‘It’s campaign slush fund’, Atiku asks N’Assembly to reject Tinubu’s loan request

President Bola Tinubu asked Nigeria’s National Assembly to approve external borrowing of $20.52 billion and €1.045 billion. These are separate amounts in different currencies, so the request is not simply one dollar figure. The scale matters because borrowing creates repayment obligations for the government and future budgets.

Atiku Abubakar said the request vindicated his October 12 warning about a possible loan plan of up to $20 billion. He criticised the President for listing broad sectors without showing each project, its cost, location or contractor. He also connected his concern to the Lagos–Calabar Coastal Highway, which has been rerouted inland.

The proposal had not yet been approved in the article. Atiku urged lawmakers to publish the supporting documents and examine every project, contract, loan term and repayment obligation before deciding. He said the National Assembly should not approve a single dollar without that information.

An external loan is borrowing obtained from lenders outside a country or through international financial markets. A domestic loan is raised inside the country, often from local banks, investors or financial institutions. External loans are commonly denominated in foreign currencies, while domestic borrowing is more often denominated in the national currency. The article identifies Tinubu’s proposal as external loans in dollars and euros.

The difference affects repayment. With foreign-currency debt, the government must obtain dollars or euros to repay principal and interest. Changes in exchange rates can make those payments more expensive in naira. Domestic debt avoids that particular foreign-currency exposure, but it still carries interest and repayment costs.

The article does not name the proposed external lenders or give the loan terms. That is why Atiku demanded publication of the lenders, terms and repayment obligations, alongside each project, cost and contractor. Such information would let lawmakers assess the full financial risk before approval.

Project-level disclosure matters because a borrowing request should show what public money will fund and what benefits Nigerians should receive. Broad sectors do not reveal whether proposed projects are necessary, fairly priced or ready to implement. They also do not show whether the government can meet the debt’s repayment obligations.

Atiku pointed to the absence of project details, costs, locations and contractors. He said this was especially troubling because the Lagos–Calabar Coastal Highway had been rerouted inland. He raised the possibility that borrowed money could reach campaigners or favoured contractors through the highway, though this was an allegation and concern, not an established finding in the article.

He therefore demanded publication of every project, contract, cost, contractor, loan term and repayment obligation. He also urged rigorous scrutiny before approval. The request would give lawmakers and Nigerians a basis for checking value, due process and accountability instead of approving what he called a blank cheque.

Nigeria’s National Assembly provides legislative oversight of federal borrowing. For proposed external loans, lawmakers examine the amount, purpose, conditions and repayment obligations before granting approval. This role helps prevent the executive branch from taking on major national liabilities without public and legislative scrutiny.

In the article, President Tinubu asked the Senate to approve $20.52 billion and €1.045 billion in external loans. Atiku responded that the National Assembly should not approve any dollar until the President publishes each project, contract, cost, contractor, loan term and repayment obligation. He also said lenders must meet constitutional, statutory and due-process requirements.

Approval does not remove the need for accountability after borrowing. Atiku said he would scrutinise loans taken in the final year of Tinubu’s tenure if he became president. The article does not describe the full parliamentary procedure, but it clearly presents lawmakers’ decision as a required safeguard before the proposed borrowing proceeds.

Borrowing gives a government money today but creates obligations for later budgets. Future governments must pay interest and repay the principal. Those payments can reduce the money available for public services, maintenance and new investment. The pressure is greater when debt is large relative to government revenue.

The proposed amount is $20.52 billion and €1.045 billion in external loans. Because the borrowing is in foreign currencies, repayment can become more expensive in naira if exchange rates move against Nigeria. The eventual effect would depend on the interest rates, maturity dates, repayment schedule and the benefits produced by the projects.

The article does not provide those terms or identify the projects in detail. Atiku therefore warned that Nigerians could be saddled with more than $20 billion and €1 billion in debt without knowing its use. He demanded full disclosure so lawmakers can judge whether the borrowing strengthens Nigeria or leaves taxpayers paying for weak projects.

The article identifies the Lagos–Calabar Coastal Highway as a major infrastructure project connected to Atiku’s concerns about the proposed borrowing. It says the highway has been rerouted inland, but it does not provide its length, detailed route, construction stage or total cost. Those limits matter when interpreting the claim.

Changing a route can change the land required, engineering work, materials, access arrangements and communities affected. It can also require revised designs, contracts and budgets. If financing was arranged around an earlier route, the government may need to explain whether the loan amount, contractor responsibilities and repayment plan still match the new project.

Atiku asked whether the inland rerouting could become a channel for borrowed money to reach campaigners and favoured contractors. The article presents this as a concern, not a proven fact. He wants the government to publish the highway’s project details, costs and contractors before lawmakers approve the wider borrowing request.

A government can justify infrastructure borrowing when a project’s expected public benefits exceed its full financial and social costs. Officials normally examine demand, construction costs, maintenance needs, delivery risks and likely effects on jobs, trade, travel and economic activity. They should also test whether the government can repay the debt under difficult conditions.

For the proposed loans, that would require project-by-project evidence. Lawmakers would need each project’s location, cost, contractor, timetable, expected benefits, loan terms and repayment obligations. The Lagos–Calabar Coastal Highway illustrates why this matters: its inland rerouting may affect designs, contracts and costs, so earlier assumptions may need review.

The article says Tinubu listed broad sectors but did not identify specific projects. It does not provide economic forecasts or cost-benefit studies. Atiku therefore urged lawmakers to publish the proposal and supporting documents and subject them to rigorous scrutiny before deciding whether the borrowing serves Nigeria rather than political interests.