Connect with us

News

Alleged violation of public trust against NEMA, DG replies House of Reps.

Published

on

RE: ALLEGED VIOLATION OF PUBLIC TRUST AGAINST NATIONAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (NEMA) BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE ON EMERGENCY AND DISASTER PREPAREDNESS

1) Distinguished members of the press corps, Good Afternoon.

2) I would like to thank you all for coming to this Press Conference. This Conference was called to provide an open platform to discuss the conclusions in the report of the House Committee on Emergency and Disaster Preparedness dated 8th November 2018.

3) As you are aware, the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA) is an Agency charged with the responsibility of Disaster Management in Nigeria and coordination of responses to emergencies.

4) Disasters either Natural or Man-made, always have adverse consequences to the people in the impacted areas. Disasters or emergencies can be in form of famine, flooding, fires, draught, epidemic, earthquake etc which often result to displacements of people, as well as massive repatriation of stranded Nigerians from other countries.

5) Our responsibilities as provided in the NEMA’s enabling Act, is to respond to disasters in a more effective, efficient and transparent manner. We strive to minimise the suffering of the people affected by Disaster and hence our Motto: ‘For the Distressed!’.

6) Therefore, to insinuate this sacred duty of saving lives and provision of livelihoods was abused is a very difficult pill to swallow, not only for me, but for many members of my team as well as our partner Agencies such as the Military, Police and International Humanitarian Agencies.

7) To provide context on the funding of North East humanitarian response, the budget of the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UN-OCHA) for the period January to April 2017 was $1.05 Billion. The sum of $590 Million was for food and nutrition. As at April 2017, only the sum of $94.8 Million was provided by the donors.
See the Report of UN-OCHA on the Nigerian Humanitarian Dashboard published on 23rd May 2017.
This meant that we had a shortfall of $495.8 Million in food funding.

For the period May to October 2018, when the Federal Government Emergency Food Intervention for the North East was being implemented, the World Food Programme net-funding requirement was $230 Million.

8) Just to re-emphasise, we are not here to come up with excuses. Today, this public response is an obligation as a Government to adequately inform Nigerians of what truly happened. The confidence Nigerians have on NEMA and its capability to respond in their most difficult time of need cannot be tarnished. Nigerians need to be rest assured that NEMA is, was and will always remain “FOR THE DISTRESSED”.

Donated Rice by the People’s Republic of China

9) The Peoples Republic of China, as a gesture of its brotherly relations with the Federal Republic of Nigeria donated 6,779 metric tonnes of rice to Nigeria as part of its support to the North East humanitarian efforts. This is equivalent to 135,550 units of 50kg bags of rice. In total, 271 containers, arrived at Apapa Port from China in 5 shipments between June and October 2017.

10) In its mandate as the coordinating ministry for all Foreign support, the Federal Ministry of Budget and National Planning received this kind gesture on behalf of the Nigerian Government. I will like to emphasise that while the Ministry of Budget and National Planning was the liaison with the Chinese Government, the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development was the consignee of the Shipments.

11) Considering NEMA’s mandate as it relates to humanitarian intervention, we were instructed to take the responsibility of port clearing and ultimate movement of the rice to the North East.

12) The original Shipping documents and Custom Exemption Certificates were handed over to NEMA by the Ministry of Budget & National Planning (MB&NP) in December 2017 and January 2018. Thereafter NEMA commenced the immediate clearing and subsequent haulage of the donated rice to Maiduguri, Damaturu, Yola, Jalingo, Gombe and Bauchi.

13) Being a donated consignment, it required duty exemption and other waivers before Clearing. The Government had restricted the importation of Rice; hence the process of getting the proper documentation also took extra time.

14) The total cost of Shipping and storage charges for the 271 containers was N518 million. We have all the receipts to prove this. The actual cost of the donated rice is N2.24 billion (50.05 Million Chinese Yuan).

15) The invoices by convention bears the consignee’s name. However, NEMA being the Agency that cleared the goods made the payments on behalf of the Federal Government of Nigeria (FGN).

16) The companies that were engaged for clearing the donated rice were duly registered with NEMA, ITF, NSITF and PENCOM with relevant documents submitted to NEMA which formed the basis for the award of the contract.

