The Presidency has taken a swipe at Labour Party’s 2023 presidential candidate, Peter Obi, over his recent comments on the federal government’s handling of fuel subsidy savings.

Obi, during an appearance on Arise News, questioned the transparency surrounding the funds reportedly saved since the removal of the petrol subsidy. While reiterating that eliminating the subsidy was a policy he supported and included in his campaign manifesto, Obi criticized the Tinubu administration for executing the policy in what he described as a “haphazard” manner.

“I have consistently maintained that I would have removed the fuel subsidy. It is clearly stated in my manifesto, along with the steps I would have taken in an organized way,” Obi said.

He further asked the government to disclose how the savings from subsidy removal have been utilized.

“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?”

Presidency Responds

In response, Daniel Bwala, Special Adviser to the President on Policy and Communication, criticized Obi’s remarks in a post shared via his official X (formerly Twitter) account.

“Is anybody watching @PeterObi on Arise TV?” Bwala wrote.
“He agreed with our policy of subsidy removal and the unification of foreign exchange. He claimed he would have done it in a more ‘organized manner.’”

Bwala argued that Obi failed to articulate what a more structured approach would entail.

“He was asked what that ‘organized manner’ meant. He played with words but eventually aligned with our approach. Anyone with a rational mind can see that these people are only interested in grabbing power they have no viable alternative agenda.”

He concluded with a direct jab at Obi’s credibility:

“He seems to have a very shallow knowledge of economics and governance. Even the interview was anchored by a known member of his Obidient movement. That’s why you didn’t hear the usual ‘I put it to you’ or Rottweiler-style questioning. Yet, as we say, ‘if e no dey, e no dey.’”