Super User
52,000 Nigerians migrated to UK for work, studies in 2024 – Report
New statistics from the UK Office for National Statistics reveal that Nigeria maintained its position as a major contributor to British immigration in 2024, with approximately 52,000 Nigerian nationals relocating to the country throughout the year.
The figures come amid a dramatic reduction in overall UK net migration, which plummeted by nearly half to 431,000 in the year ending December 2024, down from 860,000 the previous year—representing a decline of almost 50 percent.
Work and Study Drive Nigerian Migration
The data shows that Nigerian immigrants primarily arrived for employment and educational opportunities. Work-related visas accounted for 27,000 arrivals, while 22,000 came on study visas. The remaining 3,000 entered under various other immigration categories.
Nigeria's substantial contribution places it alongside India, Pakistan, and China as the leading sources of non-EU+ migration to the UK. Indian nationals topped the list as the most common non-EU+ immigrants during this period.
According to the ONS report, "Work and study-related immigration were the primary reasons for migration among Indian, Pakistani, and Nigerian nationals."
Demographics of New Arrivals
The migration data reveals key demographic patterns among non-EU+ immigrants. The vast majority—83 percent—fell within working age (16-64 years), with a relatively balanced gender split of 52 percent male and 48 percent female.
Children under 16 represented 16 percent of all migrants, while those over 65 accounted for just one percent of arrivals.
Factors Behind Overall Decline
While countries like Nigeria continued to send significant numbers of migrants to the UK, the broader downward trend in immigration resulted from multiple factors. Reduced arrivals on work and study visas from non-EU+ countries contributed to the decline, along with increased emigration rates.
The statistics suggest that many individuals who arrived during or shortly after the COVID-19 pandemic have since returned to their home countries, particularly those who came on study visas.
The most significant decrease occurred in work-related immigration among primary applicants, which fell by 108,000—a 49 percent year-on-year reduction. Study-related immigration dropped by 17 percent, while the number of study dependents saw the steepest decline at 86 percent.
FG earns 52 kobo from every N1 made by Dangote Cement – Aliko Dangote
Aliko Dangote, Chairman of the Dangote Group, has stated that the Federal Government earns 52 kobo in taxes from every N1 generated through the production and sale of Dangote Cement.
He made this disclosure during the 2025 Taraba International Investment Summit, held under the theme: “Unlocking Taraba’s Investment Potentials: Advancing Agriculture, Energy, Mining, and Industrialisation for Sustainable Growth and Development.”
Dangote emphasized the importance of creating an enabling environment for businesses, noting that both private and public investments benefit the government through tax revenues.
“It may surprise you to learn that the Federal Government—not even the states—earns more from our cement operations than we do. For every naira we generate, 52 kobo goes to the government,” he said.
Dangote underscored the role of taxation in funding essential services and infrastructure, stating, “We often say government has no business in business—and that may be true. But how else do they generate the revenue needed for education, healthcare, roads, and other public services? Through taxes.”
He cited the example of the United States, saying, “Have you ever heard of the American government owning oil blocks? No. Yet, they are the world’s leading oil producers. Their income comes through taxation.”
Bandits kill two soldiers, others in attacks on Benue community
Suspected bandits have killed four people, including two soldiers, in an attack on Ijaha Ikobi, a community in the Apa Local Government Area of Benue State.
A resident of the area who identified himself simply as Adakole told our correspondent that the assailants, believed to be armed herders, invaded the community on Wednesday and laid an ambush.
“The incident happened around 3:30 p.m. on Wednesday when residents began to hear sporadic gunshots within the village,” he said.
“Some soldiers who responded to a distress call ran into the ambush laid by the Fulani herdsmen. Two of them were killed.”
Adakole gave the names of the two civilian victims as Ocheje Sani and Aduba Ogboyi.
He alleged that the attackers also carted away military weapons, including two AK-47 rifles and one submachine gun.
Confirming the incident, the Chairman of Apa Local Government Area, Adam Ogwola, told journalists via telephone on Thursday that the attack occurred in the early hours of Wednesday.
“I received a call about an attack in Ikobi community. Initially, I couldn’t reach anyone there. Later, I got confirmation that two soldiers had been killed,” Ogwola said.
“This morning, the bodies of the two civilians were discovered.”
He noted that the situation in the area was relatively calm, and security had been reinforced with the deployment of more soldiers and police officers.
The chairman also confirmed that the civilian victims had been buried in accordance with local customs.
“Because of our people’s culture, we do not usually keep bodies of those who die in such tragic circumstances in the mortuary. We are in a period of hit-and-run attacks by herders. In such situations, burials typically happen within 24 hours,” he explained.
“The two civilians have been buried, while the bodies of the slain soldiers have been moved out of the community. I’m not sure if they were taken to the mortuary in Ugbokpo or Makurdi.”
Efforts to reach the acting Assistant Director, Army Public Relations, Operation Whirl Stroke, Lawal Osabo, were unsuccessful as he did not respond to calls.
Similarly, calls to the spokesperson for the Benue State Police Command, Catherine Anene, went unanswered, and messages sent to her phone were not returned.
Punch
Here’s the latest as Israel-Hamas war enters Day 595
Aid trucks enter Gaza after delays, as pressure mounts on Israel
Israel allowed 100 aid trucks carrying flour, baby food and medical equipment into the Gaza Strip on Wednesday, the Israeli military said, as UN officials reported that distribution issues had meant that no aid had so far reached people in need.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel would be open to a temporary ceasefire to enable the return of hostages. But otherwise he said it would press ahead with a military campaign to gain total control of Gaza.
After an 11-week blockade on supplies entering Gaza, the Israeli military said a total of 98 aid trucks entered on Monday and Tuesday. But even those minimal supplies have not made it to Gaza's soup kitchens, bakeries, markets and hospitals, according to aid officials and local bakeries that were standing by to receive supplies of flour.
"None of this aid - that is a very limited number of trucks - has reached the Gaza population," said Antoine Renard, country director of the World Food Programme.
The blockade has left Gazans in an increasingly desperate struggle for survival, despite growing international and domestic pressure on Israel's government, which one opposition figure said risked turning the country into a "pariah state".
Thousands of tons of food and other vital supplies are waiting near crossing points into Gaza but until it can be safely distributed, around a quarter of the population remains at risk of famine, Renard said.
"I'm here since eight in the morning, just to get one plate for six people while it is not enough for one person," said Mahmoud al-Haw, who says he often waits for up to six hours a day hoping for some lentil soup to keep his children alive.
U.N. officials said security issues had prevented the aid from moving out of the logistics hub at the Kerem Shalom crossing point but late on Wednesday there appeared some hope that supplies would move more freely.
Nahid Shahaiber, a major transport company owner, said 75 trucks of flour and over a dozen more carrying nutritional supplements and sugar were inside the southern area of Rafah and witnesses said trucks carrying flour had been seen in Deir Al-Balah in the central Gaza Strip.
Israel imposed a blockade on all supplies entering Gaza in March, saying Hamas was seizing supplies meant for civilians - a charge the group denies.
Under mounting international pressure, it has allowed aid deliveries by the U.N. and other aid groups to resume briefly until a new U.S.-backed distribution model using private contractors operating through so-called secure hubs is up and running by the end of the month. But the United Nations says the plan is not impartial or neutral, and it will not be involved.
'PARIAH STATE'
As people waited for supplies to arrive, air strikes and tank fire killed at least 50 people across the Gaza Strip on Wednesday, Palestinian health authorities said. The Israeli military said air strikes hit 115 targets, which it said included rocket launchers, tunnels and unspecified military infrastructure.
Efforts to halt the fighting have faltered, with both Hamas, which insists on a final end to the war and withdrawal of Israeli forces, and Israel, which says Hamas must disarm and leave Gaza, sticking to positions the other side rejects.