17) To further justify that the items were received on behalf of the Federal Government, they were delivered into NEMA warehouses in Gombe, Borno, Yobe and Adamawa, and warehouses provided by the State Governments in Bauchi, Taraba and Yobe. The Chinese Rice was used for monthly feeding of the IDPs specifically in Adamawa, Borno and Yobe States with balance in stock at Gombe, Bauchi and Taraba.

Receipt and Utilisation of 1.6bn for Flood Victims In 16 States

18) The Agency as a Disaster Management organisation has in place policies and procedures that guide its response to incidences.

19) There is Pre-assessment relief, post disaster response after conducting a Post-Disaster Needs Assessment (PDNA) and then Recovery/Rehabilitation. The first one requires immediate action, while the subsequent 2 involve detailed steps to be taken. The magnitude of the disaster determines the length of the time needed to address all issues identified such as nutrition, accommodation and livelihood support.

20) The practical case of Pre-assessment relief was that of the flood incident in Kebbi State which occurred on 30th April 2017 and NEMA responded, on 9th May 2017. Another instance was that of flash floods in Kogi State which occurred on 8th September 2017, and NEMA swiftly responded on 11th September 2017. These are clear cases of Pre-assessment response showing that the Agency was very sensitive to the plight of Nigerians immediately after the disaster.

21) In the case of the flood intervention in 12 States which was covered in the legislative report, N1.6 billion was released after the flood had occurred at different times in the respective States. We immediately conducted assessments and established the needs before moving in with relief materials.

22) The Agency delivered the items to the 12 States between September and November 2017, and subsequently the remaining 4 States.

23) Evidence of receipt of the items by the respective State Governments are available.

Funds Released for Emergency Intervention of Food Security In The North East

24) The Emergency Intervention of Food in the North East (EFINE) came into being due to a number of factors.

25) Firstly, due to the liberation of many captured territories in the North East, there was an increase in the number of citizens previously held in these locations controlled by Boko Haram. Many of these citizens moved into IDP camps or host communities. So the demand for food significantly increased.

26) Secondly, the conflicts in the region destroyed most of the arable lands in the areas. So the food production in the North East declined.

27) Many of our partners in the international donor communities were very active in providing humanitarian aid in the area in the form of food, medical and livelihood support.

28) However, on 15th April 2017, United Nations World Food Programme (UN WFP) alerted the FGN that it would be reducing its vital support to about 1.8 million IDPs by as much as 85%, due to corresponding reduction in funding by the donor countries.

29) The WFP requested the FGN’s support to augment this shortfall and avert any additional suffering on the displaced Nigerians in the zone. Based on the analysis presented, the WFP shortfall would commence by May or June 2017.

30) Around the same time, the United Nations Commission for Refugees in Geneva also issued a warning of growing risk of mass death from starvation among people living in conflict areas, including Nigeria.

31) These alerts led the Federal Government to constitute a Presidential Committee comprising of;

a. His Excellency, the Acting President,
b. Hon. Minister of Finance,
c. Hon. Minister of State, Budget and National Planning,
d. Hon. Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development,
e. Governor, Central Bank of Nigeria,
f. Deputy Chief of Staff to the President,
g. Senior Special Assistant to the President (Office of the Chief of Staff),
h. Special Assistant to the President (Planning & Coordination) and
i. Special Assistant to the CBN Governor.

32) The project demand was a clear case of emergency.

33) At the time, the Central Bank of Nigeria through its Food Security Programme had access to 30,905 Metric tonnes of assorted grains located in warehouses across the country.

34) The arrangement was for the Federal Government to procure these grains from the Food Security Programme at a cost plus model. This means the original costs of the grains plus addition costs such as insurance, fumigation, storage and a nominal interest and margin.

35) After conducting a tour by the NEMA team to the various warehouses to confirm the existence and quality of these products, it was agreed that logistical arrangements needed to be made to move these grains from various warehouses in Ibadan, Funtua, Kano, Gombe and Kaduna to the North East.

36) It is important to note that these 30,905 MT is equivalent to 1,030 trucks of 30 tonne capacity. This means we were transporting 618,100 units of 50 kg bags. These grains would cover between 3 to 4 months of food supply to the IDPs. At the time, we could not provide actual timing estimates as the rainy season was about to commence and for those who know the North East, a number of areas, such as Rann would be totally cut off once the rains kicked in there by restricting our movements.

37) The movement of these goods from the grain warehouses to the North East was coordinated by the Nigerian policy force and in the Red Zone by the Military.

