Cabinet reshuffle: Missed opportunity for change

After several speculations, President Bola Tinubu recently returned from London to announce a cabinet reshuffle. While Nigerians continue to debate the prospects of the redeployed and appointed ministers, the removal of some underperforming ministers could only be justified by a clean sweep of other underachievers who have clung to power and influence as ministers.

Unfortunately, the belated rejig of the cabinet falls short of Nigerians’ expectations. It lacks thorough merit-based evaluation and strategic cost-cutting measures, crucial for a deeply indebted country. This reshuffle may fail to bring the much-needed results to renew the hope of Nigerians under Tinubu’s government. It leaves a sour taste for those anticipating a critical reshuffle due to the government’s poor performance across many spheres.

In a statement after the 19th meeting of the Federal Executive Council, the Presidency took eight actions, including merging the newly approved regional development commissions and the existing Ministry of Niger Delta Development into the Ministry of Regional Development. The Ministry of Sports Development was integrated into the National Sports Commission, while the Federal Ministry of Tourism and the Federal Ministry of Arts and Culture were merged into the Federal Ministry of Art, Culture, Tourism, and Creative Economy. Alongside ministerial changes, two appointments were approved: Sunday Dare as Special Adviser on Public Communication and Orientation and Shehu Dikko as Chairman of the National Sports Commission.

The reshuffle resulted in ten ministerial portfolio redesignations, the outright dismissal of five ministers, and the appointment of seven new ministers pending Senate approval. Uju-Ken Ohanenye, Lola Ade-John, Tahir Mamman, and Abdullahi Gwarzo, the ministers of Women Affairs, Tourism, Education, and Housing and Urban Development respectively, were relieved of their duties.
Ten ministers were reassigned to new portfolios: Dr Yusuf Sunumu from Minister of State for Education to Minister of State for Humanitarian Affairs; Dr Morufu Alausa from Minister of State for Health to Minister of Education; Bello Goronyo from Minister of State for Water Resources and Sanitation to Minister of State for Works; and the Minister of Niger Delta Development was redirected to oversee the newly created Ministry of Regional Development.

Additionally, the Minister of State for Steel Development, Uba Ahmadu was reassigned to Minister of State, Regional Development; John Enoh from Sports Development to Minister of State for Trade and Investment; Imaan Sulaiman-Ibrahim from Minister of State, Police Affairs to Women Affairs; Ayodele Olawande was promoted from Minister of State, Youth Development to Minister, Youth Development; and Salako Adeboye, from Minister of State, Environment to Minister of State, Health. Seven new ministers were appointed, including Nentawe Yilwatda for Humanitarian Affairs, Muhammadu Dingyadi for Labour and Employment, Jumoke Oduwole for Industry, Trade, and Investment, and Idi Maiha for the new Ministry of Livestock Development.

Tinubu made the right decision to dismiss the five ministers. Most failed to make a resounding impact during the administration’s first year. Ohanenye clashed with civil servants and civil societies without advancing women’s rights. Mamman’s inability to recalibrate the education sector hurt his reputation, especially with his erratic policies like barring under-18s from university admissions. Nigeria’s housing and urban development remain dismal, with many citizens living in substandard conditions without access to potable water, motorable roads, or electricity. The Federal Mortgage system remains plagued by corruption and policy challenges. Tourism remains underperforming and hampered by insecurity, with public utilities lacking.
Some reassigned ministers also failed in their previous roles. Instead of a realignment of roles and tactical promotions, Nigerians would have preferred a complete replacement with more competent hands. Many ministers seem unaware of the dire situations in the sectors they oversee, unable to provide coordinated solutions to Nigeria’s challenges.
For instance, the health sector still struggles with poorly equipped primary health centres, ineffective sensitisation programmes, and a lack of basic medicines in public hospitals. Medical professionals continue to migrate for better working conditions, leaving a deficit in manpower. Despite support from NGOs, many states continue to battle preventable diseases like cholera, mpox, typhoid, diphtheria and malaria. Nevertheless, Tinubu deemed the junior minister of health, Alausa, fit to lead the education ministry without a proven track record.

This reshuffle hints that political sentiments may have influenced the retention and redesignation of underperforming ministers like Sunumu, Goronyo, Enoh, Sulaiman-Ibrahim, Olawonde, and Adeboye. None have delivered any significant achievements in their previous ministries. Although Momoh, reassigned to lead the Ministry of Regional Development, made some progress, the resources allocated to the Niger Delta remain underutilised. He must now focus on developing all regions impartially, ensuring that resources are equitably distributed, which will foster unity and development across Nigeria.

Defying calls for drastic change, Tinubu retained key ministers, including Olawale Edun, the Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister of the Economy, despite the economic shocks. Ministers like Adebayo Adelabu (Power), Ibrahim Gaidam (Police Affairs), Mohammed Badaru (Defence), and Nuhu Ribadu, the National Security Adviser, remain in place despite growing insecurity. Even with the poor management of the devastating impacts of floods, Balarabe Lawal, the Minister of Environment, was not replaced.

There is little to celebrate in Tinubu’s administration so far, and nothing yet to campaign for in the upcoming election year. More Nigerians are sliding into poverty, with at least 70 percent now multidimensionally poor due to the removal of the fuel subsidy and forex crisis. Inflation has spiked from 30 percent to 40 percent, while daily staples have become unaffordable. Fuel prices have skyrocketed despite the activation of the Dangote Refinery, and small businesses are suffering due to high power costs and a hostile business environment. Many international firms are divesting from or shutting down operations in Nigeria. Unemployment and human capital development continue to stifle the country’s potential, while Nigeria remains under siege from Boko Haram, ISWAP, violent herders, kidnappers, secessionists, and other criminals. While the country suffers, the President, governors, and lawmakers live in reckless opulence.

Brazenly, Tinubu has increased his cabinet from 48 to 50 members, this does not guarantee a reduction in public expenditure. New ministries will still require personnel, vehicles, and equipment, contradicting the 2012 Oronsaye Report, which recommended restructuring parastatals, commissions, and agencies into just 18 federal ministries.

In conclusion, while the cabinet reshuffle has sparked discussion and raised hopes, it falls short of what Nigerians had anticipated. The reshuffle lacks the critical depth needed to address underperformance in key sectors. Instead of bringing in fresh, competent individuals, many ministers with inadequate track records were retained or reassigned, raising doubts that these changes would lead to the desired progress.
The decision to dismiss five ministers was a step in the right direction. However, shuffling underachievers between portfolios does not offer a clear path toward transformative governance. The challenges facing the nation—from economic instability and insecurity to inadequate public services—require a more thorough, merit-based overhaul.

Although reducing the number of ministries may seem like progress, the creation of new ministries will likely negate any potential savings. The government must rise to the occasion by making decisions based on merit and competency, not political expediency. Anything less will only widen the gap between the government and the people it is meant to serve.