The lawmakers recently admitted that these vehicles were provided to them at a total cost of ₦57.6 billion, but they emphasized that these SUVs belonged to the National Assembly and were not personal gifts. This move has drawn strong reactions from local vehicle manufacturers, economic experts, and the public who argue that this purchase contradicts the drive to promote local manufacturing, job creation, and cost-effective governance. Local manufacturers had offered similar quality vehicles at a better price, but their proposals were reportedly dismissed.
“How can you represent Nigeria but refuse Nigeria, especially when some of us have shown you that we would offer similar top quality at a better price? Why do you want be seen driving a foreign brand when a Nigerian brand can offer you the same quality at a better price? No automotive sector can become successful without the support of the government. The Tesla we see today is the result of years of support from the US government. We want to create jobs but export the opportunities to create jobs to other countries at every chance we get,” founder of a local vehicle manufacturing company, Nord motors said”.
Also reacting, former deputy CBN governor, Kingsley Moghalu, “Nigeria is becoming a carcass and our political class, its scavengers! If I were president of Nigeria or governor of a state, no government official will drive a foreign made vehicle at government expense (procurement) when we have local alternatives. That is one demonstration of patriotic leadership and commitment to cutting the cost of governance,” he said.
Another financial expert, Kalu Aja said, “If the National Assembly spent those billions to order made in Nigeria cars from Innoson and NORD, it would be stimulative, it would create jobs and boost the GDP of Nigeria. The National Assembly is a first-line waste of taxpayer funds. When you earn N10 and spend N100, you don’t have a revenue problem, you have a spending problem” while the founder of BudgiT, Oluseun Onigbinde, said: “Nigeria is too poor to afford the lifestyle of its leaders.”
