By MOSHOOD OSHUNFUREWA How can Nigerian public officials defend the indefensible without being ashamed? It requires a careful blend of statistical obfuscation, semantics, former senator Patrick Obahiagbon-style linguistic gymnastics, and an unwavering belief that the Nigerian people are either too gullible or too preoccupied with survival to interrogate the numbers being thrown at them. Taiwo Oyedele’s recent appearance before the Senate Committee on Finance, where he sought to debunk claims that the Tinubu administration has borrowed N80 trillion, is a masterclass in this dark art at the very top of the evil and imperialist parasite.
But beneath the veneer of fiscal responsibility lies a government of opaqueness, one that enacts budgets it has no intention of implementing, increases taxes and revenues while poverty deepens, and treats the ordinary Nigerian as nothing more than a beast of burden to be milked dry. Oyedele’s central argument, that the apparent explosion in Nigeria’s debt stock from N75 trillion to N159 trillion is not the result of reckless borrowing but rather a product of “accounting adjustments,” naira depreciation, and the securitisation of Ways and Means advances, deserves careful scrutiny. On the surface, his explanation appears technically sound.
The naira has depreciated dramatically since the Tinubu administration’s ill-conceived currency reforms. External debt denominated in dollars will naturally balloon when converted to naira at a weaker exchange rate. The securitisation of ?33 trillion in Ways and Means advances from the Central Bank of Nigeria, inherited from the Buhari administration, is indeed an accounting recognition of existing liabilities rather than fresh borrowing.
These are facts that cannot be disputed. But here is where Oyedele’s defence unravels. The very act of securitising N33 trillion in Ways and Means advances, money that the Buhari administration had illegally borrowed from the CBN beyond the statutory five percent limit, is itself an admission of fiscal recklessness.
The National Assembly, in its characteristic abdication of oversight responsibility, rubber-stamped this conversion into formal debt, effectively legitimising a constitutional breach. Oyedele calls this “bringing existing obligations onto the government’s books” as though it were an act of transparency.
Summary from source