Cover StoryFeaturesFor the RecordOpinionPerspective

TINUBU 2027: Renewed Hope, Proven Leadership, and the Path to a Prosperous Nigeria

4 Mins read

 

By Muhammed Musa Tosken,

As Nigeria inches closer to the 2027 general elections, the political climate is heating up with familiar criticisms, recycled narratives, and a glaring refusal by some commentators to acknowledge the progress made under the administration of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu. Amid the noise and political theater, one thing remains clear to discerning Nigerians: the Tinubu presidency is not only performing; it is transforming.

From economic stabilization to security restructuring, social investment to global diplomacy, President Tinubu’s first two years in office have been defined by bold reforms, courageous leadership, and a visionary agenda that is resetting the course of Nigeria’s future. While some voices seek to distract the public with politically charged pessimism, the truth lies in the concrete milestones achieved, and the new foundations laid for a stronger, more self-sufficient nation.

The decision to remove the fuel subsidy—long abused by vested interests—was one of the boldest economic reforms in Nigeria’s recent history. For years, Nigeria hemorrhaged over N400 billion monthly to sustain a system that did little for the common man but enriched a corrupt cartel. By removing the subsidy, President Tinubu liberated trillions of naira, redirecting those funds into infrastructure development, agricultural support, and strategic palliative interventions.

Further economic reforms include the unification of forex rates—a long overdue move that tackled arbitrage and restored investor confidence—and the recent restructuring of Nigeria’s debt portfolio, which has already begun reducing the national debt burden. These reforms, though tough, demonstrate the President’s commitment to laying the groundwork for a resilient, private sector-driven economy.

While global inflation continues to squeeze economies, especially in developing nations, the Tinubu administration has introduced targeted social investments to cushion the impact on Nigerian households. The Renewed Hope Conditional Cash Transfer Programme (RH-CCT) has supported over 15 million households with direct financial aid, while the N75 Billion MSME Support Fund is creating new jobs and empowering young entrepreneurs across the country.

Palliatives, food security programs, and community-based empowerment schemes continue to offer relief while accelerating local production and economic inclusion. President Tinubu’s focus on inclusive growth is not theoretical—it is tangible and widespread.

Security remains a pressing challenge, but one that President Tinubu has confronted head-on. Through the establishment of the Presidential Security Task Force and increased funding for the military and security services, Nigeria has seen intensified crackdowns on bandits, terrorists, and kidnappers.

From the North-West to the South-East, coordinated intelligence-led operations are reclaiming territories once dominated by non-state actors. Moreover, the administration’s push for community policing frameworks is deepening collaboration between local communities and federal security agencies, enhancing response times and rebuilding trust.

President Tinubu’s infrastructural agenda is perhaps one of his most ambitious undertakings. Over 400 road projects have been completed or are near completion, improving transport efficiency and opening up economic corridors. The launch of the Lagos-Calabar Coastal Highway marks a new chapter in regional integration, set to stimulate tourism, real estate, and cross-border trade.

In the power sector, thousands of households and SMEs have been connected to electricity through solar mini-grids and rural electrification projects, with ongoing upgrades to the national grid aimed at delivering stable and sustainable power.

Understanding that no nation can grow beyond its people, President Tinubu has invested significantly in education, health, and agriculture. Over 50,000 new teachers have been recruited through federal programs. Public schools are benefiting from digital learning initiatives and renewed investment in science and technology.

The healthcare sector is undergoing a quiet revolution, with over 10,000 primary healthcare centres being revamped, and community health insurance schemes ensuring affordability and access for vulnerable populations.

On the agricultural front, dry-season farming campaigns, agro-tech investments, and subsidized fertilizers have empowered thousands of farmers and reduced Nigeria’s food import bill.

President Tinubu’s diplomatic strategy has rebranded Nigeria on the international stage. His strategic travels and bilateral engagements have attracted over $20 billion in foreign direct investment commitments, while repositioning Nigeria as a regional power in ECOWAS, the African Union, and the broader global community.

By restoring Nigeria’s voice in global affairs, President Tinubu is ensuring that the country does not only participate in world conversations but shapes them.

As the 2027 elections draw near, Nigerians must reflect not just on promises, but performance. In President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, we have a leader who does not shirk tough decisions. We have a leader who understands the complexity of Nigeria and is not afraid to disrupt the status quo for the greater good.

His agenda is not about populism; it is about purpose. It is about doing the hard work now, so that future generations can thrive. The results are already emerging — and with continuity, the gains will multiply.