Netanyahu said an Israeli air strike this month had probably killed Hamas leader Mohammed Sinwar and he reiterated his demand for the complete demilitarization of Gaza and the exile of Hamas leaders for the war to end.
The resumption of the assault on Gaza since March, following a two-month ceasefire, has drawn condemnation from countries including Britain and Canada that have long been cautious about expressing open criticism of Israel. Even the United States, the country's most important ally, has shown signs of losing patience with Netanyahu.
Netanyahu said it was "a disgrace" that countries like Britain were sanctioning Israel instead of Hamas.
There has been growing unease within Israel meanwhile at the continuation of the war while 58 hostages remain in Gaza.
Left-wing opposition leader Yair Golan drew a furious response from the government and its supporters this week when he declared that "A sane country doesn't kill babies as a hobby" and said Israel risked becoming a "pariah state among the nations."
Golan, a former deputy commander of the Israeli military who went single-handedly to rescue victims of the Hamas attack on Israel on Oct 7, 2023, leads the left-wing Democrats, a small party with little electoral clout.
But his words, and similar comments by former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in an interview with the BBC, underscored the rift within Israel. Netanyahu dismissed the criticism, saying he was "appalled" by Golan's comments.
Opinion polls show widespread support for a ceasefire that would include the return of all the hostages, with a survey from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem this week showing 70% in favour of a deal.
But hardliners in the cabinet, some of whom argue for the complete expulsion of all Palestinians from Gaza, have insisted on continuing the war until "final victory", which would include disarming Hamas as well as the return of the hostages.
Netanyahu, trailing in the opinion polls and facing trial at home on corruption charges, which he denies, as well as an arrest warrant from the International Criminal Court, has so far sided with the hardliners.
Israel launched its campaign in Gaza in response to the Hamas attack on October 7, 2023, which killed some 1,200 people by Israeli tallies and saw 251 hostages abducted into Gaza.
The campaign has killed more than 53,600 Palestinians, according to Gaza health authorities, and devastated the coastal strip, where aid groups say signs of severe malnutrition are widespread.
Reuters
What to know after Day 1184 of Russia-Ukraine war
RUSSIAN PERSPECTIVE
Russia set on creating ‘buffer zone’ in Ukraine – Putin
The Russian military has been tasked with creating a “security buffer zone” along the border with Ukraine, Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Thursday.
The president made the remarks during a government meeting dedicated to the situation in Russia’s border regions, including Kursk, Belgorod and Bryansk. Additional measures to support their residents were also discussed.
“It has been decided to create the necessary security buffer zone along the border. Our armed forces are actively solving this task now. The enemy’s firing positions are suppressed, the work is going on,” Putin stated.
The idea to create “a certain cordon sanitaire” in Ukrainian-controlled territory along the border was first floated by Putin last March. The president said Moscow could ultimately be “forced” to create such a zone in order to protect civilians in the border regions from Ukrainian long-range strikes. Russian troops would create a “security zone that would be quite difficult for the adversary to overcome with its weapons, primarily of foreign origin,” if and “when we consider it appropriate,” Putin stated at the time.
Putin’s announcement comes in the wake of an indiscriminate Ukrainian strike on the Kursk town of Lgov that left at least 12 civilians wounded, including two children. According to interim Kursk Governor Aleksandr Khinshtein, the attack targeted an area near the Kursk-Rylsk highway where the route enters the town. Media reports indicated the strike involved at least three projectiles fired by a US-supplied HIMARS multiple rocket launcher.
Over the past two days, Kiev conducted a massive long-range drone attack even deeper into Russia. According to the Russian Defense Ministry, a total of 485 Ukrainian fixed-wing UAVs were downed across the country in the past 48 hours. At least 63 of the drones were intercepted in Moscow Region, while the largest number were stopped over Orel Region, the military said.
WESTERN PERSPECTIVE
Russia says it downs at least 159 Ukrainian drones, fires Iskander missile
Russia said on Thursday it had shot down 159 Ukrainian drones over Russian regions, including about 20 headed towards Moscow, as the war in Ukraine heated up despite major powers discussing ways to end Europe's deadliest conflict since World War Two.
U.S. President Donald Trump is pressuring Russia and Ukraine to end the more than three-year war, but the two sides remain far apart. Ukraine and its Western allies are demanding an immediate and unconditional ceasefire but Russia says certain conditions must first be met. Kyiv says those conditions are unacceptable.
While leaders talk of the prospects for peace, the war is intensifying: swarms of drones are being launched by both sides while fierce fighting is underway along key parts of the front.
Russia's defence ministry said 159 drones had been shot down over Russian regions between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. (0500-1700 GMT) on Thursday. The previous day, Russia said it shot down well over 300 Ukrainian drones.
Moscow mayor Sergei Sobyanin reported late in the evening that 17 drones had been downed over the region surrounding Moscow, which has a population of 21 million. Sobyanin had earlier reported 40 downed drones overnight.
Three Moscow airports - Domodedovo, Vnukovo and Zhukovsky - suspended flights intermittently.
Separately, Russia said on Thursday it had fired an Iskander-M missile at part of the city of Pokrov, formerly known as Ordzhonikidze, in Ukraine's Dnipropetrovsk region, destroying two Patriot missile launchers and an AN/MPQ-65 radar set.
Ukraine's air force reported damage in the Dnipropetrovsk region after an attack but did not specify the type of weapon.
The governor of Russia's western Kursk region said a Ukrainian missile strike on the town of Lgov had wounded 16 people.
The Russia-installed governor of the occupied part of Ukraine's Zaporizhzhia region said a Ukrainian strike had killed a woman and injured four children in a car.
RUSSIA REPORTS ADVANCES
Russia's defence ministry said its forces were advancing at key points along the front, and pro-Russian war bloggers said Russia had pierced Ukrainian lines between Pokrovsk and Kostiantynivka in the Donetsk region of eastern Ukraine.
The Russian defence ministry said its forces had captured the settlement of Nova Poltavka in between those two towns.
Ukraine's military made no such acknowledgement in a late evening report on the area but the popular DeepState war blog, which refers to open source reports, showed the settlement to be under Russian occupation.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy had said on Wednesday that the heaviest frontline battles were around Pokrovsk, but made no reference to any Russian advances.
Russia currently controls a little under one fifth of Ukraine and says the territory is now formally part of Russia, a position Ukraine and its European allies do not accept.
Moscow annexed Crimea in 2014. Russian forces also control almost all of Luhansk and more than 70% of the Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions, according to Russian estimates. Russia also controls a sliver of the Kharkiv region.
RT/Reuters
Ishaq Oloyede’s cross - Azu Ishiekwene
The last time a public official wept on national TV, Nigerians regretted offering her towels instead of buckets to collect her tears. She was acting, but we didn’t know it.
Diezani Allison-Madueke had just been appointed Minister of Transport and went on a tour to assess some major roads. At the Benin end of the Lagos-Benin highway, she broke down and wept. She was seeing for the first time, outside her bubble, what Nigerians knew and endured daily: poor, hazardous roads.
Her tears changed nothing. She left the roads in a worse state than she found them, but Nigeria being Nigeria, she went on to become the Minister for Petroleum Resources and subsequently left the place in a more disastrous condition than Nigerian roads.
On May 15, the Registrar of the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB), Ishaq Oloyede, wept on national TV for a different reason. As a result of human negligence, the results of the 2025 UTME examination went horribly wrong, affecting 379,997 out of the 1.9 million students who took the exam. It was not a system glitch as widely reported. Some individuals responsible for patching or updating the servers were negligent, leading to a disastrous outcome.