38) The trucks moved in convoys of 10, escorted by 2 police pilot vehicles. The monitoring of this movement was coordinated by an Assistant Inspector General of police working with the respective Commissioners of Police in each transit state.

39) The vehicles carrying these grains were also monitored by digital tracking systems coordinated through the NEMA logistics base in Maiduguri.

40) There was no reported case of a single bag of grains that got missing in this movement.

41) In the North East, the goods were received in 3 main warehouses – the NEMA warehouses in Gombe, Borno, Yobe and Adamawa, and warehouses provided by the State Governments in Bauchi, Taraba and Yobe. In Yobe State, Military warehouses were also used. It is from these warehouses that the goods were eventually moved to the IDP camps, host communities and liberated areas for distribution.

42) Once again, let me emphasise, this operation was coordinated by the Nigeria Police backed by satellite tracking and supported by way bills that confirm the despatch and receipt of goods. Store Receipt Vouchers (SRVs) and Store Issuance Vouchers (SIVs) were also used.

43) In the North East, we adopted the policy of House-to-House direct distribution system, led by NEMA, along with SEMAs and I-NGOs/volunteers using Voucher System issued to the beneficiaries.

44) The House-to-House direct distribution system was a more humane system: where the food items were delivered to the IDPs doorsteps as against the usual practice of queuing up. History has shown that sometimes, long queue of IDPs under the sun led to civil disturbances or exhaustion. A register of households was also maintained for further record keeping.

45) The movement of the goods from the central warehouses to the IDP locations was coordinated by the Nigeria Military under the command of a Navy Admiral who relocated to Maiduguri from the Defence Head Quarters. We started with the IDP camps. For the more remote areas, our movements were guided by the rains, security and intelligence reports.

46) The EFINE logistics command worked hand in hand with the Operation Lafiya Dole leadership team. The EFINE military team had representatives from the Army, Navy and Air Force. The team was supported by Police HQ as well as State Commands

47) The movement of goods were in military convoys backed by the Nigerian Air Force who provided aerial cover to ensure the convoys were not ambushed. Several reports have also indicated that Boko Haram camps also had food shortages and they had been attempting to attack food warehouses. So as we feed our citizens in these remote and reclaimed locations, we also had an obligation to ensure that the food did not end up in the hands of the terrorists.

48) In each location, the battalions overseeing the reclaimed territories provided security for the grains and NEMA officials managing the distribution.

49) Proper enumeration of the IDPs across the entire Zone was first conducted. Prior to the distribution, a serially numbered voucher is issued to each Household and on the day of distribution the voucher being the identification of the Households to the distributors is ascertained and verified, thereafter the quantities corresponding to the number of Households is then released to the leader of the Households at his doorstep, and the vouchers is punched. This is repeated every month. The distribution was on a “food basket” basis. We had carbohydrate (maize, sorghum, millet) and protein (soya beans). Each household received the equivalent of 50 kg per month.

50) The project was kicked-off by His Excellency the Acting President in Maiduguri, Borno State on 8th June 2017, with the Borno State Governor, Bauchi State Governor, Yobe State Deputy Governor, National Security Adviser, Chief of Staff to the President and several National Assembly Members were all in attendance. Thereafter, the delivered items were inspected in the NEMA warehouse by the Vice President and other dignitaries. We also displayed our digital tracking centre that was monitoring the movement of the trucks.

51) Following this kick off, His Excellency the Acting President, invited all National Assembly Members from the North East and their Governors for a meeting on 16th June 2017. This consultative engagement was to get their inputs on the programme implementation. It was agreed that the members of National Assembly will also nominate their representatives as observers. It is on record that some of the members participated during the distribution exercise by providing some representation.

52) As part of the process of monitoring the project, a visit was undertaken by the Minister of State Budget and National Planning on 7th and 8th August 2017 to Bauchi, Yola and Maiduguri. This monitoring team included most members of the EFINE. During those visits, no major issues were raised by the States. Furthermore, throughout the entire process, we did not receive any feedback, positive or negative, on the process. Taking into account the open door policy we had taken, as well as the long tenure of the project (over 4 months), there were many avenues for these issues to be raised to both NEMA or the Acting President.

53) Once again, let me reemphasise that these foods items were delivered into NEMA warehouses in Gombe, Borno, Yobe and Adamawa, and warehouses provided by the State Governments in Bauchi, Taraba and Yobe. In Yobe State, Military warehouses were also used.

