By Dr Wole Olaleye

As Nigeria approaches the 2027 elections, political debate will increasingly revolve around personalities, party loyalties and regional calculations. Yet the more important question is whether the direction of public policy since 2023 should be consolidated, corrected or abandoned.

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s first term is neither an uncomplicated success nor an unqualified failure. It is better understood as a period of disruptive economic correction that has produced signs of macroeconomic stabilisation while imposing severe costs on households.

Nigeria entered the administration with deep structural weaknesses. Fuel subsidies consumed public resources without reliably benefiting the poorest citizens. Multiple foreign-exchange windows encouraged arbitrage and weakened transparency. Low revenue mobilisation limited public investment, while monetary financing of deficits contributed to inflationary pressure.

Reform was therefore unavoidable. The removal of fuel subsidies, liberalisation of the exchange rate and tightening of monetary policy addressed problems that successive governments had recognised but repeatedly postponed.

However, necessary reform is not automatically good reform. Policy must also be judged by how its costs are sequenced, distributed and mitigated. In Nigeria, major reforms moved faster than measures to protect vulnerable households, support small businesses, strengthen public transport and stabilise food supply. Citizens were asked to bear immediate pain while promised benefits remained distant.

That failure weakened public trust. A government cannot demand sacrifice from citizens while appearing tolerant of waste, excessive political appointments, opaque expenditure or weak accountability.

Economic courage must be matched by ethical consistency. This makes the quality of governance, rather than reform announcements alone, the decisive measure of meaningful progress.

There are, nevertheless, signs that some foundations of recovery are emerging. Growth has improved, the foreign-exchange market is functioning more transparently, external reserves have strengthened and government revenue has risen. These developments matter because Nigeria cannot finance infrastructure, social services or productive investment from an economy trapped in permanent fiscal crisis. They also create a stronger platform for private investment, planning and more predictable economic decision-making across sectors.

But macroeconomic stability is not the same as development. Millions of Nigerians continue to face poverty, food insecurity, high transport costs, unemployment and declining purchasing power. Growth that cannot be felt in household income, employment or access to basic services remains politically and socially fragile.

The credible case for continuity in 2027 is therefore not that the first term has been painless or flawless. It is that Nigeria has already incurred much of the cost of correcting an unsustainable system, and a disorderly reversal could recreate the distortions that made reform necessary.
Continuity, however, must not mean more of the same. A second-term proposition must offer a new governing compact based on five priorities.

First, economic recovery must reach households through reliable social protection, food security, affordable transport, electricity and basic services. Second, growth must create productive jobs in agriculture, manufacturing, technology, construction and the creative economy. Third, government must demonstrate measurable progress on insecurity, kidnapping and violent conflict. Fourth, fiscal reform must begin with government itself through lower waste, stronger procurement oversight and transparent public spending. Fifth, continuity must deepen democracy through credible elections, judicial independence, media freedom and respect for opposition.

The Tinubu administration has undertaken difficult reforms that previous governments deferred. That provides the foundation for a possible case for continuity. But foundations are not finished buildings.

A second mandate should not be treated as a reward for hardship or as a blank cheque. It must be earned through visible improvements in household welfare, security, employment, public integrity and democratic accountability.

Nigeria needs accountable continuity where policies are working, honest correction where they are not, and measurable commitments against which every government can be judged.