Cost of Governance: From Buhari to Tinubu, a Continuing Burden
By Lawal Dahiru Mamman,
Recently, the Federal Government introduced new limits on reimbursable imprest for public officials as part of efforts to strengthen financial discipline across Ministries, Departments, and Agencies (MDAs).
This directive, contained in the 2026 Annual General Imprest Warrant signed by the Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister of the Economy, Taiwo Oyedele, caps ministers at a maximum quarterly reimbursable imprest of N700,000, while permanent secretaries and directors-general are restricted to N500,000.
Directors are limited to N300,000, and heads of formations in states are capped at N100,000. Additionally, the circular mandates that any procurement exceeding N1 million must be executed through formal contract awards in line with the Public Procurement Act and requires all self-accounting entities to submit strict retirement returns within 30 days.
While this policy is a welcomed step toward financial accountability, it barely scratches the surface of Nigeria’s structural cost-of-governance crisis. For decades, the size and expense of the public sector have been an unsustainable drain on national resources.
Recurrent expenditure covering personnel salaries, bloated allowances, overheads, and political perks frequently consumes between 70% and 80% of the national budget. With Nigeria’s mounting debt servicing obligations and severe revenue challenges, leaving a mere fraction of the budget for critical infrastructure, healthcare, and education is a formula for societal stagnation.
True fiscal stability demands that the government move beyond benchmarking minor operational funds and deploy the political will necessary to tackle deeply entrenched structural inefficiencies.
A foundational step toward genuine reform lies in the comprehensive implementation of the 2012 Stephen Oronsaye Report. The document explicitly identified massive functional overlaps across the bureaucracy and recommended slashing the number of statutory agencies from 263 to 161 through liquidations, mergers, and institutional realignments.
Although various administrations have paid lip service to these recommendations, the core of the report remains unimplemented. Paradoxically, the legislative and executive arms have spent the last three years creating entirely new federal agencies, further duplicating mandates.
Merging these redundant parastatals would instantly eliminate billions in parallel personnel costs, leased office spaces, and administrative overheads.
Any serious effort to curb governance costs must address the sheer size of political appointments and the legislature. Nigeria operates one of the most expensive legislative frameworks relative to its economic output, with 469 members in the National Assembly drawing significant salaries, allowances, and constituency project funds. Transitioning to a part-time legislative model could significantly lower this fiscal burden.
Similarly, structural caps must be placed on executive patronage. The current federal cabinet stands at 47 ministers—arguably the largest in Nigeria’s history. Trimming this cabinet and strictly enforcing the travel entourage limits introduced in early 2024, which cap presidential delegation sizes on local and international trips, would transition these policies from mere public relations exercises into measurable fiscal savings.
Recall that in January 2024, President Tinubu ordered a reduction in the size of official entourages on local and foreign trips. The directive limited the President to 25 aides domestically and 20 abroad, with smaller quotas for the First Lady, Vice-President, and their spouses. At the time it was praised, but many Nigerians now see it as cosmetic. Implementation needs teeth.
Beyond restructuring institutions, political offices must be structurally stripped of their status as avenues for rapid wealth accumulation. This requires the complete monetisation of official entitlements such as vehicles, housing, and medical care, alongside the strict regulation or outright elimination of opaque “security votes.”
Ending the routine public sponsorship of foreign medical trips and religious pilgrimages for state officials would send a clear signal of administrative prudence. These structural changes should be paired with the rapid expansion of digital e-government platforms.
Broadening the reach of the Integrated Financial Management Information System (IFMIS) and deploying data analytics can eliminate payroll fraud, minimise human discretion in procurement, and drastically reduce the physical paperwork that often masks corruption.
Bottom Line
Resistance from those who benefit from institutional bloat is inevitable. Overcoming it requires transparent public communication, where the savings generated from these cuts are visibly redirected into tangible capital infrastructure and social services.
Cutting operational imprest is a useful administrative gesture, but it cannot be the destination. Turning the nation’s fiscal trajectory around requires moving past half-measures and systematically dismantling the structural bloat that has crowded out development for decades. Let’s move beyond this!