2027: Atiku Pledges $100bn Start-up Fund, Slams Tinubu Over Cost-of-Living Crisis

ABUJA, Nigeria – Former Vice President and African Democratic Congress (ADC) presidential candidate Atiku Abubakar has taken another swipe at President Bola Tinubu’s administration over the worsening cost-of-living crisis, promising to restore purchasing power and provide $100 billion in financing for start-ups and entrepreneurs** if elected president in 2027. Atiku said Nigeria’s young population does not need a government that teaches them how to survive hardship but one that creates the conditions for them to prosper. The former Vice President said the economic crisis under the present administration had stripped millions of Nigerians of purchasing power, weakened small businesses, and made it increasingly difficult for young people to secure jobs, access capital and achieve economic independence. “My commitment is to change that,” Atiku said in a statement following a meeting with a nationwide delegation of **N-Power beneficiaries** who declared their support for his presidential candidacy. According to him, his administration would restore purchasing power, reduce the cost of living, and deliberately expand economic opportunities for young Nigerians. This would include a **$100 billion financing programme targeted at start-ups and entrepreneurs.

“Our objective is simple: move young Nigerians from dependence to enterprise, from unemployment to productivity, and from palliatives to prosperity,” he said. Atiku argued that the current economic situation required a fundamental change in policy direction, contending that Nigeria could not build a sustainable future by merely distributing palliatives to citizens struggling with rising living costs. “I thanked them for their confidence and reiterated that Nigeria cannot build its future by distributing poverty. We must build an economy that creates jobs, rewards enterprise and gives every young Nigerian a fair chance to succeed,” he said. The ADC candidate emphasised that the 2027 election would offer Nigerians a choice between maintaining an economy that limits opportunities and building one capable of restoring purchasing power, dignity, and prosperity. “We will make Nigeria affordable again,” Atiku declared.

READ ALSO:

• Borno: Troops kill 26 Boko Haram fighters, destroy 10 motorcycles in Kukawa
• Police Rescue Two Colombian Women Held Captive by Trafficking Syndicate in Lagos
• JAMB Extends Admission Acceptance Deadline to September 30

The endorsement from N-Power beneficiaries came after nearly three days of consultations and stakeholder engagements in Abuja. The group cited years of hardship and unpaid stipends under the Federal Government’s social intervention programme as reasons for withdrawing support for President Tinubu and backing Atiku’s candidacy. According to the beneficiaries, their decision was influenced by what they described as the Federal Government’s reluctance to listen to their concerns, particularly their complaints over outstanding N-Power stipends. The group alleged that years of delayed or unpaid stipends had subjected many participants to prolonged financial hardship, despite the programme being introduced to provide young Nigerians with employment opportunities, skills and financial support. The beneficiaries called on their members and other Nigerians to support Atiku’s candidacy, expressing hope that his emergence would bring renewed attention to youth empowerment, job creation and social intervention programmes.

The former Vice President has repeatedly criticised the Tinubu administration’s economic policies, particularly the removal of petrol subsidy and the government’s approach to managing Nigeria’s borders. Atiku had argued a few days ago that the abrupt removal of petrol subsidy contributed significantly to the rise in transportation costs, food prices, and the general cost of living. He proposed a different approach to petrol subsidy, insisting that the government should have maintained it temporarily while putting in place measures to cushion its removal and prevent a severe shock to households and businesses. The ADC candidate also linked Nigeria’s economic difficulties to the closure of the country’s land borders, arguing that restrictions on cross-border trade had compounded hardship for Nigerians who depend on affordable imported goods and regional commerce. However, the government mocked Atiku over the subsidy restoration policy and border closure statement, stating the borders were not closed. Atiku, however, insisted that policies which restrict trade without providing adequate domestic alternatives can drive up prices and reduce the purchasing power of citizens. His position contrasts with the Tinubu administration’s decision to remove petrol subsidy as part of its broader economic reforms, which the government has defended as necessary to eliminate costly distortions, free resources for development and place the economy on a more sustainable footing. The government has also maintained that its reforms are intended to attract investment, increase production and create jobs in the long term, despite the immediate economic pains acknowledged by the administration.

The fuel subsidy war between President Tinubu and Atiku has intensified, with the Presidency accusing the former Vice President of offering Nigerians conflicting explanations of his subsidy policy. The latest round began when Atiku’s spokespersons gave differing accounts of his subsidy position, with one saying he would restore it and phase it out, while another insisted he would retain it until domestic refining capacity improved. Atiku personally intervened, declaring that his position had not changed and that he would restore what he called a targeted subsidy, adding that Nigeria was rich enough to look after its own people. According to Atiku’s camp, the proposal is not a return to the open-ended import racket he once called a fraud, but a capped, audited production subsidy, preferential crude for qualifying Nigerian refineries, and support that follows the barrel rather than the middleman. Reacting, Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, described the sequence as Atiku’s third U-turn in one week and accused him of playing politics with Nigerians’ hardship rather than proposing serious economic policy. Onanuga also disputed the claim that petrol prices alone were driving food inflation, citing insecurity, exchange rates, logistics, storage, flooding, and input costs as other factors, and challenged Atiku to state the cost and financing plan behind his proposed targeted subsidy. Atiku’s camp, however, hit back, arguing that the administration had triggered simultaneous fuel-price, exchange-rate and cost-of-living shocks, leaving millions of Nigerians poorer. Shaibu described it as “economic arson followed by propaganda about the ashes.”

The policy debate has been described by some commentators as a rare moment in Nigeria’s Fourth Republic, where elections have typically been fought over zoning, godfathers, and ethnic arguments rather than substantive policy. Atiku’s change of heart on subsidy has forced the political class to debate an actual policy issue, marking what some see as progress in Nigeria’s democratic evolution. Atiku has also questioned the administration’s claim that subsidy had been completely eliminated, citing what he described as approximately ₦17.5 trillion in energy-security costs and petroleum under-recoveries in NNPC’s audited accounts. He asked why under-recoveries remained if subsidy had been abolished and questioned whether the reform had eliminated the opacity associated with petroleum-sector costs. The former Vice President further challenged the government to explain how more than ₦600 billion was spent under its cash transfer programme, citing conflicting figures released by government officials on the number of households that benefited. He demanded verified household records, payment tranches, state-by-state distribution, failed transactions, reversals and an independent audit to prove cash reached beneficiaries.