Paying the price
The grief lies in the details. For instance, 19-year-old Faith Opesusi Timileyin, who was re-sitting the exam, hoping to study microbiology if she could improve on the 193 out of 400 she scored last year, took her own life by ingesting poison. She could not bear the shame of failing again. The same echoes of embarrassment and distress resonated across the country as thousands of young people, who made sacrifices and braved difficult conditions to take the exam, now contemplate their fate and what could have been.
Yet, Nigerians, despite being jaded by years of disappointment with incompetent public officials, can sense the difference between Diezani’s crocodile tears and Oloyede’s misery. One was a con artist; the other, the victim of “horrible, but not unexampled error,” as Farooq Kperogi noted in his column on Saturday.
Remaking of JAMB
Oloyede’s JAMB is not JAMB as it was. One of the biggest dramas in the institution’s 47-year history unfolded two years after he was appointed registrar, following his exceptional record as vice-chancellor of the University of Ilorin. JAMB introduced computerised examinations in 2014, but the system, still in its infancy at the time, was marred by delays, confusion, and scratch-card fraud.
Oloyede ordered an investigation, which found that the place was infested with snakes, including boa constrictors, that had allegedly swallowed millions of naira from the sale of scratch cards, except that the snakes were human beings. One Philomina Chieshe, a clerk at JAMB’s Benue State office, swallowed N36 million from the sale of scratch cards and told investigators and the court that it was indeed a snake that had mysteriously devoured the money.
Killing the snakes
Seven years after she was arraigned, neither Chieshe nor any of the reptiles in the scratch-card hole have been held accountable for the fraud. Apart from swallowing N36 million, which was equivalent to $100,000 at the time, the snakes also appear to have swallowed the courts and the prosecutors.
I have criticised JAMB in the past for several reasons, mainly because I still believe that a decentralised placement system, as practised in pre-1978 Nigeria, the US, and South Korea, works better.
Yet, whatever the inadequacies of JAMB, the board has, especially under Oloyede's leadership in the last nine years, transformed from a snake-infested wasteland of corruption and mediocrity into one of Nigeria’s most responsive and better-run public institutions.
Fresh air
In a country where lawmakers routinely inflate the appropriation bill by billions of naira, and ministries and government departments are broke, unimaginative and opaque, Oloyede is a breath of fresh air. He has remitted over N55 billion to the federal treasury, compared to less than N60 million remitted in the 38 years preceding his tenure.
But it’s not just about the money. To promote openness, accountability, and inclusiveness on the board, he expanded the decision-making process to include independents and other professionals in monitoring and evaluating the board’s activities, particularly the UTME exam. Still, despite our best efforts, bad things happen.
‘Not unexampled’
The 2025 UTME disruption was a horrible mishap. Still, it’s not without recent examples, one from Oxford University in 2023 and the other from the 2025 US SAT exams, both of which were cited in Kperogi’s article. There was a particularly heart-rending debacle in September 2023 when the Federation of the Royal Colleges of Physicians of the UK made a catastrophic error in the Part 2 written results of the postgraduate medical diploma exam.
Two hundred and twenty-two doctors were informed that they had passed when in fact they had failed, while 61 were told they had failed despite passing. Imagine the horror of the patients who may have been treated by “failed” doctors, not to mention the distress of those who passed but were told they failed, or the anguish of those who made progress yet were instructed to re-sit the exam.
To resign or not?
After taking responsibility for the error, Oloyede told the press that he was prepared to resign, but was persuaded that his resignation would compound rather than solve the problem. I agree. I do not share the view that all those calling for his resignation are necessarily out to settle personal scores, even though this may be correct in some instances, especially among politicians who have decided to ethnicise the matter.
The registrar bears a responsibility to the memory of the candidate who died, to the thousands of hard-working candidates who gave their best in the exam, and to the reputation he has established as an exemplary public servant to reform the system and use the lessons from this tragic episode to enhance the processes and outcomes of future exams.
Wake-up call
Parents must also play a role. We exaggerate the significance of UTME results beyond their true value, placing unnecessary pressure on candidates. Under the current system, most universities and institutions of higher learning offer admission based on the weighted average of three examination results. While the UTME result constitutes 50 per cent of the final score, the WASSCE or O/Level results and post-UTME exams, if conducted, make up the remaining 50 per cent.
Unfortunately, we have constructed a dangerous illusion that everything hinges on performance at JAMB, resulting in a frantic quest for JAMB success that now haunts us. We may never know if Faith would have taken her own life had she realised that a low JAMB score alone does not necessarily signify the end of the road to admission.
Fall to rise
Oloyede’s tears may seem insufficient to assuage a nation in grief, but he has demonstrated, over the last nine years and long before he became registrar, that he does not take his job lightly. One mishap should not define his tenure. When the ongoing investigation is complete and the house cleaning done, a sceptical public must know the steps taken to prevent a repeat.
** Ishiekwene is Editor-in-Chief of LEADERSHIP and author of the book, Writing for Media and Monetising It.
The strongest leaders avoid these 5 management mistakes
Stefan Grigorov
Key Takeaways
- People, not tools, drive innovation in the age of AI.
- Consensus and emotional intelligence unlock organizational resilience and creativity.
- Adaptive, value-driven leadership builds purpose-aligned, future-ready teams.
In an era of technological disruption and economic uncertainty, a 2024 Harvard Business Review research reveals that the "war for talent" continues to rage, with 91.9% of executives citing cultural obstacles as the greatest barrier to organizational transformation.
Through years of being a social entrepreneur and COO of a custom software company, I've learned that the most successful organizationsare rarely built by individual efforts alone, but rather by leaders who recognize that people are their greatest asset.
Leaders should not be just decision-makers, but cultivators of talent, innovation and collective growth. Leadership, therefore, should become less about commanding and more about connecting and creating environments where human potential can truly flourish.
Here are five mistakes leaders must avoid in 2025.
1. Neglecting human development
When AI first started transforming our industry, I watched talented professionals worry about their future. The fear wasn't just about job security — it was about relevance. On the contrary, although a McKinsey report reveals that 92% of companies plan to increase AI investments, only 1% consider their implementation truly mature.
The greatest asset of any company is not its technology, but its people. Leadership in the age of AI is less about implementing the latest tools — it's more about creating environments where human potential can thrive. Innovative companies are carefully choosing how to integrate AI, balancing technological capabilities with human expertise. They recognize that some roles may be transformed or replaced, while technological tools will replace others.
Technology works best as a partner that enhances human creativity and problem-solving. The goal is not to avoid technological change but to strategically use it, allowing both human potential and tools to drive organizational growth together.
2. Failing to build a consensus-driven culture
Bringing diverse perspectives together is increasingly valuable in today's organizations. While traditional top-down approaches work in some situations, collaborative methods often spark more innovation. Most teams benefit from finding a good balance between making timely decisions and including different viewpoints.
Consensus-driven cultures require more than just occasional team meetings. They require structured processes that systematically encourage dialogue, active listening and collective decision-making through cross-functional workshops, feedback channels and more.
The strength of an organization often lies in its ability to transform different viewpoints into innovative solutions, turning diverse perspectives from potential conflict into a source of creativity and strategic insight.
3. Ignoring value alignment
Values aren't just words on a wall — they're the heartbeat of an organization. Keeping these principles active in daily decisions takes conscious effort.
Creating real value alignment is about more than good intentions. It's a deliberate, ongoing process of bringing your beliefs into everyday decisions. This means making choices that genuinely reflect your organization's core commitments — whether that's environmental sustainability, social impact or a deep investment in continuous learning. Successful organizations often take time to thoughtfully apply their values to everyday situations and decisions.
The key is authenticity. When an organization's actions consistently reflect its stated beliefs, something powerful happens. Employees become more than just workers—they become believers. Customers transform from transactions to loyal supporters and ambassadors. And the organization itself becomes more than a business—it becomes a community with a shared purpose.
