Political economist Pat Utomi has renewed his call for improved living conditions in Nigeria following remarks attributed to Finance Minister Taiwo Oyedele that some low income households spend the equivalent of as much as 120 per cent of their earnings on food.
Oyedele, speaking during an engagement at Chatham House in London, said a government survey had highlighted the extraordinary pressure food costs place on vulnerable families. He suggested that households spending more than they earn on food must rely on borrowing, deferred payments or other means to bridge the gap. The date, methodology and sample size of the survey were not specified in the account provided.
Responding on social media, Utomi described the situation as distressing and said Nigerians deserved better. The exchange drew attention to the distinction between being employed and earning enough to meet basic needs.
Oyedele argued that reliable data must underpin economic decisions. He said the National Bureau of Statistics had faced funding constraints that limited its ability to conduct surveys needed to understand inflation, household welfare and the impact of government policies.
While consumer price statistics show how prices change, the minister said policymakers also need information on production costs and other drivers of inflation. He referred to the usefulness of producer price data and the need for closer coordination between fiscal authorities and the Central Bank of Nigeria.
He further argued that a relatively low measured unemployment rate can coexist with widespread poverty because many people work in low paying or insecure occupations. The central challenge, he suggested, is not only the number of jobs but also the purchasing power and productivity associated with them.
The comments underscore the need to distinguish headline economic indicators from the experience of families whose incomes are consumed by food, transport and other necessities. Publication of the underlying household survey would allow independent analysts to assess the 120 per cent figure and its implications for social protection, wages and food security.
