comprehensive tax schedule.
“The government must publish the full tax schedule and explain whether today’s promise of relief will be followed by higher charges after the election,” he said.
He also demanded a list of infrastructure projects scheduled for completion within the period, including their locations, outstanding costs and expected dates of public use.
“A project is complete when it serves people, not when it is marked complete on a government dashboard,” Atiku stated.
On investment bottlenecks, he urged the administration to identify the barriers it intended to remove, stressing that manufacturers required reliable electricity, affordable financing and workable transportation costs.
He also sought clarification on the proposed household support programme, including eligibility criteria, payment amounts, funding and what would happen after the 90-day period.
Atiku separately raised concerns about a registration form reportedly being circulated under the name “Arise for Tinubu 2027”, which he said requested voter identification, bank details and telephone numbers.
He questioned who was collecting the information, how it would be used and whether the exercise had any connection to the government’s proposed household assistance.
“No Nigerian should have to hand over voter or bank details to a political group to receive public relief,” he said.
The former Vice President urged the government to clarify whether the registration exercise was linked to any publicly funded programme and explain the safeguards against the political use of citizens’ personal information.
The alleged connection between the registration exercise and government assistance was not established in the statement.
Atiku maintained that his own economic proposals would prioritise disciplined public spending, targeted household assistance and reductions in the cost of producing and transporting essential goods.
He argued that government policies should be assessed by their effect on household purchasing power rather than the deadlines attached to official announcements.
“Economic policy should be judged by what families can afford, not by how many deadlines a government announces,” he said.
The former Vice President concluded by posing two questions to the President.
“Are Nigerians better off than they were in May 2023?” he asked.
“And will they still be able to afford food on day 91 of his plan?”
He described the initiative as “a political timetable dressed up as economic relief”, maintaining that Nigerians should demand evidence of lasting improvements before accepting the administration’s latest promises.
“President Tinubu made life expensive. Atiku Abubakar will make life affordable again,” the statement concluded.