4. Underestimating adaptive leadership
The complexity of modern organizations demands more than traditional leadership approaches. Adaptive leadership, a framework developed by Harvard scholars, recognizes that today's most pressing challenges can't all be solved with existing knowledge. I've watched industries transform faster in the past five years than in the previous two decades, meaning that leadership now is about guiding organizations through unprecedented change.
This approach recognizes two types of challenges: routine problems with known solutions, and complex issues that require fresh thinking. Good leadership involves creating an environment where teams can solve problems together rather than expecting leaders to have all the answers. Effective teams develop the ability to adapt quickly when facing unexpected situations.
5. Overlooking emotional intelligence
In a world where AI can handle more technical tasks, human connection has become our most valuable currency. I've seen brilliant teams fall apart not because of technical challenges, but because they failed at communicating and understanding each other.
Emotional intelligence isn't a soft skill — it's the foundation of how we work together. It means creating spaces where people feel safe to share ideas, where differences are seen as strengths and where success is measured not just by numbers, but by how we treat each other. The most powerful teams are those that know how to bring out the best in each other.
Entrepreneur
N’assembly padded 2025 budget with projects worth N6.9trn - BudgIT
BudgIT, a civic tech non-profit organisation, has uncovered 11,122 projects valued at N6.93 trillion inserted by the national assembly into the budget.
The organisation, in a statement posted on its social media platform on Tuesday, said the practice, which began as an “isolated irregularities has, over the years, evolved into a deeply entrenched culture of exploitation and abuse by top-ranking members of the national assembly”.
On February 28, the president signed the N54.99 trillion 2025 appropriation bill into law, marking a 99.96 percent increase from the 2024 budget of N27.5 trillion.
The national assembly approved the bill on February 13, after revisions to Tinubu’s initial budget proposal of N49.7 trillion.
The key breakdown of the 2025 budget includes a total expenditure of N54.99 trillion, statutory transfers of N3.65 trillion, and a recurrent (non-debt) expenditure of N13.64 trillion.
“Our analysis reveals that 238 projects valued above N5 billion each, with a cumulative value of N2.29 trillion, were inserted with little to no justification,” BudgIT said.
“984 projects worth N1.71 trillion and 1,119 projects within the range of N500 million to N1 billion, totalling N641.38 billion, were indiscriminately inserted, raising questions about their relevance and alignment with national priorities.
“These insertions, far from promoting development, appear tailored to satisfy narrow political interests and personal gains rather than the citizens’ interests.
“A closer look shows that 3,573 projects worth N653.19 billion are assigned directly to federal constituencies and 1,972 projects worth N444.04 billion to senatorial districts.
“Categorically, some of the most glaring anomalies include: 1,477 streetlight projects worth N393.29 billion; 538 boreholes totalling N114.53 billion; 2,122 ICT projects valued at N505.79 billion; and N6.74 billion earmarked for ‘empowerment of traditional rulers’.”
BudgIT further said 39 percent of all insertions, such as 4,371 projects worth N1.72 trillion, were forced into the ministry of agriculture’s budget, inflating its capital allocation from N242.5 billion to N1.95 trillion.
“The Ministries of Science and Technology and Budget and Economic Planning also saw bloated allocations of N994.98 billion and N1.1 trillion, respectively, from insertions alone,” the firm said.
“Even more concerning is the targeted misuse of agencies like the Nigerian Building and Road Research Institute (Lagos) and the Federal Cooperative College, Oji River, as dumping grounds for politically motivated projects.
“These agencies lack the technical capacity to execute such projects, leading to rampant underperformance and waste. For example, the Federal Cooperative College, Oji River, a training institution, was saddled with N3 billion for utility vehicles to support farmers and distribution agents; N1.5 billion for rural electrification in Rivers State; and N1 billion for solar street lights in Enugu State.
“These are examples of agencies operating outside their mandates, managing projects unrelated to their statutory functions, and adding zero value to national development.”
‘PRESIDENCY HAS REMAINED SILENT’
Despite the findings, BudgIT said the presidency has remained “conspicuously silent”.
It added that no response was received from any of the institutions after several letters, and not a single institution has taken responsibility for the anomalies
BudgIT, therefore, called on the president to “exercise stronger executive leadership and reform the budgeting process to ensure alignment with the medium-term national development plan (2021-2025) and other national priorities”.
“We urge the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice to seek a constitutional interpretation from the Supreme Court regarding the extent of the National Assembly’s appropriation powers, particularly its authority to unilaterally introduce new capital projects without Executive concurrence,” the organisation said.
“We hope that the anticorruption agencies, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Independent Corrupt Practices Commission (ICPC), will also take action to track these projects and ensure Nigeria gets value for money.
“We also call on citizens, the media, civil society organisations, and the development community to speak out and demand reform.
“This is not merely about financial mismanagement, it is a matter of justice, equity, and the future of accountable governance in Nigeria.”
BudgIT said it is imperative that the 2025 budget “serve the interests of the Nigerian people, not a privileged few”.
The Cable
Elon Musk, in this interview with Bloomberg, discusses wide range of hot botton issues. Enjoy
Elon Musk needs little introduction. His acumen has transformed the business of electric vehicles and getting to space, and he has more recently been at the right hand of US President Donald Trump. Whether at campaign rallies, on foreign trips, in the Oval Office or cutting federal government spending through his Department of Government Efficiency, Musk’s influence is everywhere.
But the entrepreneur’s iconoclasm has also made him a magnet for controversy. Tesla has experienced a pronounced backlash — you might have seen the stickers: “I bought this before we knew Elon was crazy” — and Bill Gates recently accused Musk of being responsible for killing children by pushing massive cuts to US foreign aid. To get Musk’s reactions to as many of these points as possible, we sat down (virtually) at the Qatar Economic Forum on May 20. Here’s our conversation, lightly edited for clarity.
Hello everyone and Elon Musk. Welcome to the Qatar Economic Forum. How are you?
Thank you for having me. I’m fine. How are you?
Very well, thank you, and very pleased to have you with us. You know, among those here in the audience in Doha are people who have backed you financially over the years since you last spoke here in 2022. A lot has changed in your life. You are not only running multiple companies — you were doing that then — but now you also have a role in government 1. So first of all, I hope you won’t mind if from time to time I have to move you from one topic to another because we have a lot to cover in the time we have.
1Musk is a designated “special government employee” (SGE)–a label that allows him to work at a paid or unpaid government job for 130 days each year. His status as an SGE is expected to run out on May 31.
Well, let’s start then with the fact that you now have this combination of being a CEO and having a role as a government advisor. Tell me about your week. How does it work? What’s the split of your time?
Well, I travel a lot. So I was in Silicon Valley yesterday morning. I was in LA yesterday evening. I’m in Austin right now. I’ll be in DC tomorrow. I’ll be there after having dinner with the president tomorrow night, I believe. And then a whole bunch of cabinet secretary meetings and then back to Silicon Valley on Thursday night.
But I mean the balance of your time, is it—
Well, clearly it’s a lot, but is it still the case, as you said a while ago, that it’s about one to two days a week on your government work 2?
2 During a Tesla earnings call in April, Musk said he would spend “a day or two a week on government matters” but would also continue working with the US government for “the remainder of the president’s term, just to make sure that the waste and fraud that we stop does not come roaring back.”
And what does that mean for your corporate life? Because if we start with Tesla, the company has suffered, in recent months, what you’ve called blowback. So what is your plan for turning around the declining sales picture and by what stage do you think you’re going to be able to turn it around?
Oh, it’s already turned around.
Give me some evidence for that. I’ve just been looking at the sales figures for Europe in April, which show very significant declines in the big markets 3.
