Opinion
Periscoping 2024 Budget Proposal
President Ahmed Bola Tinubu, penultimate Wednesday presented to the National Assembly for deliberation and approval, the 2024 appropriation bill, tagged “Budget of Renewed Hope.”The president proposed an expenditure estimate of N27.5 trillion for the 2024 fiscal year with a total recurrent overhead of N18.17 trillion (a debt-service projection of N8.25 trillion, plus non-debt recurrent expenditure of N9.92 trillion), representing 66.07 percent of total budget, while capital expenditure estimate is N8.7 trillion, a 31.64 percent of total budget. What comprises the remaining 2.29 percent, about N629.75 billion, remains unclear.The president stated that the projected budget deficit of N9.18 trillion would be financed from fresh borrowings amounting to N8.88 trillion (N7.83 trillion conventional loans, plus N1.05 trillion from multilateral and bilateral loans), and about N300 billion proceeds from privatisation.
Mr President’s budget speech was conspicuously silent on the expected revenue sum for the fiscal year 2024, but after reviewing the revenue landscapes, hinted on current tax and fiscal policy reviews to enable the federal government increase revenues, from a revenue to GDP ratio of less than 10 percent, to 18 percent. The 2024 revenue expectation could however be figured-out by deducting projected budget deficit from the total budget, a calculation that gives N18.32 trillion. This gives a revenue increase of 74.64 percent from this year’s N10.49 trillion. Debt servicing at N8.25 trillion is now 45 percent of Nigeria’s revenue.The above analysis shows the dire state of our economy. Going by Mr President’s proposal, even if Nigeria meets its revenue target for 2024, it can not finance its overhead obligations without borrowing. Nigeria is headed towards selling-off national assets to pay for basic needs, and borrowing in addition, to pay debts, finance extravagant overheads, alongside hopes of executing vital capital projects.
According to a World Bank report, Nigeria’s debt profile as at second quarter of 2023 stood at N87.38 trillion. But President Tinubu appears to still be in celebration mood, having secured his own “turn to rule.” Hardly had he dropped his presentation, and he who was preoccupied in his speech with the COP 28 climate summit in the UAE, zoomed-off to Dubai with a crowd of 1,411 delegates. Officials now claim government only sponsored 422 delegates. Given our predicaments, the expenditure for that number is wasteful. The harsher economic climate at home calls for more circumspection. This nation stands in uncommonly difficult times, wherein the utmost financial prudence is needed to stop the slide into deeper crises. The national assembly, and indeed all arms and tiers of government, should adopt more realistic approaches towards cutting down cost of governance by weeding out extraneous costs.
Extravaganzas like the N5 billion for presidential yacht, N19 billion for state house vehicles and N57.6 billion spent on Toyota SUVs for 360 house members who already enjoy bogus allowances, are few out of many outrageous profligacies. Government should also rid its capital project contracts of padded costs, to ensure value for money allotted. Resources saved could be invested in crucial development projects, pay-off national debts, shore-up external reserves which have become heavily depleted, or increase the the poor wages of ordinary workers. It has become usual to hear reports of borrowed funds earmarked for specific projects being looted or misdirected. Already, former federal lawmaker, Shehu Sani, has warned against spending the humongous N3.2 trillion budgeted for security and defence on frivolities, saying that the fund “should not be wasted on building event centres, hotels, and shopping malls, while terrorists are killing people every day in the country.” The requisite equipment and protection should be provided to the rank and file who risk their lives under harsh elements to protect lives. Their food and other welfare should be readily available to enhance professional efficiency and effectiveness.