President Tinubu is not just another candidate. He is the stabilizing bridge between a troubled past and a thriving future. His Renewed Hope Agenda is more than a slogan — it is a contract with the Nigerian people, backed by action and accountability.

In the face of economic headwinds, global uncertainty, and inherited dysfunction, President Tinubu has shown resilience, reform-mindedness, and a deep love for Nigeria. He is not perfect, but he is purposeful. He is not performative, but productive.

Come 2027, Nigerians have a clear choice: Retreat to the comfort of empty rhetoric or advance with a leader who has dared to deliver. The future demands courage — and President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is courage personified. No wonder the Secretary to the Government of the Federation Sen Dr George Akume CON, leveraging on his ground-breaking and enamous experience, which virtually cut across all sectors of public, private and civil services cum it trajectory, has been reiterating and reephasising on the need for Nigerians to rally-round President Bola Ahmed Tinubu GCFR, give him full support and trust in the Renewed Hope Agenda for a sustainable economic growth and economic development in Nigeria, Amb Tsoken concluded.

Musa Tosken, is a Convener of APC Initiative for Good Governance (APC-IGG) and also a Fellow Public Policy Analysis fppa.

   

About author
Time Nigeria is a modern and general interest Magazine with its Headquarters in Abuja. The Magazine has a remarkable difference in editorial philosophy and goals, it adheres strictly to the ethics of Journalism by using the finest ethos of the profession to promote peace among citizens; identifying and harnessing the nation’s vast resources; celebrating achievements of government agencies, individuals, groups and corporate organizations and above all, repositioning Nigeria for the needed growth and development. Time Nigeria gives emphasis to places and issues that have not been given adequate attention by others. The Magazine is national in outlook and is currently being read and patronized both in print and on our vibrant and active online platform (www.timenigeria.com).
Articles
Related posts
All The NewsCover StoryNewsPolitics

Musa Tsoken Congratulates Kalu on Daily Times’ Lawmaker of the Year Award

1 Mins read
The National Coordinator of the Asiwaju Again Renewed Hope Support Initiative 2027 and National President of the APC Initiative for Good Governance…
Abuja FileDevelopmentEconomyEnergyFinanceInside LagosOpinionPerspective

The Missing Middle of Infrastructure Finance: Why Capital Still Fails to Become Infrastructure

