Nigeria faces growing economic challenges, with government expenses rising and unemployment increasing. Senator Ali Ndume, representing Borno South in the Senate, has suggested a practical solution: reducing the size of President Bola Tinubu’s cabinet.
Speaking during an interview on Arise TV, Ndume emphasized that Nigeria urgently needs to adopt strict financial discipline. He noted that the government’s recurrent expenses continue to grow, while fewer jobs are available for citizens. This imbalance, he explained, has contributed to the country’s economic struggles.
According to Ndume, cutting down the number of cabinet members would not only lower the cost of governance but also signal a more focused and efficient approach to solving national issues. By saving money through a smaller cabinet, the government could redirect those funds toward creating jobs and improving social welfare programs.
This isn’t the first time Ndume has made this suggestion. As a strong advocate for governance reforms, he believes that a leaner cabinet would show a commitment to addressing Nigeria’s economic challenges in a sustainable way.
Reducing the size of the cabinet is more than just a cost-cutting measure; it’s a step toward a more efficient government that prioritizes the needs of its people. With proper implementation, this approach could free up resources for critical areas like job creation and social development, ultimately improving the lives of Nigerians.
When asked if the President should sack more ministers, Ndume said, “I don’t want you to put me on the spot. What I’m saying is that he has made quite significant moves expected by Nigerians, but it’s not quite enough. It should be a continuous process, and it should also be an expanded process. What I mean by that is that, I don’t know how they arrived at the numbers sacked or relieved of their posts.
“Constitutionally, you have one minister from each state, and in this government, more ministers were nominated. In fact, we had the highest number.
The President himself recognized the need to reduce the cost of governance, and that means or calls for inwardly looking into the number too, because what the Constitution says is that the minimum is 37, one per state, and then one additional one.
“The President needs to at this time, look inwards to see whether we can just prune down the number. But now, he released some and brought in new ones. The number is still up there. So, it’s not a matter of it’s not a personal thing.
“It’s just maybe my own opinion, and that may make sense and contribute towards good governance. And not only that, the cost of governance should be brought down, all other agencies of government are doing the same. The focus for now, is on the presidency and the National Assembly, but it should be across board.
“There are some organizations that are not visible, but the cost implication of running those agencies is enormous, right! So I recommend pruning the system and reducing the cost of governance. This is not the first time I have cried out.
“If you look at the budget, the recurrent expenditure keeps going up, and the rate of employment is going down, so it doesn’t balance now that the President is looking around, I think he should look deep into it and reduce the cost of governance across board.”
