JUST IN: BudgIT Frowns At Nigeria Operating Several Capital Components Of Budget
Says it promotes fiscal irresponsibility
By OGB Joseph, Abuja
The Deputy Country Director of the BudgIT Foundation, YaVahyala Kwaga, has condemned the circumstances leading to Nigeria operating several capital components of budgets, saying it is not the best as it could lead to fiscal irresponsibility.
Kwaga made this revelation at a media briefing on Friday 13th March, 2026 held at BudgIT office in Apo resettlement in Abuja, stressing the need to close the necessary gaps such that Nigeria’s budget can run the stipulated calendar year of 12 months.
Kwaga said: “It helps us frame the real question before us: Why is the government operating several capital components of the budget at the same time?”
He reminded the audience that sometime late the previous year, the head of the Budget Office of the Federation had argued that the government had legal backing to run multiple budgets simultaneously.
According to him, certain laws permitted the practice. Yet, there was a lingering concern—no specific sections of those laws had been clearly cited.
” For civil society groups like BudgIT, this raised a larger issue about Nigeria’s public financial management system. The discussion was not merely technical; it touched on transparency, accountability, and the proper use of public resources.
“One of the biggest concerns was the growing pattern of overlapping budgets.
Originally, the capital component of the Nigeria 2025 Federal Budget was scheduled to end in March. However, the government later extended it to November. This meant that a single budget cycle would technically run for almost 24 months. “
The Deputy Director explained that this was not entirely new saying In 2021, the previous administration had also extended its capital budget timeline, and the practice seemed to be becoming normal.
“But Nigeria operates a 12-month fiscal year by law,” he emphasized. “These constant extensions violate the spirit—if not the letter—of existing financial laws.”
He said civil society groups were therefore calling for a harmonized budget calendar, one that respects the legal fiscal timeline and restores discipline to the budgeting process.
” Another important issue concerned the Medium‑Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF), a document designed to guide Nigeria’s fiscal planning for three years.
” Ideally, the MTEF should be debated and approved before the annual appropriation bill is submitted to the National Assembly. It sets the economic assumptions and fiscal strategy that shape the national budget.
But what happened instead was troubling.
” The framework was presented just two days before the appropriation bill itself was submitted to the National Assembly of Nigeria.”
However, the Deputy Director, this clearly undermined the process and violated provisions of the Fiscal Responsibility Act of Nigeria.
“Nigerians are not asking for too much,” he said calmly. “We are simply asking the government to obey its own laws.”
He informed that the administration had repeatedly spoken about building a trillion-dollar economy. While the ambition was admirable, the deputy director warned that unrealistic fiscal projections could damage credibility.
” When projected revenues fail to materialize, government spending plans suffer. Projects remain unfinished, and essential services—healthcare, education, water, and sanitation—fall short.
“When revenues are overestimated,” he explained, “it means that many of the projects promised to citizens will never be fully implemented.”
” This erodes both public trust and the government’s reputation internationally.
Another challenge was the increasing reliance on supplementary appropriations.
“When the original fiscal plan lacks a clear and publicly accessible cash plan, governments often introduce additional budgets mid-year to fund projects that were not originally prioritized
” They expand the budget deficit, forcing the government to borrow more. And every new loan increases Nigeria’s debt exposure.
For BudgIT and other civil society organizations, this trend highlights the need for stronger planning and fiscal discipline, “he stated.
The Deputy Director also raised concerns about the growing size of service-wide votes within the appropriation act, saying these funds often do not have clearly identified implementing ministries, departments, or agencies (MDAs). As a result, tracking how the money is used becomes extremely difficult.
“These are public funds,” he reminded the audience. “They do not belong to any politician or government official.”
He said citizens therefore have a right to know where the money goes and how it is spent.
The Civil Society’s Recommendations
As the discussion drew toward its conclusion, the deputy director summarized the key recommendations.
” First, Nigeria must revisit the legal framework governing the budget process and ensure that laws guiding fiscal management are respected.
” Second, the National Assembly must play a stronger oversight role. Through technical analysis and evidence-based scrutiny, lawmakers can ensure that public funds translate into actual services for citizens. “
” Third, BudgIT proposed what it called a “fiscal reset.” Instead of extending budgets endlessly, the government could close its accounts at the end of the fiscal year and carry forward unspent balances as opening funds for the next cycle. This aligns with the accounting principle of periodicity, which requires financial activities to occur within defined time frames.
” Fourth, transparency must improve. Budget implementation reports should be published regularly so Nigerians can track government performance monthly and quarterly, “he said.
Speaking also in her contributions, Enebi Opaluwa, Head, Natural Resources and Climate Governance, BudgIT Foundation highlights the need for stronger climate governance and accountability in how Nigeria’s Ecological Fund is managed.
She said that although the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation publishes allocations showing how much the federal government releases to states, stressing that there is still limited transparency about how these funds are actually spent.
” Governments at all levels must demonstrate how these resources improve livelihoods and help prepare the country for a future where oil and gas revenues may decline.
” While it is difficult to punish states for misuse because ecological spending can appear in many types of projects, stronger monitoring of state budgets and project reports is necessary.
” Ultimately, better tracking and accountability will ensure the funds support environmental protection, climate adaptation, and long-term economic sustainability,” she noted.
Leave a Comment