3 One example of this decline: Just 512 new Teslas were registered in the UK in April, down 62% from a year earlier. Denmark, the Netherlands and Sweden each had even larger year-over-year declines.
Europe is our weakest market. We’re strong everywhere else. So now our sales are doing well at this point. We don’t anticipate any meaningful sales shortfall and obviously the stock market recognizes that, since we’re now back over a trillion dollars in market cap. So clearly the market is aware of the situation. So it’s already turned around.
But sales are still down compared to this time last year.
Yes, but that’s true of all manufacturers. There’s no exceptions 4.
4 The picture is more complex than this. European car sales began to grow in March after a weak start to the year, with EV sales in the region surging 24%. But the growth in EV sales didn’t extend to Tesla, which saw new registrations fall 28% in Europe in March. During an earnings call in May, Musk said first quarters are “usually the worst quarter of the year because people don’t want to go buy a car in the middle of winter during a blizzard.”
Does that mean that you are not going to be able—
The European market is quite weak
Okay, but you would acknowledge, wouldn’t you, that what you are facing — let’s just take it as Europe — what you are facing is a significant problem. Tesla was an incredibly aspirational brand, people identified with it, saw it as being at the forefront of the climate crisis. And now people are driving around with stickers in their cars saying, “I bought this before we knew Elon was crazy.”
And that there are also people who are buying it because Elon’s crazy or however they may view it. So yes, we’ve lost some sales paths on the left, but we’ve gained them on the right. The sales numbers at this point are strong and we see no problem with demand.
And I mean, you, can just look at the stock price. If you want the best inside information, the stock market analysts have that. And the stock wouldn’t be trading near all-time highs if it was not, if things weren’t in good shape. They’re fine. Don’t worry about it.
Okay, I was citing sales figures rather than share price. Well, tell me then, how committed you are to Tesla. Do you see yourself and are you committed to still being the chief executive of Tesla in five years’time?
No doubt about that at all.
I can’t be CEO if I’m dead. So there’s a slight amount of—
Does that mean that the value of your pay doesn’t have any bearing on your decision?
Well that’s not really a subject for discussion in this forum. I think obviously there should be compensation for — if something incredible is done, that compensation should match that, something incredible was done. But I’m confident that whatever some activist posing as a judge in Delaware happens to do will not affect the future compensation 5.
5 There’s no shortage of reporting about Judge Kathleen McCormick’s decision, for which she gave multiple reasons in a second ruling last December. Delaware is the most popular state for US corporations due to a well-developed set of corporate-governance laws and 125 years of case law, but after his legal setbacks there, Musk moved SpaceX’s incorporation to Texas.
This is the judge who twice struck down the $56 billion pay package that was awarded to you?
Not a judge. Not a judge. The activist who is cosplaying a judge in a Halloween costume.
Okay, that’s your characterization. On the current value of stock options, I think the value of that pay package stands at about $100 billion. Are you saying you are relaxed about the value of your future pay package? Your decision to be committed to Tesla for the next five years, as long as you are still with us on this planet, is completely independent of pay?
It’s not independent? So pay is a relevant factor then to your commitment to Tesla.
Sufficient voting control such that I cannot be ousted by activist investors is what matters to me. And I’ve said this publicly many times, but let’s not have this whole thing be a discussion of my alleged pay. It’s not a money thing. It’s a reasonable-control thing over the future of the company, especially if we’re building millions, potentially billions of humanoid robots 6.
6 Musk often speaks of Tesla’s Optimus robots, including in Saudi Arabia last week, where he said one had danced for President Trump and the Saudi Crown Prince. He has big plans for these, imagining them in roles from getting groceries and serving drinks to being a friend to their owners. It’s a major ambition, but when the robots have been publicly displayed, there has sometimes been a level of human control that wasn’t fully transparent at the time.
I can’t be sitting there and wondering about getting tossed out for political reasons by activists. That would be unacceptable. That’s all that matters.
Well, one question before we move on to other companies, which is that I wonder if some of what has happened to Tesla in the last few months, did you take it personally?
And did it make you regret any of it or think twice about your political endeavors?
I did what needed to be done. The violent antibody reaction — I’m not someone who’s ever committed violence. And yet, massive violence was committed against my companies 7. Massive violence was threatened against me. Who are these people? Why would they do that?
How wrong can they be? They’re on the wrong side of history, and that’s an evil thing to do, to go and damage some poor, innocent person’s car, to threaten to kill me. What’s wrong with these people? I’ve not harmed anyone, so something needs to be done about them. And a number of them are going to prison and they deserve it. And more will.
You’re referring to the attacks on Tesla showrooms, but I think—
Well, it’s— [going] into showrooms and burning down cars is unacceptable.
Those people will go to prison and the people that funded them and organized them will also go to prison. Don’t worry.
But wouldn’t you acknowledge that some of the people who turned against Tesla in Europe were upset at your politics and very few of them would’ve been violent in any way; they just objected to what they saw you say or do politically.
It’s certainly fine to object to political things, but it’s not fine to resort to violence and hanging someone in effigy and death threats. That’s obviously not okay. You know, that’s absurd. That is in no way justifiable at all in any way, shape or form. And, some of the, legacy media nonetheless have sought to justify it, which is unconscionable. Shame on them.
Elon Musk on Tesla, Starlink, Protests, Politics, AI
Okay. Let’s talk about your other companies in other business areas. SpaceX — I saw that you said in a speech at the West Point Military Academy recently that the future of warfare is AI and drones, and obviously defense is an increasingly booming sector with the state of the world at the moment. Do you see SpaceX moving into weaponized drones?
[Laughs] You certainly ask interesting questions that are impossible to answer. So no, SpaceX is, it’s a space launch leader. So SpaceX doesn’t do drones. SpaceX builds rockets, satellites and internet terminals. So SpaceX has a very dominant position in space launch. Of the mass launches to orbit this year, SpaceX will probably do 90%.
China will do half of the remaining amount — so 5% — and the rest of the world, including the rest of the US, will do about 5%. So SpaceX will do about 10 times as much as the rest of the world combined, or 20 times as much as China… and China is doing actually a very impressive job.
The reason for this is that we’re putting into orbit the largest satellite constellation the world has ever seen 8 by far. So I think at this point maybe approaching 80% of all active satellites in orbit are SpaceX. And they’re providing high-bandwidth global connectivity throughout the world. In fact, this connection is on a SpaceX connection. So I think this is a very good thing, because it means that we can provide low-cost, high-bandwidth internet to parts of the world that don’t have it, or [where] it’s very expensive. And I think the single biggest thing you can do to lift people out of poverty and help them is giving them an internet connection.
8 This world of satellite constellations is immense, and growing — Starlink alone accounts for more than 6,000 of them. It’s worth taking in its scale. Have a look at this explanation and the chart showing the big players in this new frontier.
Because once you have the internet connection, you can learn anything for free on the internet and you can also sell your goods and services to the global market. And once you have knowledge of the internet and the ability to engage in commerce, this is going to greatly improve quality of life for people throughout the world, and it has.
And I’d just like to thank anyone in the audience who may have been helpful with Starlink and getting it approved in their country. I think it’s doing a lot of good in the countries that have approved it, which is, I think at this point, 130 countries are very happy with it.
I don’t currently anticipate SpaceX getting into the weapons business. That’s certainly not an aspiration. We’re frequently asked to do weapons programs, but we have thus far declined.
Do you envisage SpaceX or indeed Starlink as a separate entity publicly listing in the near future or at all?
It’s possible that Starlink may go public at some point in the future 9.
9 SpaceX executives have hinted over the years at the possibility of a Starlink IPO. Gwynne Shotwell, the company’s chief operating officer, first floated the idea of a spinoff for Starlink in 2020. But Musk has said in the past that it doesn’t make sense to take the initiative public until its revenue flow is more predictable.