6 Mins read
  By Chidi Nwafor  In October 2023, a Gulf sovereign wealth fund quietly closed a $2 billion allocation to global infrastructure, earmarked in part for emerging-market energy and transport assets. The announcement drew the usual applause: another sign, commentators said, that institutional capital was finally waking up to the infrastructure opportunity in the Global South. Eighteen months later, less than a tenth of that allocation had actually left the fund’s balance sheet. Not because the mandate had changed. Not because the fund had lost appetite. According to two people familiar with the portfolio, the constraint was simpler and more uncomfortable: there were not enough investable projects to put the money into. This is not a story about a reluctant investor. It is a story about capital that wants to move, cannot find enough places willing and able to receive it in a form it can underwrite, and quietly waits instead. Multiply that fund by the hundreds of pension schemes, sovereign wealth vehicles, commercial banks and infrastructure funds now carrying dedicated allocations for emerging-market infrastructure, and a pattern emerges that rarely makes it into a headline: the world is not short of capital for infrastructure. It has capital in historic abundance, sitting adjacent to a historic infrastructure gap, unable to cross the distance between the two. The Comfortable Explanation  The explanation on offer at every major infrastructure summit is a familiar one. Global infrastructure investment needs run into the tens of trillions of dollars over the coming decade; committed capital falls well short; therefore, the problem is one of insufficient funding, and the solution is more of it: more pledges, more blended-finance facilities, more climate funds, more multilateral capital increases. It is a comfortable explanation because it assigns responsibility clearly to governments who under-fund, institutions who under-commit, and it offers a clean remedy: raise more. It is also, on close inspection, not what the evidence shows. Pension funds globally hold trillions in assets under management with explicit infrastructure allocations that remain structurally underweight, not because trustees have rejected the asset class but because deal flow meeting their risk and governance thresholds has not materialised at the pace their mandates assume. Sovereign wealth funds report the same pattern. Commercial banks with dedicated project finance desks describe pipelines that look full at the term-sheet stage and thin dramatically by financial close. Development finance institutions, whose entire purpose is to absorb risk that commercial capital will not, routinely report that their binding constraint is not capital adequacy but the volume of bankable transactions their teams can originate and structure in a given year. None of this fits the scarcity narrative. All of it fits a different one. Availability Is Not Deployability  Capital availability and capital deployability are not the same condition, and the conflation of the two is doing real damage to how the world thinks about the infrastructure gap. Availability asks whether money exists somewhere with a mandate that could, in principle, be pointed at infrastructure. Deployability asks something much narrower and much harder: whether a specific project, at a specific moment, has been engineered, structured, documented and de-risked to the point where an investment committee can approve it without exception. The first condition is met, overwhelmingly, across nearly every category of capital that matters to infrastructure. The second is met by only a small fraction of the projects competing for it. The result is a market that looks, from the outside, like a financing gap, and functions, from the inside, like a conversion problem: an abundance of capital on one side, an abundance of infrastructure need on the other, and an underbuilt set of mechanisms in between capable of turning one into the other at any meaningful scale. Where the Conversion Breaks  The break does not happen at the ends of the process. It happens in the middle, in the unglamorous sequence of work that turns a plausible concept into an instrument a fiduciary can sign. A promising transmission project needs a feasibility study rigorous enough to survive institutional scrutiny rather than optimistic enough to attract early interest. It needs offtake arrangements that hold up under real counterparty and currency risk, not the counterparty risk assumed in a base case. It needs environmental and social documentation calibrated to the standards of the institutions being asked to fund it, not the standards of the jurisdiction hosting it. It needs a legal and commercial structure that allocates risk in ways a commercial lender, not only a development financier, will accept. It needs a sponsor capable of executing what has been proposed, not merely capable of proposing it. Each of these is ordinary project finance discipline. None of it is exotic, and in mature infrastructure markets it happens as a matter of course, absorbed into systems built over decades: specialist advisers, standard-form contracts, established procurement norms, deep pools of transaction expertise. What is missing in the markets where the infrastructure gap is largest is not the standard itself but the machinery that meets it. Projects arrive at investment committees with ambition intact and preparation incomplete, and that gap is treated, again and again, as an individual project’s failure rather than what it actually is: a structural absence in the systems responsible for producing investable transactions at scale. The Missing Middle  This is the Missing Middle of Infrastructure Finance: the institutional architecture that sits between capital that wants to move and infrastructure that needs building, and whose incompleteness explains far more of the global infrastructure gap than any shortfall in committed funds. It consists of project preparation facilities able to fund feasibility and structuring work before commercial viability has been proven. Transaction advisers capable of building deals that satisfy development mandates and commercial return thresholds at once, rather than treating the two as separate constituencies to be managed sequentially. Risk-sharing and guarantee instruments that convert political, regulatory and currency risk into something a commercial balance sheet can underwrite. Aggregation platforms that bundle smaller, individually sub-scale projects into portfolios large enough to justify institutional transaction costs. Standardised documentation that reduces the bespoke legal cost of every new deal. And coordination across ministries, regulators and financiers robust enough that a technically sound project does not die in bureaucratic sequencing after the money has already been found. None of these are new ideas in isolation. What is missing is their assembly into a coherent system, deliberately funded and institutionally accountable, rather than scattered across donor-funded pilots that end when the grant does. The African Dimension  Africa makes this dynamic unusually visible, and consequently offers an unusually clear opportunity to correct it. The continent’s infrastructure financing need, by any measure, is vast. Less understood is that the shortfall is disproportionately one of preparation rather than capital. Nigerian gas-to-power, off-grid solar and mini-grid developers have each demonstrated that individual projects can clear the bankability bar; what has not emerged is systemic pipeline scale, a steady stream of comparably prepared projects large enough to absorb the capital already circling the sector. The pattern repeats, with local variation, from grid infrastructure in East Africa to transport corridors in West Africa. Interested capital is rarely the scarce input. Investment-ready projects are. The Global Comparison  Mature markets solved this problem gradually and mostly invisibly, through decades of institution-building that predates the current infrastructure conversation: specialist project finance units inside banks, standardised PPP frameworks, established regulatory playbooks, deep benches of transaction lawyers and engineers who move between deals rather than between one-off assignments. Emerging and frontier markets are not being asked to meet a lower standard. They are being asked to meet the same standard without having built the same machinery, and then being told, when deals fail to close, that the problem is insufficient funding….
Cover StoryNewsSports

Union Bank, AIICO Multishield, Checkers Custard, Others Back 5th Cycling Lagos

2 Mins read
Union Bank of Nigeria Plc, AIICO Multishield, Checkers Custard and other corporate organisations have thrown their weight behind the 5th Cycling Lagos,…
Stay on the loop!

Subscribe to our latest news.

Leave a Reply

WP2Social Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com