The African Democratic Congress (ADC) has described the Federal Government’s announcement of a $1 billion social protection programme as a panic reaction to the growing campaign by its presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, to reverse the fuel subsidy removal and reduce the cost of living.
The opposition party accused the President Bola Tinubu administration of worsening the economic hardship faced by Nigerians through what it called failed economic policies, only to introduce a fresh intervention programme as the 2027 general election approaches.
The ADC National Publicity Secretary, Bolaji Abdullahi, stated this in a statement reacting to the $1 billion social protection programme unveiled by First Lady Oluremi Tinubu.
Abdullahi said the timing of the programme raised questions about the government’s commitment to addressing poverty and hardship, noting that Nigerians had spent the past three years struggling with high food prices, rising transport fares and falling purchasing power.
The party also questioned how the Federal Government suddenly found $1 billion for the programme after repeatedly telling Nigerians to endure the difficulties caused by its economic reforms.
The ADC said, “We find this sudden discovery of compassion, and money, quite remarkable. For three years, Nigerians have cried under the weight of food prices, transport costs and collapsing purchasing power, while this government insisted that there was no money to cushion the effects of its reforms.
“Now that elections are approaching, it has suddenly found $1 billion for the poor. If the government could somehow conjure up this money, why did it remain indifferent to the suffering of Nigerians for three years? Or did the poor only become visible when their votes become valuable?”
The party linked the announcement directly to Atiku’s recent position on fuel subsidy.
Atiku, who is the ADC’s presidential candidate for the 2027 election, has proposed reversing the subsidy policy in a bid to reduce the cost of living. He has argued for a targeted production subsidy that would help reduce costs and stimulate economic activity rather than maintaining the previous system.
The ADC said the Federal Government’s decision to launch a major social protection programme showed that the administration had now recognised the need to shield Nigerians from the effects of economic reforms.
According to the party, this was the same concern Atiku had raised in proposing a targeted subsidy arrangement.
The ADC asked why it took Atiku’s proposal for the government to recognise that economic reforms should also protect citizens from severe hardship.
The fuel subsidy was removed by President Tinubu shortly after he assumed office in May 2023. The decision was announced during his inauguration and was presented by the administration as a major economic reform aimed at reducing the financial burden of subsidy payments on the government.
The removal led to an immediate increase in the price of petrol and contributed to higher transport costs. The impact also spread to food prices and the cost of goods and services as businesses and individuals faced increased energy and transportation expenses.
The Federal Government has defended the policy, arguing that the subsidy regime was expensive, unsustainable and prone to abuse. It has maintained that the savings and additional revenues from the reform could be redirected to development and social programmes.
The government has since introduced several measures to cushion the impact of its reforms, including cash transfers, food distribution, student loans and other intervention programmes.
However, the ADC argued that the measures had not done enough to address the hardship being experienced by Nigerians.
The party also raised questions about the government’s earlier cash transfer programme.
Abdullahi referred to a claim by the Minister of Humanitarian Affairs that more than N600 billion had been disbursed in cash transfers over the past three years, reaching slightly more than 10 million households.
The ADC questioned whether the beneficiaries and the impact of the payments had been independently verified.
“What evidence exists of actual beneficiaries, and what measurable impact did that N600 billion have? Have these numbers ever been independently verified?” the party asked.
The opposition party further criticised the proposed payment of N40,000 per family under what the government described as a “shock-response payment”.
According to the ADC, the proposed intervention could not adequately compensate Nigerians for the effects of higher food, fuel, transport and energy costs.
The party alleged that the programme could amount to vote-buying ahead of the 2027 elections.
It said Nigerians would not forget what it described as the consequences of the Tinubu administration’s economic reforms, including reduced purchasing power, rising living costs and pressure on businesses.
The ADC claimed that the reforms had pushed many Nigerians into deeper poverty and accused the government of failing to adequately protect vulnerable citizens.
The party also raised a separate issue concerning the role of the First Lady in the new social protection programme.
While acknowledging that the President’s wife could support humanitarian causes and run charitable projects, the ADC questioned the involvement of an unelected person in launching a Federal Government programme involving $1 billion in public funds.
The party asked whether the programme was a Federal Government initiative or a project of the First Lady.
It also demanded clarification on the source of the funds, the budget head or financing arrangement under which the money was approved, and the institution responsible for accounting for the funds.
The ADC further asked who would control the disbursement of the money and who would answer to the Auditor-General of the Federation and the National Assembly.
The party argued that if the funds were public money, the programme should be subject to established government procedures and accountability requirements.
“One billion dollars is public business, and public business requires transparency,” the party said.
The controversy comes as political parties begin to intensify preparations for the 2027 elections. Economic hardship, subsidy removal, unemployment, poverty and the cost of living are expected to feature prominently in the campaigns.
For the Tinubu administration, social protection has become an important part of its response to the economic impact of its reforms. The government has repeatedly said that the long-term benefits of the reforms will outweigh the initial difficulties and that intervention programmes are being expanded to support vulnerable Nigerians.
For the ADC and other opposition parties, however, the government’s social interventions are coming too late and do not address the root causes of the hardship.