Budget Chief Details 2026 Plan and Funding Delays

The Budget Office’s Explanation on the PEAC/PFIPC Controversy

The Director-General of the Budget Office of the Federation, Tanimu Yakubu, appeared before the House of Representatives Ad hoc Committee investigating the establishment and budgetary provisions of the Presidential Economic Advisory Council/Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PEAC/PFIPC). He provided a detailed explanation of how the controversial Council found its way into the 2026 federal budget. Yakubu emphasized that the Budget Office did not create the body or approve its establishment but only costed its personnel requirements based on official government instruments issued by relevant authorities.

He stressed that although the National Assembly appropriated ₦1,302,978,783 for the Council, not one kobo was released or spent, highlighting that the statutory conditions required before public funds could be disbursed were never met.

Institutional Origins of the Council

Yakubu traced the Council’s institutional origins to the Presidential Economic Advisory Council inaugurated by former President Muhammadu Buhari on October 9, 2019. According to him, before the Budget Office became involved, the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation had assigned the Council an administrative budget code, giving it an identity within the Federal Government’s budget architecture.

He explained that without the code, a spending body cannot be recognized for budgeting, appropriated as a spending unit, or participate in the expenditure process. Yakubu further disclosed that an authorized establishment and a recruitment waiver had already been issued by the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, while the relevant public service salary structure was also in place before the Council sought budgetary provision.

Budgetary Calculations and Appropriation

Yakubu revealed that the Council requested ₦3,850,935,000 as personnel costs, but the Budget Office rejected the figure as unsupported. Instead, they conducted an independent calculation using only the authorized establishment, approved recruitment waiver, applicable public service salary structure, and established personnel-cost methodology. This resulted in ₦802,978,783.00, which was placed in the Executive Budget proposal and later appropriated.

He clarified that this amount was not a compromise with the Council but an independent fiscal determination. Yakubu noted that much of the public debate had wrongly assumed that appropriation automatically translated into expenditure.

The Role of Appropriation in Public Finance

Yakubu explained that an appropriation only authorizes expenditure in law and does not amount to payment. He emphasized that before money can move, other conditions must be met, including actions by different institutions. If one condition fails, the chain stops.

Nigeria’s public finance system deliberately divides responsibility among different government institutions to prevent a single office from creating an agency, recruiting staff, releasing money, and spending appropriated funds. While the Office of the Head of the Civil Service handles establishment and recruitment approvals, the National Salaries, Incomes and Wages Commission regulates remuneration; the Budget Office assesses fiscal implications and issues Financial Clearance where conditions are met.

Financial Clearance and Personnel Expenditure

Yakubu identified Financial Clearance as the critical legal gateway before recruitment and salary payments can commence. He noted that until Financial Clearance is issued, a personnel provision remains only a figure in the budget and cannot create employees, place anyone on the payroll, or generate salary payments.

The Director-General stated that the Budget Office never issued Financial Clearance because the statutory requirements were incomplete. Even after presidential assent, another condition remained outstanding: the National Salaries, Incomes and Wages Commission had not confirmed that the proposed staffing and remuneration arrangements complied with the approved public service compensation framework.

No Expenditure Occurred

Yakubu told lawmakers that the personnel allocation of ₦802,978,783, representing 61.63 per cent of the Council’s total appropriation, never became available to the Council. He explained that personnel appropriations are never paid to agencies as lump sums but are released monthly as salaries directly into the accounts of verified employees on the Federal Government payroll.

He stressed that because no Financial Clearance was issued, no recruitment took place, no payroll was created, and no salaries became due. “Not one kobo of the personnel provision could lawfully have been drawn,” he said.

On the ₦200 million overhead allocation, Yakubu said it never became a cash entitlement because overhead releases are made monthly only after Treasury warrants and cash backing. He disclosed that after questions arose over the Council’s legal status in June 2026, the Budget Office formally instructed the Federal Ministry of Finance and the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation to withhold every payment instrument relating to the Council.

Capital Allocation and Procurement

Yakubu dismissed suggestions that the ₦300 million capital allocation resulted in expenditure, explaining that the provision merely formed part of the standard start-up allocation usually made for new or reactivated public bodies. He noted that no procurement process reached the stage where expenditure could arise, as there was no procurement approval, no Certificate of No Objection from the Bureau of Public Procurement, no warrant, and no Treasury cash backing.

Conclusion and Commitment to Transparency

Summing up the Budget Office’s defense, Yakubu said all the safeguards built into Nigeria’s public finance system functioned as intended. He emphasized that the legal path from appropriation to expenditure was broken at every material point. Yakubu assured the committee that the Budget Office would continue to cooperate with the investigation by providing records, computations, correspondence, and system evidence required to establish the facts.

Chairman of the Ad hoc Committee, Hon Yusuf Gagdi, expressed the committee’s commitment to follow the investigation to a logical conclusion. He said the probe will resume on Monday, with the Accountant General among others expected.