Former president of the Nigerian Association of Chambers of Commerce, Industry, Mines and Agriculture, Dele Oye, has called for greater transparency in the Nigerian Education Loan Fund following reported disbursements of N372.62 billion in student support.
Oye, chairman of the Alliance for Economic Research and Ethics, said a student loan programme should be judged not only by the amount released but also by how quickly applicants receive decisions, institutions receive fees and students receive upkeep allowances.
Referring to a NELFUND report generated on October 3, 2026, he said the agency had processed 1,659,853 applications and disbursed N372.62 billion as of September 29. He urged the fund to publish aggregate approval and rejection figures, payment timelines and service standards while providing applicants with a reliable means of tracking their cases.
He also proposed a visible complaints system with clear deadlines for responding to and resolving grievances. According to Oye, delayed or unpredictable disbursements can undermine students’ ability to plan their academic terms even when funds have been approved in principle.
Turning to the National Economic Council’s 90-day economic action plan, endorsed on October 22, Oye welcomed its focus on food affordability, tax harmonization, priority projects, investment bottlenecks and household support. However, he questioned how its performance could be assessed without published baseline figures, cost estimates, responsible agencies and measurable milestones.
He recommended a public dashboard showing commitments against actual results, including food and transport prices, project completion, student loan payments and the use of proceeds associated with subsidy reforms.
Oye also urged federal and state regulators to disclose the legal basis and cost of collecting their taxes, fees and levies. He proposed a regulatory cost register to identify overlapping charges and fees whose collection costs outweigh their benefits, alongside simpler registration procedures and an independent route for businesses to contest disputed assessments.
His broader argument was that government interventions must be measured by verifiable improvements in household welfare and business conditions, rather than by announcements or headline spending figures.
