Presidency Fires Back At Dino Melaye For Criticising Debt Profile Under Tinubu

The Presidency has dismissed remarks by former Kogi West Senator, Dino Melaye, on Nigeria’s rising debt profile, describing them as “entertainment, and not enlightenment.”

Recall that Melaye, during an interview on Arise News Channel’s Prime Time show on Monday evening, mocked the Tinubu administration’s borrowing practices, alleging that the situation had become so dire that the government might soon be forced to borrow from local fintech firms if the trend continued.

He queried the rationale behind recent loan requests, citing the government’s bid for a $1.7billion World Bank facility and the Senate’s approval of about $21 billion in external borrowing so far. According to him, the borrowing scale was “unprecedented” and contradicted the administration’s pledge to eliminate waste.

But, in a swift response via his verified X handle, the Special Adviser to President Bola Tinubu on Media and Public Communication, Sunday Dare, countered Melaye’s claims, insisting that Nigeria’s debt was being misrepresented.

Quoting data from the Debt Management Office (DMO), Dare said the country’s total public debt stood at ₦149.39 trillion as of March 31, 2025, adding that the surge was “not the result of reckless borrowing but largely due to the effect of naira depreciation on existing external loans.”

He argued that Nigeria’s debt-to-GDP ratio, currently between 40 and 45 per cent, remained moderate when compared to countries such as South Africa at 70 per cent and Ghana at over 90 per cent.

“The real challenge lies in revenue mobilization, not runaway borrowing. Encouragingly, revenues are improving, strengthening our capacity to service obligations,” Dare explained.

Defending the government’s borrowing strategy, the former Minister of Youth and Sports said, “Borrowing is a legitimate tool for financing growth and reforms. What matters is sustainability, not soundbites. Unfortunately, Dino prefers theatrics to truth.

“Until Dino acquaints himself with basic economics, his commentary will remain what it has always been: entertainment, not enlightenment.”