What would be the timeframe?
I’m in no rush to go public. Going public is I guess a way to, you know, potentially make more money, but at the expense of a lot of public-company overhead and inevitably a whole bunch of lawsuits, which are very annoying.
So really something needs to be done about the shareholder derivative lawsuits in the US, because it allows plaintiffs’ law firms who don’t represent the shareholders to pretend that they represent the shareholders by getting a puppet plaintiff with a few shares to initiate a massive lawsuit against the company.
And the irony being — the extreme irony — that even if the class they purport to represent were to vote that they don’t want the lawsuit, the lawsuit will still continue. So how can it be a class action representing a class if the class were against it? And that’s the bizarre situation we’ve got in the US. It’s in dire need of reform. And as anyone who’s run a public company has experienced this, it’s an absurd situation that needs to change.
Well, do you think Donald Trump might change it? You’ve certainly got his ear, I imagine that you’ve put this to him. Is this something you’re trying to change before any Starlink IPO?
Well, it would need a law to be passed. But the trouble being that you need 60 Senate votes and the Democrats will vote against it. The plaintiffs’ bar is, I believe, the second-largest contributor to the Democratic party. That’s the issue.
At the state level this can be solved. And I should say, Texas recently passed a law which, at least on the state level, made it much more reasonable because you have to get at least one in 33 shareholders to agree that they are part of a class of shareholders. Three percent, okay. This will really help with frivolous lawsuits.
Okay. Let’s talk about AI, which is in so many of your businesses and in all our worlds in different ways. It’s one of the big changes, the development of generative AI, since you last spoke to this forum three years ago. You’re in this space, of course, with Grok, which almost everyone will know.
You co-founded OpenAI and then left, and you obviously got into a legal battle with OpenAI and Sam Altman. I wonder if you could say something about the status of that, because you were together in Saudi Arabia with the president last week, with Sam Altman—
In the same place at the same time—
I was with the president, Sam was in the neighborhood.
Okay. So does that mean you are pushing ahead with the lawsuit against OpenAI 10?
10 There’s a long history to this! Elon Musk was a co-founder of OpenAI and is among those objecting to it changing into a for-profit business. Open AI has partly gone back on those plans, but it’s also countersuing. And we now know there was no rapprochement behind the scenes in Saudi Arabia.
Yes but — so look, I came up with the name OpenAI as open source, and as a nonprofit. And I funded OpenAI for the first roughly $50 million. And it was intended to be a nonprofit open-source company. And now they’re trying to change that for their own financial benefit into a for-profit company that is closed-source. So this would be like, let’s say you funded a nonprofit to help preserve the Amazon rainforest, but instead of doing that, they became a lumber company, chopped down the forest and sold the wood. You’d be like, ‘Wait a second. That’s not what I funded.’ That’s OpenAI.
They’ve made some changes to their corporate structure though, haven’t they? Since then, in recognition of what you’ve said.
No, that’s just what they told the media.
They have partly walked back their plan to restructure the business. I guess that’s made no difference to how you feel about it. So you’re determined to see them in court?
Okay, well that’s certainly going be one to watch. I also wanted to ask you about AI and regulation, because when you were here last talking to John Micklethwait, you had some pretty strong words about the risk that AI poses, and you said that you really felt what the US was missing was a federal AI regulator, something along the lines of the Food and Drug Administration or the Federal Aviation Administration. Now you are clearly in a zone where you are more on the cutting-regulation side than wanting new regulators. So has your view changed on the need for an AI regulator?
Well, it’s not that I don’t think there should be regulators 11. You can think of regulators like referees on the field in sports. There should be some number of referees, but you shouldn’t have so many referees that you can’t kick the ball without hitting one. So in most fields in the US, the regulatory burden has grown over time to the point where it’s like having more referees than players on the field.
11 So the background. Musk’s words at the Qatar Economic Forum in 2022were, “I think there ought to be an AI regulatory agency that oversees artificial intelligence for the public good. And I think that for anything where there is a risk to the public, whether that’s, say, the Food and Drug Administration or Federal Aviation Administration or the [Federal] Communications Commission, whether it’s a public risk or a public good at stake, it’s good to have a sort of government referee and a regulatory body. And I think we should have that for AI, and we don’t currently.” Hence my question.
This is a natural consequence of an extended period of prosperity. It’s very important to appreciate this. This has happened throughout history. When you have an extended period of prosperity with no existential war, there’s no cleansing function for unnecessary laws and regulations 12. So what happens is that every year, more laws and more regulations are passed because, you know, legislators are going to legislate, regulators are going to regulate, and you’ll get this steady pile of more and more laws and regulations over time until everything is illegal.
12 Musk is not the first to claim that regulations build up in the absence of war. In his 1982 book The Rise and Decline of Nations, political economist Mancur Olson made a similar case, arguing that Japan and Germany were growing faster than the US and the UK because World War II had the side effect of sweeping away interest groups that lobbied for carve-outs and favorable regulations. In Trump’s first term, he attempted to implement a “two-for-one” policy, whereby federal agencies needed to identify two rules they’d consider rescinding for every new “significant” rule. This time around, Trump signed an executive order in January requiring 10 rules repealed for every new one.
Let me give you an example of a truly absurd situation: Under the Biden administration, SpaceX was sued for not hiring asylum seekers in the US. Now the problem is it’s actually illegal for SpaceX under ITAR — International Traffic and Arms Regulations — to hire anyone who is not a permanent resident of the United States, the premise being that they’ll take advanced rocket technology and return to their home country if they’re not a permanent resident.
So we’re simultaneously in a situation where it’s illegal [not] to hire asylum seekers and it is also illegal to hire asylum seekers. And Biden’s Department of Justice chose to prosecute us despite both paths being illegal. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
But my question was specifically about a regulator for AI, which you said three years ago was needed, and you said, we need to be proactive on the regulation of AI rather than reactive. Have you changed your mind on that?
What? No, of course not. What I’m saying is that there should be some referees on the field, a few referees, but you shouldn’t have a field jam-packed with referees, such that you could not kick a ball in any direction without hitting one.
So the fields that have been around for a long time, such as automotive, aerospace, you know, the sort of food and drug industries, are overregulated. But the new fields, like artificial intelligence, are under-regulated. In fact, there is no regulator at all.
So there should be? Do you still think that?
Yes. I’m simply saying, which I think is just basic common sense, that you want to have at least a few referees in the field. You don’t want to have an army of referees. But you want to have a few referees on any given field, in any given sport, or even any given arena or industrial arena to ensure that public safety is taken care of. So there’s a proper number of referees. Like I said, it’s actually very easy to visualize this when compared to sports. If the whole field is packed with referees, that would look absurd. But if there were no referees at all, your game’s not going to be as good.
Okay, so let’s then talk about your new world, your role advising the government. You are in this unique and unprecedented position of having billions of dollars’ worth of contracts with the federal government yourself, mostly through SpaceX, and also now an insider’s knowledge of it because of DOGE. Can you see that there is a conflict of interest or a potential conflict of interest in broad terms, just through that very fact 13?
13 It’s worth reading this January piece from Bloomberg on the subject, which includes the view from Kathleen Clark, a law professor at Washington University of St. Louis who studies government ethics. She thinks this is akin to Musk having the “keys to the candy store” because of access to government data that could include trade secrets and enforcement actions against his own companies and competitors: “If I were a competitor to Musk in any industry, I’d be really worried about him having this kind of head start,” Clark says. But Musk is emphasizing transparency and the lack of accusations of conflict thus far.
I don’t think so, actually. There have been many advisors throughout history in the US government and others who have had economic interests. I’m simply an advisor, I don’t have a formal power. And that’s it. A president can choose to accept my advice or not. And that’s how it goes. If there’s a single contract that any of my companies have received that people think was somehow not awarded improperly, it would immediately be front-page news, to say the least. And if I didn’t mention it, certainly my competitors would. So if you’re not seeing that, then clearly there’s not a conflict of interest.