Apart from the judicious use of defence budgets, the federal government should help curb criminality in the country by enabling job availability and food security, to help its hard-pressed populace make genuine livelihoods. The spiralling economic challemges of the past few months have made most Nigerians, who are forced daily to cut down on basic necessities, to now view the harsh years of Buhari’s government as glorious. According to a report, the nation’s service chiefs, led by Chief of Defence Staff, General Christopher Musa, during a parliamentary inquest a few weeks ago, shocked a House of Representatives plenary when he warned that “People are hungry. No matter how well you tell them to keep the peace, they will not because they have to eat and it aids criminality.” The service chiefs stressed that official corruption, lack of good governance and political will, are the real vectors of insecurity, leading to security personnel being overstretched. Emphasising, another said, “We (soldiers) are not magicians.” According to them, Nigeria has more than 1,000 unmanned border openings in about 4,000km borderlines shared with our Sahelian neighbours through which cross-border crimes and small arms proliferate into the country. Banditry and kidnapping in the north-west, north-east and north-central are therefore making farming impossible and escalating food prices. In the south-east ,‘unknown gunmen’ are almost carving-out enclaves of their own. Reports say about 629 lives have been lost to violent attacks within 45 days of Tinubu’s government.The federal government could resolve the south-east crises through adopting non-combative approaches by respecting existing court orders. With tensions doused, military personnel and expenditures being wasted in guerrilla conflicts could be put to other uses.
These considerations on security become essential because the N3.2 billion defence and security budget is the highest ever, and represents 11.64 percent of total budget. Government should not just throw money at problems without the necessary enablement towards effective security.As for Mr President’s assertion that “we are attempting to draw water from a dry well,” I beg to differ. We are rather drawing water from a richly endowed well that has become infested with so many brazen drainages, so much so that it appears dry. Mr president should use the powers available to his office to plug these leakages to make our commonwealth serve every Nigerian, equitably.The 2024 budget is envisaged on an oil production capacity of 1.78 million barrels per day (bpd), which is still about 320,000 bpd below the production records of President Jonathan’s days. Eliminating oil thefts, all illegal minings and sharp practices at the various offices of government should make more resources available for good governance and boost the economy.
Regrettably, the likelihood of the presented budget being pruned by our parliamentarians appears slim going by previous trends. In the 2023 budget for example, former President Buhari proposed an estimate of N20.51 trillion but got N21.83 trillion approved on reciprocity, a figure which is now above N24 trillion following recent supplementary approvals. With some members already singing praises to Mr Tinubu, many would rather fall over themselves to lobby for juicy constituency project allocations. It is an anomaly, in the first place, for legislators to be executors of projects, whereas their primary duty is to make laws and exercise oversight on institutions of government. Vested interests inspired by the introduction of the concept of constituency projects appear to be a soft bribe that is eroding the ability to discharge those sacred duties. If parliamentarians who were hailing Mr President on the floor of parliament did so due to the perceived jump in presented budget figure from N20.51 trillion for the 2023 budget, to N27.5 trillion, they may now have a rethink. Going by official exchange rate of N436.57/USD on which the 2023 budget was based, N20.51 translated to $46.98 billion, while at N750/USD at present, N27.5 trillion budget for 2024 translates to $36.67 billion, which rather represents a 22 percent reduction.With the dollar now hovering arround N1,200/USD in the black market, if politicians insist on their bogus allowances, then projects, the economy and the masses would face more austerity.
By: Joseph Nwankwor
From all indications, Nigeria possesses enough human and material resources to become a true economic powerhouse in Africa. According to the National Population Commission (NPC, 2023), the country’s population has grown steadily within the last decade, presently standing at about 220 million people—mostly young, vibrant, and innovative. Nigeria also remains the sixth-largest oil producer in the world, with enormous reserves of gas, fertile agricultural land, and human capital.
Yet, despite this enormous potential, the country continues to grapple with underdevelopment, poverty, unemployment, and insecurity. Recent data from the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS, 2023) show that about 129 million Nigerians currently live below the poverty line. Most families can no longer afford basic necessities, even as the government continues to project a rosy economic picture.
The Subsidy Question
The removal of fuel subsidy in 2023 by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has been one of the most controversial policy decisions in Nigeria’s recent history. According to the president, subsidy removal was designed to reduce fiscal burden, unify the foreign exchange rate, attract investment, curb inflation, and discourage excessive government borrowing.
While these objectives are theoretically sound, the reality for ordinary Nigerians has been severe hardship. Fuel prices more than tripled, transportation costs surged, and food inflation—already high—rose above 30% (NBS, 2023). The World Bank (2023) estimates that an additional 7.1 million Nigerians were pushed into poverty after subsidy removal.