Release of N3,153,000,000.00 To NEMA for Food Intervention to the North East
54) The Federal Government approved the release of 5,000MT to WFP upon their request in May 2017. The following facts informed the decision of the Presidential Committee:

a) The request by WFP to import the Rice will have had a direct negative impact on Government position against Rice importation. It would have left rice farmers with unutilised stock of paddy and millers with unsold stock of rice.

b) The permission sought to import the Rice comes with additional request for waiver on duty and associated taxes.

c) WFP being a donor-funded Agency, their activities are for the benefit of Nigerians and the 5,000MT approved for release was meant to be distributed to Nigerian IDPs in the North East.

d) Indeed, included in there submission is a request for the FGN to donate rice.

e) It was true that WFP offered to import the Rice at N11,500/bag. This price assumed zero duty. It is important to note that imported rice attracts a 60% duty and levy. The Government proposed that WFP should buy locally at market rates instead of importing at concessional rates. This means they had a shortfall in the quantity when compared to their budget, hence the decision of Government to augment the shortfall by releasing the 5,000MT for onward distribution to the IDPs. This scenario resulted in two benefits to Nigeria. The first is our farmers had an offtake. And secondly, our IDPs received their interventions.

f) The 5,000MT given to WFP attracted some associated logistics cost, which was paid by them in recognition of Government effort in meeting the need of the IDPs.

The balance of 5,000MT was allocated to NEMA for distribution.

Massive Evacuation of Stranded Nigerians from Libya

55) There was an international outcry on cases of slavery in Libya towards the end of 2017, which informed the decision of Government to commence the Massive Evacuation of Nigerians from Libya.

56) The evacuation of stranded Nigerians from Libya was a multi-agency operation, with the following stakeholders: Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of Interior, Federal Ministry of Health, the Nigerian Army, the Nigerian Air Force, National Intelligence Agency, Department of State Security, NAPTIP, National Commission for Refugees, relevant State Governments, etc. which was carried out between 26th December 2017 and 22nd February 2018.

57) Operationally, we commenced with a Fact-finding Mission to authenticate the data and information supplied. We then deployed a technical team in Libya as well as Monitoring and Evaluation teams. Back home, we established a Reception Center in Port Harcourt to receive the returnees.

58) The operation commenced smoothly but had to abruptly be terminated due to rising insecurity in Libya that impacted its airport and skies. At the time the project was terminated, Two Thousand, One Hundred and Thirty (2,130) Nigerians were evacuated as against the 5,037 earlier estimated. However, alternative arrangements were made to evacuate the remaining Nigerians trapped in the Militia-controlled area. We worked leveraging on the existing MoU between NEMA and International Office for Migration (IoM) and this has resulted in further evacuation of 3,303 Nigerians. I am pleased to say all repartees under the Federal Government project are safely home.

59) This operation was highly successful with prudent fund management after which the unspent balance was returned to the coffers of Government. The sum of N102,714,095.00 and $4,864,224.00 was graciously approved by Mr. President for the entire project and the balance of N11,039,555.00 and $2,528,073.00 was returned to the Treasury respectively.

CONCLUSION

60) I hope this explanation sheds more light on the activities of NEMA as it relates to the allegations made in the report of the National Assembly House Committee on Emergency and Disaster Preparedness. The projects and programmes above presented are properly documented; Waybills, SRVs, SIVs, and stubs where vouchers were used are all available.

61) We will continue to execute our mandate to the best of our ability.

62) We will continue to consult and engage all stakeholders as our mandate is meant to be inclusive and value adding.

63) We will ensure that the confidence Nigerians have in NEMA during their time of need is sustained and enhanced.

64) In conclusion, NEMA is and will forever remain FOR THE DISTRESSED.

