Economic analysts have challenged the Federal Government’s claim of achieving 85 percent capital expenditure in the 2024 fiscal year, calling for independent verification and greater transparency.
The controversy erupted following remarks by Finance Minister Wale Edun at the 2026 Macroeconomic Outlook event in Lagos, where he credited the National Assembly’s decision to extend the 2024 budget implementation period as the driving force behind what he described as exceptional performance in capital spending.
Minister Edun informed the gathering that the budget extension strategy had proven successful in ensuring project completion. “In terms of the capital budget, the budget, at the end of the day, is a law of the National Assembly. They extended the 2024 budget for the full year to ensure that projects were completed,” he explained, before announcing that aggregate capital expenditure reached 85 percent performance in 2024.
The extension followed the National Assembly’s initial approval of a N35.06 trillion budget, with N13.77 trillion allocated for capital projects. By December 2025, the House of Representatives had revised this upward to N43.56 trillion, with capital spending increasing to N22.27 trillion while debt service and statutory transfers remained largely unchanged.
However, the government’s self-reported success metrics have been met with considerable skepticism from independent economic observers who question both the methodology and the absence of third-party verification.
Economist Aliyu Ilias delivered a particularly scathing assessment, arguing that the lack of independent oversight undermines the credibility of the government’s claims. “I think what they are saying can only be believed by those who are saying it because the fact remains that transparency is key,” Ilias stated. “I don’t think a government executive, in particular, should be the one telling us; it should be the people with the oversight function, like the National Assembly, to come and see it.”
Ilias raised concerns about budget rollovers from previous years, questioning whether the reported 85 percent figure might actually represent a combination of multiple fiscal years’ expenditures rather than genuine 2024 performance. “The previous budget suffered a lot of rollovers, so how can we be sure it’s not even a combination of two years’ budgets?” he asked.
The economist also highlighted a persistent problem that has plagued Nigeria’s public finance management: delayed payments to contractors working on critical infrastructure projects. Despite capital allocations on paper, essential projects in roads, primary healthcare, education, and social amenities often languish incomplete.
“Debt service is an obligation, and the government will find ways to meet it, but capital expenditure often suffers neglect,” Ilias observed. “That does not help the economy, which is why Nigeria is not yet where it should be in terms of social infrastructure.”
Professor Akpan Ekpo, a renowned economics scholar, raised different concerns about the timing of capital releases and their economic impact. He noted that even if the expenditure figures are accurate, significant delays in fund disbursement mean the intended economic benefits fail to materialize when needed most.
“It’s capital expenditure that enhances growth. Now he’s talking about 2024, which has almost a one-year or nearly two-year lag,” Ekpo explained. “For the 2025 budget, only 17 percent of the capital expenditure has been released. We are not feeling the impact because of the delay in releases.”
The professor expressed hope that the president’s commitment to eliminate delays by March would be honored, but noted the awkward reality that “2026 is to start, while 2025 has not ended yet because of capital releases.”
Former Zenith Bank chief economist Marcel Okeke emerged as the sole voice defending the government’s position, though his argument centered more on the absence of contradictory data than on positive evidence supporting the claims.
“There’s no way you can counter whatever figure has been released because we are talking about projects. No other authority has provided any figure before now,” Okeke reasoned. He argued that without alternative official statistics or a comprehensive nationwide audit of projects, critics lack standing to challenge the minister’s assertions.
Okeke pointed to visible construction projects across the country as circumstantial evidence supporting the government’s narrative, while conceding that “a comprehensive independent report would be necessary to confirm the figures.”
At the heart of this controversy lies a fundamental question about fiscal accountability in Nigeria’s public finance system. The debate underscores the critical need for independent project verification mechanisms and transparent reporting standards that would allow citizens and analysts to assess government performance objectively.
The fact that economists must rely solely on government self-reporting—with no independent audit or oversight body verifying—highlights a significant gap in Nigeria’s fiscal governance framework. As the country prepares to implement its 2026 budget, the unresolved questions about 2024 performance threaten to erode public confidence in the government’s fiscal management capabilities.
Whether the 85 percent figure represents genuine achievement or accounting creativity remains an open question—one that only rigorous independent verification can definitively answer.
WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW
The federal government claims it achieved 85% capital expenditure in 2024, but economists are demanding proof. Nigeria has no independent verification system for government spending claims.
The finance minister reports the numbers, but there’s no oversight body to confirm them. Economists cite unpaid contractors, project delays, and suspicious budget rollovers as red flags. Even supporters admit the figures can’t be verified without a comprehensive audit.
