In a defiant display of political insensitivity, President Bola Tinubu, during his first presidential media chat on Monday, reaffirmed his decision to keep his bloated 48-member cabinet intact, rejected concerns over mounting public debt, and defended controversial policies such as the removal of the fuel subsidy and tax reforms. However, his words failed to reassure a growing chorus of critics who argue that his administration’s choices are exacerbating Nigeria’s economic woes and deepening public hardship.

Tinubu’s insistence on maintaining an oversized cabinet comes at a time when many Nigerians are calling for a reduction in the cost of governance. The president, who had already appointed the largest cabinet since Nigeria’s return to democracy in 1999, declared that each of his ministers was “crucial” to the country’s progress. Despite mounting pressure for downsizing and cost-cutting, especially amid the ongoing economic struggles, Tinubu dismissed such calls. “I’m not prepared to bring down the size of my cabinet. I saw the need before I put them together,” he said, highlighting the scale of Nigeria’s challenges and emphasizing “efficiency” and “effectiveness” as key criteria for his appointments.

While efficiency is a noble goal, critics argue that the sheer size of the cabinet suggests inefficiency and redundancy. With 48 ministers—many of whom have faced scrutiny for their lack of visible impact—it’s hard to argue that the administration is optimizing resources. In fact, the appointment of ministers with scant public accountability or demonstrable results raises serious questions about the effectiveness of this government structure.

Meanwhile, Tinubu’s defense of the government’s aggressive borrowing strategy is equally troubling. Despite the National Assembly’s approval of a massive $2.2 billion loan to finance the 2024 budget, the president stressed that borrowing “is not criminal” and argued that it was necessary to address Nigeria’s vast infrastructure deficit. While the country indeed faces significant infrastructure challenges, the growing public debt and the continued reliance on loans to fund recurrent expenditures paint a grim picture of economic mismanagement. With debt servicing already consuming a disproportionate chunk of Nigeria’s revenue, many fear that these loans may only deepen the fiscal crisis in the years to come.

Tinubu’s most controversial policy remains the abrupt removal of the fuel subsidy in May 2023, which triggered an unprecedented spike in fuel prices and subsequent inflation. The president staunchly defended his decision, claiming that it was vital to secure the nation’s future, even as Nigerians continue to suffer from soaring transportation and food costs. He rejected any suggestion of a phased subsidy removal, dismissing it as a misguided “fortune of our future generations” and insisting that the move was necessary to curb wasteful government spending.

However, his rhetoric has done little to ease the pain felt by millions of Nigerians struggling with daily hardships. The astronomical price hikes have ignited public fury, especially as many blame the removal for plunging them into further poverty. Despite this, Tinubu remained unapologetic: “I don’t have any regret whatsoever removing the subsidy,” he declared, showing little sensitivity to the widespread anger.

In tandem with his economic policies, Tinubu is also pushing through ambitious tax reforms, which have sparked backlash from various quarters. The president’s plan to widen the tax net and impose higher taxes on citizens, particularly the middle class, has met with resistance, with critics accusing the administration of burdening Nigerians already grappling with high inflation and unemployment. Despite the objections, Tinubu remains adamant that tax reforms are necessary to fund the country’s development. “The tax reform is here to stay,” he asserted, dismissing calls for wider consultations as futile.

Tinubu’s approach to food security and price control, too, has left much to be desired.

On inflation, Tinubu believes that supply and demand will eventually bring prices down, but for many, the continued rise in the cost of living suggests otherwise. Critics argue that his administration’s failure to address the root causes of food insecurity, such as inadequate infrastructure and poor policy planning, is contributing to widespread suffering.

Even in his handling of the minimum wage, Tinubu’s claims of tackling corruption through wage increases ring hollow for many. While the increase from N30,000 to N70,000 is seen as a positive step, it does little to address the systemic issues that perpetuate corruption, such as lack of transparency and accountability within government institutions. Furthermore, the increase is insufficient to offset the relentless inflationary pressures on ordinary Nigerians, leaving them still struggling to make ends meet.

Overall, Tinubu’s administration appears to be doubling down on its most controversial policies, even as the country’s economic indicators worsen. From an inflated cabinet to reckless borrowing and harsh economic reforms, his leadership is characterized by a troubling disconnect from the realities faced by millions of Nigerians. With public dissatisfaction mounting, it remains to be seen whether Tinubu can convince the nation that his vision will lead to a brighter future, or if his presidency will become a cautionary tale of missed opportunities and mismanagement.