Thank you for Listening

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

Stakeholders, Staff Benefit from NDPHC’s Procurement Training Initiative

Published

on

The Niger Delta Power Holding Company (NDPHC) has reaffirmed its commitment to transparency, accountability, and efficiency in project delivery by hosting a high-level refresher and sensitization training for its management team, staff, and stakeholders.Organized by the Human Resources Department at the company’s headquarters, the programme was designed to strengthen institutional capacity, refresh knowledge, and promote greater effectiveness in the discharge of responsibilities.The training was anchored on the theme “Operationalizing by Way of Experimenting the Procurement Processes While Navigating the Pre-Bidding Stage Through to Post Bidding”, and facilitated by DEVD Integrated Project Ltd. Discussions focused on procurement processes, emphasizing due process, compliance, and optimization in power sector project execution.Participants were guided through the critical stages of procurement, from pre-bidding to post-bidding, with facilitators stressing the importance of adherence to established procedures. The session also provided a platform for robust engagement on stakeholder collaboration, highlighting how effective partnerships can drive efficiency and accountability in project delivery.The initiative enjoyed strong backing from the NDPHC Executive Management (EXCO), led by Engr. Jennifer Adighije, FNSE, FINEEE, Managing Director/CEO. She was joined by her team: Engr. Bello Babayo Bello, FNSE, FINEEE, Executive Director (Networks); Engr. Abdullahi Kassim, Executive Director (Generation); Hon. Dr. Steven Andzenge, Executive Director (Legal Services); Hon. Chukwuma Umeoji, Executive Director (Corporate Services); Hon. Omololu Agoro, Executive Director (Finance & Accounts); and Hon. Patrick Obahiagbon, Executive Director (Strategy and Commercial). Their collective presence underscored the importance of the training to the company’s strategic vision and operational goals.Facilitators encouraged participants to apply the knowledge gained to improve operational efficiency and foster stronger collaboration across departments and with external stakeholders. They noted that the lessons learned would help strengthen the company’s institutional framework and ensure that projects are delivered in line with global best practices.The event brought together management staff and other relevant stakeholders, creating an opportunity to exchange ideas and refresh their understanding of procurement processes. It also reinforced NDPHC’s commitment to professional development, transparency, and accountability in its operations.By investing in capacity-building programmes such as this, NDPHC continues to demonstrate its resolve to enhance professional standards and institutional effectiveness. The company emphasized that the training reflects its broader vision of building a stronger, more accountable institution capable of delivering sustainable power solutions to Nigeria.The sensitization exercise forms part of NDPHC’s ongoing efforts to ensure that its workforce remains equipped with the skills and knowledge required to meet the demands of the power sector. It underscores the company’s belief that continuous learning and adherence to due process are essential for achieving its corporate objectives and delivering value to stakeholders.

Continue Reading

News

Hon. Jafaru Yakubu Commends President Tinubu’s Approval of Mutum Biyu–Garba Chede Road Reconstruction

Published

on

Hon. Jafaru Yakubu, Member of the House of Representatives and Chairman, House Committee on Nigeria–China Friendship Group, has commended President Bola Ahmed Tinubu GCFR for granting approval for the urgent rehabilitation and total reconstruction of the Mutum Biyu–Garba Chede Road, a 48km stretch in Taraba State.

Yakubu, who sponsored the motion in the House of Representatives calling for immediate intervention on the road, said the President’s approval is a bold and strategic response to the plight of commuters and communities along the corridor. He explained that the motion, which was debated and adopted by the House, underscored the dangers of continued neglect, including accidents, economic disruption, and the risk of total collapse.

He further acknowledged the National Security Adviser (NSA) Mallam Nuhu Ribadu for adopting a non-kinetic approach in addressing the crisis. According to Yakubu, the NSA’s intervention elevated the urgency of the project, treating infrastructure development as a vital instrument of peace, security, and stability. By drawing national attention to the road’s deterioration, the NSA highlighted the grave risks posed to lives, trade, agriculture, and access to healthcare.

The Mutum Biyu–Garba Chede Road, constructed in the early 1980s, has deteriorated severely due to age and lack of maintenance. With the collapse of the Namnai Bridge along the Jalingo–Wukari highway, the road became the sole alternative route for heavy-duty trucks, worsening its condition and exposing communities to untold hardship.

Hon. Yakubu assured his constituents that he will continue to work closely with the Federal Ministry of Works, FERMA, and the North East Development Commission to ensure the project’s swift execution. He emphasized that the House Committee on Works has already been mandated to conduct oversight and report back within four weeks, a step he believes will guarantee transparency and accountability in the delivery of the project.

“As Chairman of the Nigeria–China Friendship Group, I am deeply conscious of the importance of strategic partnerships in advancing national development. This reconstruction is not merely about infrastructure—it is about saving lives, strengthening commerce, and reaffirming government’s duty to serve its people. On behalf of my constituency, I extend profound gratitude to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu GCFR and the NSA for their steadfast commitment,” Yakubu declared.