There’s another way, though, to look at it: that, for example, you have many competitors, whether it’s companies like Boeing or companies who would like to do more of the kind of work you do for NASA — Blue Origin, Rocket Lab. And because DOGE is in every federal government department, you or people who work for DOGE — and you are the driving force behind it — have an insight into those companies’ affairs and those companies’ relationships with the federal government.
No. All we do is we review the organization to see if the organization has departments that are no longer relevant. And then, are the contracts that are being awarded good value for money? In fact, frankly, the bar is not particularly high. Is there any value for money in a contract? And if there isn’t, then we make recommendations to the secretary.
The secretary can then choose to take those actions or not take those actions. And that’s it. And then any action that is a function of DOGE is posted to the DOGE website, doge.gov or at the DOGE handle on the X platform. So it’s complete transparency. And I’ve not seen any case where, to the best of my knowledge, there’s even been an accusation of conflict. Because it is completely and utterly transparent.
And what about the international dimension? Now let’s think about Starlink. Starlink is obviously a very, very good internet service. It’s sought after all over the world. It’s critical to the frontline in Ukraine. It has also had more contracts coming its way, and there is some evidence that [countries] are allowing access to it because they want to be close to the Trump administration and send the right signal. So Bloomberg broke news today that the South African government is working around the rules on Black ownership in order to allow Starlink in, and that is being done on the eve of the visit that President Ramaphosa is going to make to the White House.
Do you recognize that as a conflict of interest?
No, of course not. First of all, you should be questioning, why are there racist laws in South Africa? That’s the first problem. That’s what you should be attacking. It’s improper for there be racist laws in South Africa. The whole idea with what Nelson Mandela – who was a great man – proposed was that all races should be on an equal footing in South Africa 14.
14 The Bloomberg story from South Africa that I mentioned in the question provides background context on the country’s Black economic empowerment laws. It also includes recent official statistics showing that today, White South Africans earn on average five times what Black citizens do.
That’s the right thing to do, not to replace one set of racist laws with another set of racist laws, which is utterly wrong and improper. So that’s the deal, that all races should be treated equally. And there should be no preference given to one or the other. Whereas there are now 140 laws in South Africa that basically give strong preference to if you’re a Black South African and not otherwise. And so now I’m in this absurd situation where I was born in South Africa but cannot get a license to operate in Starlink because I’m not Black.
Well, it looks like that—
Does that seem right to you?
It looks like that’s about to change.
I just asked you a question. Please answer. Does that seem right to you?
Well, those rules were designed to—
Does that seem right to you, yes or no?
Those rules were designed to bring about an era of more economic equality in South Africa, and it looks like the government has found a way around those rules for you.
This is your interview. Everyone wants to hear from you.
I asked you a question, yes or no?
[It’s] not for me to answer. I have got a question for you about your government work though, in the amount of savings.
Why do you like racist laws?
This is not for me to answer. Come on. Now, you wouldn’t be trying to dodge a question?
No, you have to answer the question. You answer mine.
I’m sure you can have that conversation directly with the South African government, if you want to. I want to ask you about the total—
I can’t believe it. That’s not good.
I want to ask you about the total amount—
Why do you like racist laws?
I want to ask you about the total amount that you’re planning to save through DOGE’s work. Before the election, you said it was going to be at least $2 trillion. The number currently on doge.gov is $170 billion. That’s a big change. What happened to the $2 trillion?
Do you expect it to happen immediately?
Well, is it going to happen? Because DOGE is supposed to run until July 2026.
I mean, your question is absurd in its fundamental premise. Are you assuming that in one day, you know, within a few months, an instant $2 trillion is saved?
No, I’m not at all. I’m just asking, is that still your aim then? Is it still your aim to get to $2 trillion?
Have we not made good progress given the amount of time?
That’s exactly what I’m asking. So is it still your aim to go from $170 billion to $2 trillion?
The ability of DOGE to operate is a function of whether the government, and this includes Congress, is willing to take our advice. We’re not the dictators of the government, we are the advisors. And so we can advise. And the progress we’ve made thus far, I think is incredible. The DOGE team has done incredible work. But the magnitude of the savings is proportionate to the support we get from Congress, and from the executive branch of the government in general.
So we’re not the dictators, we are the advisors. But thus far for advisors, we’ve – the DOGE team, to their credit, has made incredible progress.
You’ve talked about $4 billion a day being saved, but that—
And I think everyone can agree that combating waste and inefficiency in government is a very good thing. But if you add that up, it’s not going to get to $2 trillion over the lifetime of DOGE.
The $4 billion a day, if DOGE is going to run till next July, is not going to get you to $2 trillion. But you still say it’s your aim, so we’ll take that as read.
I mean, I feel you’re somewhat trapped in the NPC dialogue tree 15 of a traditional journalist. So it is difficult when I’m conversing with someone who’s trapped in the NPC tree of a conventional journalist because it’s like talking to a computer.
15 This is a first for me in a conversation of this kind! The term NPC stands for “non-player character” and means those in a video game who are not controlled by the players and therefore engage in repetitive behavior rather than original thought. In journalism however, we tend to ask the same question or a version of the same question again when there’s no answer the first time.
So DOGE is an advisory group. We are doing the best we can, as an advisory group. The progress made thus far as an advisory group is excellent. I don’t think any advisory group has done better in the history of advisory groups of the government. Now, we do not make the laws nor do we control the judiciary, nor do we control the executive branch. We are simply advisors. In that context, we’re doing very well. We cannot take action beyond that because we’re not some sort of imperial dictator of the government. There are three branches of the government that are to some degree opposed to that level of cost savings.
But nonetheless, let’s not criticize whether there’s $2 trillion and instead look at the fact that $160 billion has been saved and more will be saved too.
And as I said, I think everyone can agree that cutting waste and indeed fraud in any government and being responsible with taxpayers’ money is a very good thing.
I can see that you are proud of that work.
I do want to ask you about USAID and the comments that Bill Gates made the other day, which, and I know that you called him—
I know you’ve said that already.
I’m sorry, who does Bill Gates think he is to make comments about the welfare of children, given that he frequented Jeffrey Epstein?
Okay, well he said he regrets those and he’s spent—
Exactly. I wouldn’t trust that guy with my kids—
He’s spent a lot of his own money on philanthropy around the world over the years. My question to you is, have you looked at the data to check if he might be right, that the cuts to USAID might cost millions of lives?
Yes. I’d like him to show us any evidence whatsoever that that is true. It’s false. What we found with USAID cuts, and by the way, they haven’t all been cut. The parts of USAID that we found to be even slightly useful were transferred to the State Department. They’ve not been deleted. They’ve simply been transferred to the State Department.
But many, many times over with USAID and other organizations, when they said, “Oh, well this is going to help children” or it’s going to help some disease eradication or something like that, and then we ask for any evidence whatsoever, I say, “Well, please connect us with this group of children so we can talk to them and understand more about their issue,” we get nothing. They don’t even try to come up with a show orphan. It’s sort of like, well, can we at least see a few kids? Like where are they? If they’re in trouble, we’d like to talk to them and talk to their caregivers. And let me put this as a response because what we find is an enormous amount of fraud and graft.
Okay. Let me, let me put this example to you—
Very little of it actually gets to the kids, if anything at all 16.
16 This is a common misconception. While a January report from USAID noted that 12.1% of its money went directly to local organizations in foreign countries last year, most of the remaining money is distributed through organizations and companies that operate internationally. In March, USAID itself catalogued the effect of the recent cuts in a memo. And a top development think tank estimated lives saved from all US international aid — not just USAID — to be in the millions.
