The Media Office of former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has accused the All Progressives Congress (APC) of responding with insults rather than facts to questions raised over the ₦12.8 trillion Service-Wide Vote (SWV) in the 2026 Appropriation Act.
In a statement on Wednesday, the Atiku Media Office said the APC’s reaction exposed “a guilty conscience” and failed to address the central issue of how the SWV ballooned by over 1,918 per cent in two years.
“The attention of the Media Office of former Vice President of Nigeria and Presidential Candidate of the African Democratic Congress, Atiku Abubakar, has been drawn to the emotionally charged but intellectually bankrupt response by the National Publicity Secretary of the APC, Felix Morka, over our exposure of the unprecedented ₦12.8 trillion Service-Wide Vote contained in the 2026 Appropriation Act,” the statement signed by Olusola Sanni, Atiku’s Strategic Media Associate said.
“Ordinarily, we would have ignored Mr Morka’s descent into insults. However, when a ruling party confronted with legitimate questions about a ₦12.8 trillion public expenditure abandons facts for abuse, Nigerians deserve to know why.”
The office faulted the APC for not providing justification for the sharp increase in the SWV from ₦638.34 billion in 2024 to over ₦12.8 trillion in 2026.
“It is remarkable that in his lengthy treatise, Mr Morka failed to answer the central question: What emergency or unforeseen expenditure justifies increasing the Service-Wide Vote from ₦638.34 billion in 2024 to over ₦12.8 trillion in 2026? That is an increase of approximately 1,918 per cent in barely two years.
“Such an astronomical leap cannot be dismissed with the lazy excuse that a Service-Wide Vote is merely a ‘contingency arrangement.’”
The Atiku Media Office said while the existence of a Service-Wide Vote is not in dispute, Nigerians are concerned about its size and lack of transparency.
“No one disputes the existence of a Service-Wide Vote as a recognised budgetary instrument. What Nigerians are questioning is the size, opacity, and abuse of the provision under the Tinubu administration,” it stated.
“If the APC truly believes there is nothing unusual about this allocation, it should explain why an envelope that stood at ₦638.34 billion has suddenly ballooned to ₦12.8 trillion—an amount that rivals the combined budgets of critical sectors such as defence, education, healthcare and works.”
It further raised concerns over vague project descriptions tied to the allocation, warning that without specificity the fund risks becoming a “slush fund”.
“Even more disturbing is the fact that substantial portions of this allocation are tied to projects that are either vaguely described or not described at all. A contingency fund without specificity, accountability or transparency ceases to be a contingency provision and becomes precisely what Nigerians fear—a slush fund waiting to be abused.”
The statement accused the APC of resorting to “character assassination” instead of providing answers, and referenced past controversies around duplicated budget items and opaque allocations.
“Rather than answer these fundamental questions, Mr. Morka resorted to his party’s familiar playbook of character assassination. Nigerians are not interested in political insults. They want answers,” it said.
“The APC spokesman also conveniently ignored the fact that this administration has been serially embarrassed by revelations of duplicated budget provisions, opaque religious project allocations, unnamed palace renovations and other questionable appropriations that have steadily eroded public confidence in the integrity of the federal budget.”
The Atiku Media Office restated its demand for full disclosure of the allocation.
“We therefore restate our demand that the Tinubu administration publish a comprehensive breakdown of the ₦12.8 trillion Service-Wide Vote, clearly identifying every project, beneficiary, implementing agency and legal basis for each expenditure.
“Until that is done, Nigerians are entitled to conclude that the APC’s anger stems not from the weakness of our questions, but from its inability to answer them.”