As the 2026 budget defence unfolds at Nigeria’s National Assembly, a troubling question hangs in the air: Is this another elaborate ritual in futility?
Year after year, ministers, heads of agencies, and parastatals appear before lawmakers with thick documents, PowerPoint slides, and rehearsed assurances.
Committees ask probing questions. Figures are adjusted. Allocations are defended. But outside the polished halls of Abuja, contractors remain unpaid, projects stall, and communities see little of the promises captured in previous budgets.
The 2025 Appropriation Act was hailed as bold and expansionary, targeting infrastructure renewal, security enhancement, social intervention, and economic stabilization.
Yet, as 2026 discussions begin, implementation gaps are glaring: Capital projects reportedly underfunded or delayed,
contractors complaining of non-payment months after execution, MDAs struggling with cash releases, and Inflation eroding the real value of allocations.
If the 2025 budget has not been substantially implemented, what moral authority underpins the push for a new 2026 spending framework?
Budget defence is meant to ensure accountability, transparency, and alignment with national priorities. But without a transparent performance audit of the previous fiscal year, the process risks becoming cosmetic.
Key questions demanding answers include: What percentage of the 2025 capital budget has been cash-backed? How many projects captured in 2025 have reached completion? What is the total outstanding debt owed to contractors and service providers? Why should Nigerians trust projections for 2026 when 2025 remains unsettled?
Without clear performance data, budget defence becomes less about accountability and more about paperwork compliance.
Across sectors; roads, health facilities, schools, and housing, contractors report delays in payments.
Many have borrowed from banks at high interest rates to execute government contracts.
Non-payment translates to: Job losses, project abandonment, rising public debt, increased cost of future contracts. Because, when contractors factor payment uncertainty into future bids, government ultimately pays more.
Nigeria’s budgeting challenge is not only about approval, it is about cash backing.
Appropriations do not equal releases. Releases do not equal payments. Payments do not equal completed projects.
Until revenue projections become realistic and expenditure aligns strictly with available cash flow, annual budget defence sessions risk becoming ceremonial exercises detached from fiscal reality.
For the 2026 budget defence to carry credibility, the National Assembly must:
– Demand a full 2025 implementation report before advancing 2026 approvals.
– Insist on verified data from the budget office and the ministry of finance
– Tie new capital approvals to measurable performance benchmarks
– Establish timelines for settling outstanding contractor liabilities.
Anything less reinforces public skepticism.
At a time when inflation bites, unemployment persists, and citizens demand visible governance dividends, fiscal discipline is not optional, it is urgent.
The 2026 budget defence presents an opportunity to break from tradition and restore confidence in Nigeria’s budgeting process. But if performance review remains secondary to projection debates, Nigerians may see it for what it risks becoming: another expensive ritual in futility.
So, will this be a turning point for fiscal accountability or just another annual spectacle?