The approval of this project, following Yakubu’s sponsored motion, is widely seen as a demonstration of leadership that listens and acts decisively. For communities in Mutum Biyu, Garba Chede, and adjoining areas, the reconstruction represents hope for safer travel, renewed economic activity, and restored dignity after years of neglect.

Analysts note that the development is not just about fixing a road but about reconnecting people, boosting agriculture, and reinforcing national cohesion at a time when infrastructure remains central to Nigeria’s growth agenda.

Continue Reading

News

BUDGET OFFICE OF THE FEDERATIONRESPONSE TO THE 2026 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE FISCAL TRANSPARENCY REPORT ON NIGERIA

Published

on

  1. Introduction
    The Budget Office of the Federation (BOF) notes the observations on Nigeria contained in the 2026 Fiscal Transparency Report of the United States Department of State. The Federal Government welcomes objective assessments of its public financial management system and remains committed to the continuous improvement of fiscal transparency, accountability and access to public finance information.
    The Report acknowledges important areas in which Nigeria meets fiscal transparency requirements, including the public availability of the enacted budget and end-of-year fiscal information; the disclosure of debt obligations, including major state-owned enterprise debt; the legal and disclosure framework governing the sovereign wealth fund; and the existence and application of statutory procedures governing natural-resource extraction contracts and licences.
    Other observations in the Report require clarification when considered in the context of Nigeria’s institutional allocation of responsibilities and the range of budgetary and fiscal information already in the public domain. The purpose of this response is therefore not to dispute the value of external scrutiny, but to ensure that the factual record and the structure of Nigeria’s fiscal system are properly understood.
  2. Mandate of the Budget Office of the Federation
    The BOF is responsible for coordinating the preparation and consolidation of the Federal Government’s budget, and for monitoring and reporting on its implementation within the framework established by law and government fiscal policy.
    Its responsibilities include coordinating the preparation of the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework and Fiscal Strategy Paper (MTEF/FSP); issuing Budget Call Circulars; coordinating the preparation of Medium-Term Sector Strategies; coordinating the preparation and consolidation of the Executive Budget Proposal; supporting the appropriation process; monitoring budget implementation; and producing periodic Budget Implementation Reports.
    These responsibilities form part of a wider public financial management system in which different institutions perform duties assigned to them by the Constitution and by statute. Debt recording and management fall principally within the remit of the Debt Management Office; government accounting, treasury and cash-management functions reside principally in the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation; external audit is constitutionally assigned to the Office of the Auditor-General for the Federation; while federal procurement operates within the statutory framework administered by the Bureau of Public Procurement and individual procuring entities.
    The observations in the Report are therefore best considered in the context of this institutional division of responsibility. Fiscal transparency is the product of an interconnected system; no single institution produces or controls every category of information on which an assessment of the entire system must depend.
  3. Publication and Accessibility of Budget Information
    The Report recommends that Nigeria make its Executive Budget Proposal widely and easily accessible to the public, including online. The BOF respectfully notes that the online publication of the Executive Budget Proposal and other major budget documents has, for several years, formed part of the Federal Government’s established budget process.
    The BOF routinely publishes major documents produced at successive stages of the fiscal cycle. These include the MTEF/FSP, the Executive Budget Proposal and detailed estimates, Appropriation Acts, implementation guidelines, and periodic Budget Implementation Reports.
    For example, the 2025 Executive Budget Proposal was published on the BOF website on 18 December 2024 alongside the 2025 Appropriation Bill. The 2026-2028 MTEF/FSP was similarly published, while the 2026 Appropriation Bill and its detailed estimates were placed on the BOF website on 8 January 2026.
    The purpose of continuing reform, therefore, is not to create a practice of publication where none exists, but to make an established practice more timely, systematic and easier for users to navigate. Fiscal information is useful not merely because it exists, but because it is published at the appropriate time, clearly identified and readily connected to the other documents needed to understand the fiscal picture.
    Following presidential assent to an Appropriation Act, the signed instrument is subjected to validation and line-by-line reconciliation against the version passed by the National Assembly before the final budget details are reflected on the Government’s financial management platform and released for public use. This process is intended to ensure that the figures, codes and statutory references placed before the public correspond with the instrument that has become law.
    For the 2026 Appropriation Act, this process took longer than would ordinarily be desirable. The Budget Office considered it preferable to complete the necessary validation before publication rather than place in the public domain figures that might later require correction. That choice protected the integrity of the published record, but the delay also demonstrates the need to shorten the interval between presidential assent and public availability.
