African Democratic Congress (ADC) presidential candidate Atiku Abubakar has questioned the Bola Tinubu administration’s management of billions of naira reportedly disbursed through the federal government’s cash transfer programme, arguing that the intervention was both inadequate for struggling households and insufficiently accounted for.
Atiku’s criticism centres on a reported N33.75 billion payment to 3.29 million vulnerable households. In a statement issued on Saturday by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, the former vice president said the amount itself raised questions about how much assistance individual households actually received.
Using the figures cited in the programme, Atiku calculated that the N33.75 billion distributed among 3.29 million households amounted to approximately N10,258 per household.
He argued that such an amount could provide little meaningful relief for Nigerians dealing with rising household expenses, particularly following increases in the cost of transportation, electricity and food, as well as higher taxes associated with the government’s economic policies.
“Nigerians are already facing higher transportation fares, electricity costs, food prices and taxes following the removal of the fuel subsidy,” Atiku said.
His criticism, however, went beyond the size of the reported payment. The ADC candidate questioned whether the funds intended for vulnerable Nigerians could be properly accounted for, describing the issue as more serious than a simple discrepancy in government bookkeeping.
“This is beyond a bookkeeping scandal. The intervention is insultingly small, yet even that small amount cannot be cleanly accounted for,” he said.
Atiku questions conflicting beneficiary figures
A major part of Atiku’s complaint concerns the different figures that he said the government has presented regarding the number of households covered by its cash transfer programme.
According to the ADC candidate, the government has claimed that more than N600 billion was disbursed to over 10 million households. He contrasted that figure with an earlier figure of approximately 15 million households that Nigerians had reportedly been told were beneficiaries of the intervention.
Atiku argued that the changing numbers make it difficult for citizens to establish how many households actually received payments and how much money was ultimately transferred to them.
The former vice president said transparency was particularly important because the programme was designed to provide assistance to Nigerians described as vulnerable at a time when households are facing increased living costs.
He questioned how the government could demonstrate that the money reached its intended recipients if the number of beneficiaries itself appears inconsistent across official figures.
The concerns raised by Atiku form part of his broader criticism of the administration’s approach to social intervention, which he said should be subjected to closer scrutiny when public funds are involved.
Audit concerns over additional payments
Atiku also pointed to what he described as audit concerns surrounding other transactions connected to the intervention programme.
He cited reported payments of N36.74 billion allegedly made without pre-payment audits and another N4.62 billion for which, he said, payment vouchers were reportedly unavailable.
The figures, according to Atiku, raise questions about the controls used before government funds were released and the documentation available to demonstrate how the transactions were processed.
He argued that the concerns could not simply be resolved by asking the same government institutions whose transactions were being questioned to investigate themselves.
“Nigerians cannot be expected to trust the same government to investigate transactions that are already being questioned by auditors,” he said.
The statement did not establish that the cited payments were fraudulent or that public funds were stolen. Rather, Atiku used the reported audit and documentation issues to argue for an independent examination of the programme’s financial records.
Atiku proposes independent financial investigation
In response to the questions he raised, Atiku said an independent team should be established to examine the cash transfer programme and trace the movement of funds as far as available records allow.
He proposed bringing together specialists from several fields, including finance, auditing, technology and public accounting.
According to Atiku, the team would examine the number of beneficiaries recorded under the programme, the channels through which payments were made and the reconciliation records associated with the transactions.
It would also review the audit queries raised around the programme before presenting its findings directly to Nigerians.
The proposal, he said, would provide an independent assessment of the records and help establish what happened to funds allocated for the intervention.
“There must be no black box around the poor man’s money,” Atiku said.
His proposed review therefore focuses not only on the amount reportedly distributed but also on the systems used to identify beneficiaries, authorise payments, transfer funds and reconcile the transactions afterwards.
Debate over the value of cash interventions
Atiku also used the controversy to renew his criticism of what he described as the government’s reliance on temporary palliatives rather than policies capable of improving household purchasing power.
The ADC presidential candidate argued that direct cash support could provide short-term assistance but should not replace broader economic measures aimed at reducing the cost of essential goods and services.
His position is that Nigerians require policies capable of improving their ability to afford food, transportation, electricity and other necessities rather than repeatedly relying on emergency interventions to cope with rising prices.
The argument places the reported N33.75 billion payment within a wider debate over the effectiveness of government support programmes amid increased living costs.
For Atiku, the issue is therefore twofold: whether the amount allocated to each household is sufficient to provide meaningful assistance and whether the government can clearly demonstrate where the funds went.
His statement did not provide an independent finding establishing that the entire N33.75 billion or the other cited amounts were misappropriated. Instead, he called for the records to be independently examined in response to what he described as inconsistencies and audit concerns.
Pressure for greater transparency
The criticism adds to the political debate over how the Tinubu administration has managed economic hardship and social interventions following the removal of the fuel subsidy.
Atiku argued that Nigerians are being confronted by higher expenses while government support intended for vulnerable households remains relatively small when spread across millions of beneficiaries.
His calculation of about N10,258 per household was central to that argument, as he questioned whether such an intervention could adequately offset the rising cost of basic needs.
He also maintained that the credibility of the programme depends on clear and consistent information about its beneficiaries and financial transactions.
For the former vice president, resolving the questions requires more than another government explanation. He is calling for financial, audit, technology and public-accounting experts to examine the records independently, reconcile the figures and trace the payments.
Atiku’s proposed investigation would ultimately seek to establish the beneficiary numbers, payment channels and financial trail behind the intervention based on the records available.
Until such an examination is conducted, the competing figures and audit concerns he raised remain matters of political and financial scrutiny rather than established evidence of wrongdoing.
Atiku has nevertheless used the controversy to press his wider argument that government assistance should move beyond short-term palliatives and towards economic policies that strengthen purchasing power and make essential goods and services more affordable for Nigerians.
Atiku Questions Tinubu Government Over N33.75bn Cash Transfers to Vulnerable Households
