By Michael Olaogun
Fiscal appropriation is the heartbeat of democratic governance. It is through the appropriation process that governments translate campaign promises into tangible programmes, projects and public services. Every naira appropriated represents the collective aspirations of Nigerians for better roads, quality healthcare, improved education, enhanced security, and sustainable economic development. Yet, appropriation without accountability breeds suspicion, and where transparency is weak, perception often becomes reality.
Since President Bola Ahmed Tinubu assumed office on 29 May 2023, Nigeria has embarked on one of the most ambitious fiscal and monetary reform agendas in its democratic history. The administration inherited an economy burdened by high debt, dwindling foreign exchange reserves, a costly fuel subsidy regime, multiple exchange rates, and weak public revenues. In response, the government initiated bold reforms, including the removal of fuel subsidies, the liberalisation of the foreign exchange market, tax reform initiatives and aggressive borrowing to finance development. International financial institutions have broadly described these reforms as important structural adjustments intended to restore fiscal sustainability.
However, while the necessity of reform may be defensible, the management of public resources generated by those reforms has become the subject of increasing public debate. For example, the fuel subsidy removal perhaps is one policies that has generated more controversy in recent times. President Tinubu declared during his inauguration that “fuel subsidy is gone,” instantly changing Nigeria’s fiscal trajectory. The policy was expected to save trillions of naira annually, eliminate waste, reduce smuggling and free resources for investment in infrastructure and social protection. Yet, nearly three years later, many Nigerians continue to ask a simple but profound question: where are the savings?
Federation revenues have reportedly increased following the removal of subsidy, and state governments have consistently received higher allocations from the Federation Account Allocation Committee (FAAC). Nevertheless, many citizens argue that the improvements have not translated into visible public goods proportional to the magnitude of the sacrifices imposed on households. The issue is not merely whether the savings exist. It is whether government has convincingly demonstrated how those savings have been appropriated, allocated and utilised.
Similarly, since 2023, the Federal Government has presented several supplementary appropriation bills to the National Assembly. While supplementary budgets are legitimate fiscal instruments, especially during emergencies or changing macroeconomic conditions, their increasing frequency has provoked concerns regarding planning efficiency. Several allocations generated public controversy, including substantial provisions for presidential vehicles, renovation projects, official residences and other administrative expenditures at a period when millions of Nigerians were grappling with rising inflation, unemployment, and declining purchasing power.
Although government defended many of these expenditures as necessary for state operations and security, critics argued that the optics were inconsistent with the call for national sacrifice. Leadership is not judged only by legality but also by symbolism. Citizens expect governments asking them to endure hardship to demonstrate corresponding restraint in public expenditure.
The establishment of the Nigerian Education Loan Fund (NELFUND), consumer credit initiatives, conditional cash transfer programmes and various intervention schemes were designed to cushion the effects of economic reforms. However, implementation challenges, allegations of irregular disbursement, administrative bottlenecks and conflicting public narratives have occasionally overshadowed these programmes.
While investigations and institutional reviews are appropriate responses where irregularities are alleged, such controversies reinforce the importance of transparent reporting and robust oversight rather than assumptions of wrongdoing before facts are established.
While it is known that fiscal policy cannot be separated from monetary management, the unification of exchange rates and subsequent depreciation of the naira represented another major reform. Government argued that multiple exchange rates encouraged arbitrage, discouraged investment and distorted the economy. Yet, the resulting inflationary pressures significantly increased the cost of imported goods, production inputs, transportation and food prices. Combined with high interest rates introduced to combat inflation, businesses and households experienced unprecedented financial strain. Although economists remain divided over the speed and sequencing of these reforms, there is broad agreement that effective communication and credible institutional transparency are essential for sustaining public confidence.
Furthermore, on the tax reform agenda, it seeks to expand the tax base, simplify administration, improve compliance and reduce dependence on oil revenues. The reforms are intended to strengthen long-term fiscal sustainability while encouraging investment and economic growth. Yet many Nigerians remain sceptical.Their concern is not necessarily opposition to taxation but uncertainty about public expenditure. Citizens are generally willing to contribute more when they believe their contributions are managed prudently. The real social contract is built on accountability rather than taxation alone.
Consequently, there is the need to inspire confidence in the citizens on financial related issues for the nation. This can be achieved by publishing comprehensive reports on subsidy savings and their utilisation; strengthening real-time public expenditure tracking; enhancing the independence and capacity of oversight institutions; ensuring prompt publication of procurement information and project implementation data; and institutionalising periodic public accountability sessions involving key fiscal agencies. Open budgeting should become the rule rather than the exception.
Nigeria’s fiscal reforms represent one of the boldest economic experiments in recent history. Whether history ultimately judges them as transformational or traumatic will depend less on the policies themselves than on how transparently their outcomes are managed. The central challenge before the Tinubu administration is no longer merely generating public revenue. It is convincing Nigerians that every additional naira appropriated serves the public interest. Fiscal appropriation should never become synonymous with perceived mis-appropriation.
In every democracy, trust is the most valuable currency. Once citizens begin to question not only how much government spends but also why it spends and who truly benefits, the legitimacy of public finance itself comes under scrutiny. Nigeria’s future depends not only on balancing the budget but also on balancing accountability with ambition, reform with compassion, and appropriation with measurable national development.
Ultimately, democracy is sustained not by the size of government expenditure but by the confidence that public resources are managed with integrity, transparency, and an unwavering commitment to the common good.
Michael Olaogun, a policy and development researcher wrote from Abuja, Nigeria and can be reached via michaelolaogun2014@gmail.com