    The lesson is therefore twofold: published fiscal information must be reliable, but that reliability must increasingly be achieved without sacrificing timeliness. The BOF is reviewing its internal sequencing, validation and publication arrangements with that objective in mind.
  4. Completeness of the Presentation of Government Revenues and Expenditures
    The Report recommends that the budget provide a substantially complete picture of government revenues and expenditures. Nigeria’s fiscal framework is expressed through several related documents rather than through a single instrument. The MTEF/FSP establishes the macroeconomic and fiscal assumptions underlying the annual budget. The Executive Budget Proposal, Appropriation Bill and detailed estimates set out proposed expenditure allocations, revenue assumptions and the financing framework. Budget Implementation Reports subsequently show performance against approved benchmarks.
    Taken together, these documents contain extensive information on projected revenues, expenditure proposals, financing and the operations of Government-Owned Enterprises. The budget documentation also provides information on grants, external financing and other material fiscal flows within the Federal Government’s reporting framework.
    Expenditure is presented through institutional and economic classifications, including allocations to ministries, departments and agencies. The Government also publishes detailed estimates relating to the Presidency and other institutions of government, subject always to the legitimate requirements of law, national security and operational confidentiality.
    The BOF therefore considers that an assessment of Nigeria’s fiscal transparency is most complete when it examines the available budget documents as a body, rather than treating any one document as though it were intended to contain the entire fiscal account.
    This does not remove the need for improvement. Citizens, investors and other users of fiscal information should be able to understand the broad relationship among revenue, expenditure, financing and fiscal risks without having to reconstruct the fiscal picture from numerous documents. The Office will therefore continue to improve consolidation, cross-referencing and presentation so that information already disclosed across different fiscal documents can be more readily understood as a coherent whole.
  5. Expenditures Relating to Executive Offices
    The Report recommends a clearer breakdown of expenditures supporting executive offices. The BOF agrees with the transparency objective underlying this recommendation.
    Appropriations to offices and institutions within the Executive are subject to the same constitutional appropriation process that applies to other Federal Government entities. Detailed estimates are already published within the budget documentation. Where expenditures are currently aggregated within broader administrative, personnel or service-wide classifications, there remains scope to improve their presentation without compromising legitimate security, statutory or operational considerations.
    The BOF will accordingly continue to examine the classification and presentation of such expenditures with a view to improving public understanding within the applicable legal and security framework.
  6. Variance Between Budgeted and Actual Revenues and Expenditures
    The Report observes that actual revenues and expenditures did not reasonably correspond with the enacted budget. The BOF considers that this observation would benefit from greater precision regarding the standard against which such correspondence is being assessed.
    An appropriation is an authority to spend; it is not, in every circumstance, a guarantee that the entire amount appropriated will become available in cash. Actual fiscal outcomes depend on realised revenues, oil production and prices, tax collections, exchange rates, financing conditions, cash availability and the timing of expenditure execution. A difference between an approved budget and the eventual outturn must therefore be interpreted rather than merely observed.
    The central transparency question is whether material deviations are identified, explained and reported. This is one of the purposes of the Budget Implementation Reports produced by the BOF, which compare revenue and expenditure performance against approved benchmarks and explain significant departures from the fiscal plan.
    At the same time, persistent or unusually large differences between appropriations and outturns can weaken the usefulness of the budget as an instrument of economic management. The Government’s continuing reforms therefore place greater emphasis on realistic revenue forecasting, improved revenue mobilisation, stronger commitment controls, better cash planning and closer alignment between appropriations and available financing.
  7. Audit Independence and Publication of Audit Reports
    The observations concerning the independence of the Supreme Audit Institution and the publication of audit reports relate principally to the constitutional and statutory mandate of the Office of the Auditor-General for the Federation and to the wider legislative framework governing public audit.
    The BOF supports a strong and independent external audit function as an essential component of fiscal accountability. It will continue to provide the budgetary and implementation information required within its mandate and to cooperate with the Office of the Auditor-General for the Federation and other oversight institutions.
    Institutional or legislative questions concerning the independence, powers and publication obligations of the Supreme Audit Institution are, however, appropriately addressed in conjunction with the Office of the Auditor-General for the Federation, the National Assembly and other authorities responsible for the applicable legal framework.