A Critical Economic View
As an economist, I argue that the problem was not subsidy removal itself—which was inevitable—but the timing, sequencing, and structural gaps in Nigeria’s implementation.
- Structural Miscalculation
Nigeria’s four state-owned refineries remain nonfunctional. By removing subsidies without local refining capacity, the government exposed the economy to import-price pass-through effects—where global oil price shocks translate directly into domestic inflation. This was not just a timing issue but a fundamental policy miscalculation.
- Neglect of Social Safety Nets
Countries like Indonesia (2005) and Ghana (2005) removed subsidies successfully only after introducing cash transfers, transport vouchers, and food subsidies for the poor (World Bank, 2005). Nigeria, however, implemented removal abruptly, shifting the fiscal burden directly onto households without protection.
- Failure to Secure Food and Energy Alternatives
Fuel subsidy removal amplified existing weaknesses in agriculture and energy. Instead of sequencing reforms, government left Nigerians without refinery capacity, renewable energy alternatives, or mechanized agricultural productivity—all of which could have cushioned the shock.
Political and Public Concerns
Prominent leaders have echoed these concerns. Mr. Peter Obi, the Labour Party’s 2023 presidential candidate, described the subsidy removal as “good but wrongly timed.” Atiku Abubakar of the People’s Democratic Party also faulted the government’s hasty approach. Human rights activists like Obodoekwe Stive stressed that refineries should have been made functional first, to reduce the suffering of citizens.
This is not just political rhetoric—it reflects a widespread economic reality. When inflation climbs above 30%, when purchasing power collapses, and when households cannot meet basic needs, the promise of reform becomes overshadowed by social pain.
Broader Implications
The consequences of this policy are multidimensional:
- Inflationary Pressures – Food inflation above 30% has made nutrition unaffordable for many households.
- Rising Poverty – 7.1 million Nigerians have been newly pushed into poverty (World Bank, 2023).
- Middle-Class Erosion – Rising transport, rent, and healthcare costs are squeezing household incomes.
- Debt Concerns – Despite promises, government borrowing has continued, raising sustainability questions.
- Public Distrust – When government promises savings but citizens feel only pain, trust in leadership erodes.
In effect, subsidy removal without structural readiness has widened inequality and eroded social stability.
Missed Opportunities
Nigeria’s leaders had the chance to approach subsidy removal differently:
- Refinery Rehabilitation – Ensuring local refining to reduce exposure to global oil price shocks.
- Renewable Energy Investment – Diversifying energy through solar, hydro, and wind to reduce reliance on imported petroleum.
- Agricultural Productivity – Mechanization, irrigation, and smallholder financing could have boosted food supply and stabilized prices.
- Social Safety Nets – Conditional cash transfers, food vouchers, and transport subsidies could have protected the most vulnerable.
Instead, reform came abruptly, leaving citizens to absorb all the pain while waiting for theoretical long-term benefits.
Conclusion: Reform With a Human Face
Fuel subsidy removal was inevitable, but Nigeria’s approach has worsened hardship for millions. True reform must go beyond fiscal savings to protect citizens.
Economic policy is not judged only by its efficiency but by its humanity. A well-sequenced reform could have balanced fiscal responsibility with equity, ensuring that ordinary Nigerians were not crushed under the weight of sudden change.
Nigeria has the resources, population, and resilience to lead Africa’s economy. But leadership requires foresight. It requires policies that are inclusive, humane, and strategically sequenced.
Reform without equity is displacement of poverty, not development. If Nigeria truly seeks progress, its policies must wear a human face.
References
- National Bureau of Statistics (NBS). (2023). Poverty and Inequality Report. Abuja.
- National Population Commission (NPC). (2023). Population Estimates. Abuja.
- World Bank. (2023). Nigeria Development Update. Washington, DC.
- World Bank. (2005). Fuel Subsidy Reforms: Lessons from Indonesia and Ghana. Washington, DC.
- OPEC. (2023). Annual Statistical Bulletin. Vienna.
By: Amarachi Amaugo