•Tinubu
About 14 years after the Stephen Oronsaye Committee’s Report on the streamlining of federal ministries, departments and agencies (MDAs), the federal government may have given up on efforts to streamline existing public institutions and reduce the cost of governance.
Rather, President Bola Tinubu has increased the cost of governance by creating additional MDAs, contrary to his commitment to implementing the report earlier in his administration, reports The Guardian.
Newly-created MDAs, many of which have only duplicated existing functions or merely been created to pander to the interests of politicians, have increased the cost of governance by at least N1.13 trillion.
This is different from the ever-increasing allocations of MDAs marked for abolition but which the government continues to retain.
In February 2024, the President, amidst scepticism, approved the full implementation, a decision that was expected to have reduced the number of MDAs drastically.
Rather than abolishing all 38 agencies and implementing all 52 proposed mergers, the government approved merging 29 agencies, eight for subsuming, four for relocation and two for scrapping.
Over two years after the announcement, the administration has created new MDAs that have added to the cost of governance and fueled rivalry among different institutions.
The federal government has allocated about N1.13 trillion to six ministries and five regional development commissions established or expanded under President Bola Tinubu’s administration, highlighting the financial cost of its big government philosophy.
The allocations include N81.19 billion for the Ministry of Livestock Development, N27.23 billion for the Ministry of Regional Development, N70.3 billion for the Ministry of Art, Culture, Tourism and Creative Economy, N21.52 billion for the Ministry of Steel Development and N149.2 billion for the Ministry of Marine and Blue Economy.
The Ministry of Gas Resources was allocated N71.59 billion, although it has no separate budget and is managed under the Ministry of Petroleum Resources.
The four new regional development commissions received a combined 705.61 billion budget, comprising N145.61 billion for the North-West and N140 billion each for the South-West, South-East, South-South and North-Central commissions.
The figures bring the total allocation for the ministries and new commissions to N1.13 trillion.
Some newly-created federal agencies do not have specific budgetary allocations. They include the Nigerian Education Loan Fund (NELFUND), Nigerian Independent System Operator (NISO) and the National Health Technology and Data Analytics Office (NHTDAO), raising questions about how newly established institutions are being funded and integrated into the existing budget structure.
This month, the Nigeria Ports Economic Regulatory Agency (NPERA) came into being, raising questions about the statutory significance of the Nigeria Shippers Council (NSC) and whether its functions would not overlap those of the Nigeria Port Authority (NPA).
With multiplicity and duplication also comes what has now been codenamed ‘ghost agencies’. While the Nigerians are still awaiting the outcome of the full investigation into the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC), the National Brands Development and Made in Nigeria Special Project Office are making headlines again.
Apart from the newly-created establishments, agencies marked for abolition are adding billions of naira to yearly budgets.
The Pension Transitional Arrangement Directorate (PTAD) is one of the agencies recommended for abolition, with its functions to be transferred to the Federal Ministry of Finance.
Despite the recommendation, the PTAD continued to operate as a standalone institution with a director-general, staff and budgetary provision. The 2025 federal budget contained a dedicated appropriation of about N4.72 billion for the PTAD headquarters, including personnel and overhead expenditure.
The PTAD has also continued to announce and implement pension-related programmes.
The National Productivity Centre (NPC) presents another significant case. The Oronsaye committee recommended its abolition, with earlier estimates putting its potential annual saving at about N2.7 billion.
Yet, the 2026 budget provides N110.68 billion for the NPC under the Federal Ministry of Labour and Employment, representing more than 60 per cent of the ministry’s total N183.63 billion allocation.
The scale of the provision is particularly striking because the NPC’s core mandate centres on promoting productivity in the public sector. Its 2026 budget includes provisions for activities under the centre, including fertiliser and agricultural inputs, food supply, roads, palaces, medical outreach and stadium projects.
The N110.68 billion allocation is more than 40 times the earlier estimated yearly savings from abolishing the centre.
Another case is the Infrastructure Concession Regulatory Commission (ICRC). The Federal Executive Council (FEC) approved its merger with the Bureau of Public Enterprises (BPE) to create a new institution. Yet, the 2026 budget proposal still lists the ICRC as a standalone MDA, with about N748.4 million in capital expenditure.
The National Land Development Authority (NALDA), which the Oronsaye proposed to be returned to the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security, has also remained separately funded.
Its allocation increased from N7.43 billion in 2025 to N25 billion in the 2026 budget.
Of the allocation, N274.75 million is earmarked for personnel, N763.26 million for overhead and N23.966 billion for capital projects.
The Federal Character Commission (FCC), which the original report recommended for abolition, also remains in operation.
A 2021 review estimated potential savings of about N3.6 billion from its abolition based on its then-current budget. In 2026, however, the commission had an allocation of about N6.5 billion and defended the provision before the Senate, saying it was required to monitor compliance of more than 700 MDAs.
The Financial Reporting Council of Nigeria was also recommended for abolition after the repeal of its enabling law. It remains a standalone federal institution, with approximately N1.99 billion allocated to its operation in the 2026 budget.
The report, submitted on April 16, 2012, has survived three administrations, four reviews and several presidential directives but without implementation, raising questions about the legal, administrative, budgetary and personnel status of agencies earmarked for scrapping, merger or absorption.
The committee, formally known as the Presidential Committee on the Restructuring and Rationalisation of Federal Government Parastatals, Commissions and Agencies, examined 541 statutory and non-statutory federal institutions.
It identified widespread duplication of mandates, overlapping functions and high administrative costs while recommending the collapse of 263 agencies into 161.
Besides failed attempts at implementation, the government has not established a clear record of how many agencies have actually been abolished, how many workers have been removed from duplicated structures or how much has been saved.
Many of the agencies planned for abolition continue to hang on to enabling laws that have neither been repealed nor abrogated.
In several cases, their boards and management structures have also remained in place, while personnel and budgetary provisions continue to be maintained.
Today, the hitherto business facilitation and regulation agencies are under intense pressure to support the government’s drive to increase revenue to plug the hole in expanded fiscal need, a challenge many attribute to the big government philosophy of the administration.
A retired official of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Dr Yunana Bature, said the continued failure to implement the Oronsaye recommendations shows the problem is no longer identifying weaknesses in Nigeria’s public-sector architecture.
“The issue is whether the government is prepared to confront the political interests that benefit from maintaining it,” he said.
Bature challenged the government to publish a baseline showing the annual cost of agencies targeted for abolition, merger or rationalisation and the potential savings from the abolition.
Without such measurements, he warned, restructuring could become another bureaucratic exercise without meaningful fiscal impacts.
An investment banker, Tolulope Alayande, said the reform should focus on functions rather than merely changing institutional names.
“Scrapping an agency while transferring its staff, offices, vehicles, overheads and functions to another institution would amount to renaming bureaucracy rather than reducing it,” he said.
According to him, Nigeria does not necessarily need fewer government responsibilities but fewer institutions performing overlapping responsibilities.
He said the objective should be a leaner state capable of delivering more with less, rather than merely producing a smaller government structure on paper.
Ultimately, the success of the reform, Alayande said, should be measured not by the number of agencies abolished but by whether it reduces the cost of governance, shortens administrative processes, improves accountability and frees resources for infrastructure, education, healthcare and employment.
He insisted that 14 years after the Oronsaye report, the central question is no longer whether Nigeria knows what needs restructuring, but whether government can translate repeated presidential directives into repealed laws, dismantled structures, reduced personnel obligations and verifiable savings.