  8. Public Procurement Information
    Federal procurement is governed by the Public Procurement Act and the institutional framework administered by the Bureau of Public Procurement, while procurement transactions are undertaken by individual procuring entities. The recommendation concerning the publication of accessible information on procurement contracts should therefore be addressed principally through that framework.
    The BOF nevertheless recognises the close relationship among appropriation, procurement, commitment and payment. Greater interoperability among budget, procurement and treasury information systems would materially improve the public’s ability to follow expenditure from appropriation through procurement to eventual payment and delivery. The Office supports the continued development of such integrated public financial management arrangements.
  9. Timeliness, Institutional Capacity and the Fiscal Responsibility Framework
    Fiscal transparency should be treated as a continuing institutional obligation, not as an exercise undertaken solely in response to an external assessment. The experience of producing statutory fiscal reports has, however, brought into sharper focus a question that warrants attention beyond administrative improvement alone.
    Fiscal reports are assembled from numerous sources across government. Their reliability depends on the timely submission of information, reconciliation among institutions, resolution of discrepancies and verification before publication. Where these processes repeatedly require more time than the statutory reporting period permits, the response should not simply be to normalise lateness.
    Government must first improve the processes that can be improved: clearer responsibility for source data, earlier submission, greater automation, greater interoperability among systems and stricter reporting discipline.
    However, where experience over time demonstrates that a statutory deadline no longer reasonably accommodates the number of institutions, datasets and verification steps required to produce a reliable report, there is also a legitimate case for reviewing the law itself.
    The purpose of the Fiscal Responsibility Act is to strengthen fiscal discipline, accountability and transparency. Its reporting provisions should therefore impose deadlines that are demanding enough to compel administrative discipline, but sufficiently realistic to permit the publication of information whose accuracy can be defended.
    The Federal Government should accordingly consider, through the appropriate legislative process, whether aspects of the reporting timetable under the Fiscal Responsibility Act require amendment in the light of experience since its enactment. Such a review should not weaken reporting obligations. Its purpose should be the opposite: to establish timelines that are credible, enforceable and capable of producing reports that are both timely and reliable.
  10. Institutional Engagement and Continuing Improvement
    The Fiscal Transparency Report can also serve as a basis for constructive technical engagement. The BOF considers it useful to deepen dialogue with the United States Government and other development partners on the methodology used in fiscal transparency assessments, particularly the treatment of multiple publicly available fiscal documents, the measurement of budget credibility, and the standards applied to timeliness and accessibility.
    Such engagement should be approached as an opportunity for clarification and institutional learning rather than as a dispute over the assessment. The Office may also explore appropriate technical assistance arrangements to strengthen its capacity in fiscal reporting, information management, digital publication, interoperability and public accessibility. Any such cooperation should complement Nigeria’s own reforms and operate within the Government’s legal, institutional and information-security framework.
  11. Conclusion
    Nigeria accepts the principle at the heart of fiscal transparency: citizens and other stakeholders should be able, without unnecessary difficulty, to know what the Government intends to raise and spend, what the legislature has authorised, what was eventually received and spent, and how public resources were accounted for and audited.
    Nigeria has already built a substantial architecture for making this information public. The question before us is therefore not whether disclosure exists, but how to make the existing system faster, clearer, more complete and easier to understand.
    There are areas in which Government must improve its own processes. There are areas in which fiscal information already exists but must be assembled and presented more coherently. There are responsibilities that belong to institutions other than the Budget Office. There may also now be statutory reporting timelines whose continued practicality deserves examination in the light of experience.
    A mature system should be able to acknowledge all four points without defensiveness.
    The Budget Office therefore welcomes external assessments that assist Nigeria in strengthening its institutions. It also considers it important that such assessments take account of the full range of fiscal documents made publicly available and of the constitutional and statutory division of responsibilities among institutions.
    The Federal Government remains committed to a budget system in which fiscal decisions are not only lawful and disciplined, but are also increasingly transparent, accessible, intelligible and capable of independent public scrutiny.

Tanimu Yakubu
Director-General
Budget Office of the Federation
Abuja
18 August 2026

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2017 Zox News Theme. Theme by MVP Themes, powered by WordPress.