Okay. Let me put this example to you because you grew up in South Africa so you’ll know the impact of HIV/AIDS. And this is why I asked about the data. The US led on international efforts to combat HIV/AIDS treatment and prevention, and there’s an initiative called PEPFAR, which is credited with saving 26 million lives in the last 20 years. It was part of the foreign aid freeze. Then there was a limited waiver. Its services are disrupted and UNAIDS says, if permanently discontinued, there will be another 4 million AIDS-related deaths by 2029. So if you look at that example, which is backed up by data — in 2023, 630,000 people died of AIDS-related illnesses — then perhaps Bill Gates’s figures are not wrong. Millions of lives could be lost 17.
17 This was my longest question, but there’s a reason for it: accuracy and attribution. You can see my source here. UNAIDS — a key delivery partner for the US in its HIV-response work — makes clear that only some of the work of PEPFAR is covered by the Emergency Humanitarian Waiver issued at the end of January.
First of all, the program, the AIDS medication program, is continuing. So your fundamental premise is wrong. It is continuing. Now, do you have another example?
Elon, not in its entirety—
There’s a limited waiver and UNAIDS have said that not all of the services that were previously funded by USAID are continuing. So that’s why I put that example to you.
Okay, well, which ones aren’t being funded? I’ll fix it right now.
Okay, well actually they’re all on the UNAIDS website, so you’ll be able to see them. But mostly they are to do with prevention and for example, the rollout of a drug called Lenacapavir 18, which was hailed as one of the biggest breakthroughs against AIDS for many years, which came out last year. So I’m sure UNAIDS would be delighted if you’re able to look at that again.
18 This piece, which Bloomberg published in April, shows how much uncertainty there is about services that were covered by PEPFAR, and about the future rollout of this drug. Lenacapavir comes from a California-based pharmaceutical company, and could therefore also bring revenues back to the US.
Yes, but well, if in fact this is true, which I doubt it is, then we’ll fix it.
So finally, your political influence. I wondered whether you have decided yet how much you are going to spend on the upcoming midterms? You spent a lot more money on the last US election than you envisaged when you were speaking here three years ago 19. Are you going to continue to spend at that kind of level on future elections?
19 At QEF in 2022, Musk said he had not decided on an exact amount, but estimated it would be “$20 million to $25 million.” He ultimately donated about a quarter of a billion dollars to various political groups in the 2024 cycle, mostly supporting Donald Trump.
I think in terms of political spending I’m going to do a lot less in the future.
I think I’ve done enough.
Is it because of blowback?
Well, if I see a reason to do political spending in the future, I’ll do it. I don’t currently see a reason.
Okay. And what about political influence beyond the US? How often do you speak to President Putin?
I don’t speak to President Putin.
You’ve never spoken to President Putin?
I was on a video call with him once about five years ago.
Why do you think I speak to President Putin? Oh, you must, oh, I get it. You believe the legacy media.
Because I’ve heard you speak, actually. I’ve heard you speak about it, for example, in your West Point speech. You said, ‘Oh, I challenged President Putin’ to, was it an arm wrestle? And I know The Wall Street Journal reported conversations.
Oh yeah The Wall Street Journal is—
If you are saying they haven’t happened other than once, I’ll take that as read.
Is there a worse publication on the face of the earth than The Wall Street Journal? I wouldn’t use that to line my cage for parrot droppings. That newspaper is the worst newspaper in the world. If there’s one newspaper that should be pro-capitalist, it’s the one with Wall Street in the name. But it isn’t. So I have the very lowest opinion of The Wall Street Journal, absolute nonsense. And you clearly believe the tripe that you’ve read in those papers
I read very widely, and I’m putting these questions to you so that you have an opportunity to respond to them, which you are, and, and for which we’re all grateful.
Okay. We are out of time.
You mentioned me challenging [Putin]. I did so on the X platform. I challenged Vladimir Putin—
But I didn’t talk to him. That was a post on the X platform.
Great. That’s why I asked you, and you’ve clarified and explained. Thank you. That’s why I was asking whether you have had reported conversations and, and you’ve said—
—you haven’t, other than a video call.
Typical legacy media lies.
I actually thought I might give Grok the last word, because when I asked Grok what your hardest challenge is, it said “the strain of managing multiple high-stake ventures amid financial, regulatory, and public relations crises.” And I wondered whether you recognize that characterization and whether you do think that this is a pivotal year in your life?
Well, every year has been somewhat pivotal, and this one’s no different. So I mean, in terms of interesting things that probably are accomplished this year: getting Starship to be fully reusable so that we catch both the booster and the ship, which would be the first fully reusable orbital rocket ever in history, which would be a profound breakthrough, the essential breakthrough necessary to make life multiplanetary — and ultimately it’ll become a space-faring civilization.
We’ve got Neuralink, which has now helped five patients restore capability using the telepathy implant, where they’re able to control a computer simply by thinking. We’ll be doing our first patient to restore sight with a Blindsight implant, which is the end of this year, early next. In fact, that first patient might be in the UAE since we have a relationship with the UAE and the Cleveland Clinic there.
I think what’s running on the AI front, we are close to what you might call AGI, or digital superintelligence. I think we are seeing an explosion in digital superintelligence here. And then we’ve got Tesla. We’ll be launching unsupervised autonomy, basically self-driving cars with no one in them, in Austin next month.
So it’s a big year for sure. Many other things in the works too. I’m a technologist first and foremost.
Elon Musk, thank you very much for joining us here at Qatar Economic Forum.
Bloomberg
Terrorists outgun Army, saboteurs within undermining anti-insurgency war - Zulum
Governor Babagana Zulum of Borno State has raised alarm over the Nigerian Army’s lack of modern equipment to effectively counter increasingly tech-savvy terrorist groups operating in the northeast. Speaking during an interview on News Central’s Breakfast Central, Zulum said insurgents now deploy sophisticated tools such as drones, giving them a tactical edge over poorly equipped government forces.
“The army does not have the necessary equipment on ground to fight the insurgency. A few days ago, I visited the Chief of Army Staff—he said if he had just 32 drones, he could end this insurgency,” Zulum said. “We must prioritise security. Both national and subnational governments need to pool resources together for equipment procurement.”
The Borno governor also called for the removal of bureaucratic bottlenecks hampering the acquisition of military hardware and urged President Bola Tinubu to rely on accurate ground intelligence and professional military advice rather than political sycophancy.
Zulum further warned that insecurity in Borno State—and by extension, the country—cannot be resolved through military force alone. He advocated for a combined approach that includes socio-political and economic strategies.
“Insurgency will never be ended by kinetic measures alone. We must implement non-kinetic measures—addressing the socio-economic root causes of the crisis,” he said. “Among the 300,000 or more that have repented, I cannot rule out the possibility that a few may return to the bush.”
In a more damning revelation, Zulum accused some members of the Nigerian Armed Forces, politicians, and local communities of acting as informants and collaborators for Boko Haram. “We have informants and collaborators within the Nigerian Armed Forces, within the politicians, and within the communities. What we shall do is strengthen our intelligence and deal with them ruthlessly.”
Despite his criticism, the governor commended the military for supporting peace-building efforts and emphasized the need for immediate action to consolidate gains made. “Let’s remove contractocracy. In six months, we can put an end to this madness,” he asserted.
Zulum also reiterated his opposition to politicizing the security crisis. “We should not politicise insecurity. Some people claim there’s no insecurity in Borno. That’s false. Let’s be honest and work together to end it,” he said.
Borno State remains the epicentre of the Boko Haram insurgency, which has killed over 350,000 people and displaced millions since 2009. With renewed attacks in recent months, Zulum’s warnings highlight the urgent need for decisive and coordinated action to restore peace in the region.