The Presidency on Thursday dismissed the Allied Peoples Movement’s (APM) interpretation of comments by the Minister of Budget and Economic Planning, Senator Abubakar Atiku Bagudu, on the impact of the Federal Government’s economic reforms, saying the opposition party misunderstood the minister.
Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, told The Nation in a telephone conversation in Abuja on Thursday evening that Bagudu’s remarks did not amount to an admission that President Bola Tinubu’s economic policies had failed.
‘I’m sure they must have misunderstood what Bagudu said’, Onanuga said while reacting to a statement issued by the APM earlier on Thursday.
The opposition party seized on remarks Bagudu made at the Federal Appointees Strategic Summit in Abuja on Wednesday, where the minister acknowledged that the administration did not fully anticipate the scale of subsequent turbulence in the global economy and its impact on Nigeria.
Bagudu, while reviewing the administration’s economic reforms, said the removal of the petrol subsidy and foreign exchange market reforms came against the backdrop of significant economic challenges.
He acknowledged that the reforms, combined with international economic pressures, contributed to cost-of-living difficulties confronting Nigerians, but maintained that the measures were necessary to address longstanding economic distortions and place the economy on a more sustainable footing.
The minister also argued that the reforms had significantly strengthened the fiscal positions of the Federal Government, states and local governments by expanding resources available to the three tiers of government.
‘Rather than keeping additional revenues at the centre, the President has taken the position that we should give local governments and states more money and energise everyone so that we can interrogate and fulfil our responsibilities’, Bagudu said.
He maintained that the administration remained focused on translating the improved fiscal position into higher economic output, jobs, investment and improved living standards, stressing that increased government revenue alone would not constitute economic transformation.
The APM, however, interpreted Bagudu’s acknowledgement of the turbulence accompanying the reforms as an admission that the Tinubu administration failed to adequately anticipate the consequences of its economic policies.
In a statement signed by its National Publicity Secretary, Abubakar Yusuf, the party said Bagudu’s remarks vindicated its criticism of the administration’s handling of the economy.
The party described the minister’s comments as ‘a gross admission of incompetence’, alleging that the government lacked adequate policy foresight and safeguards before implementing far-reaching reforms.
It argued that the removal of petrol subsidy, foreign exchange reforms and other economic measures had worsened living conditions, increased business costs and weakened the purchasing power of Nigerians.
The APM also claimed that the government had ignored warnings about the likely consequences of the measures, accusing the administration of failing to adequately cushion their immediate effects on households and businesses.
‘Now that the administration has admitted that it has failed and that it is responsible for the woes of the citizens, it is expected that President Tinubu should take responsibility, apologise to Nigerians and quit the 2027 presidential race’, the party said.
The APM consequently urged Nigerians to support its presidential candidate, Oyo State Governor Seyi Makinde, in the January 16, 2027 election, arguing that the country required a different approach to economic management.
But Onanuga’s response rejected the premise on which the opposition party based its statement, maintaining that Bagudu’s remarks had been misconstrued.
Bagudu’s comments at the summit had combined an acknowledgement of the immediate pressures associated with the reforms and external economic shocks with a defence of the administration’s decision to undertake them.
He said the government’s strategy was directed at long-term economic stability and inclusive growth, while arguing that the additional fiscal resources now available to states and local governments should be channelled into productive activities, infrastructure, education, security and other priorities capable of improving citizens’ living standards.