N8.2bn For 35 Million PWDs: Disability Experts Raise Alarm Over Inadequate Funding, Alleged Budget Corruption
…Nigeria Spends Just About ₦234 per Disabled person, panellists calculate
…Specialists accuse Govt Agencies Of Poor implementation, Opaque Spending, Procurement Irregularities
…BudgIT Demands Disclosure Of Beneficiaries, Contractors, Project Costs, Fund Releases
…Experts Fault Exclusion Of PWDs From Budget Decisions, Demand Accountability Ahead Of 2027 Elections
Daud Olatunji
Disability inclusion specialists, journalists and public finance experts have raised concerns over what they described as grossly inadequate funding for persons with disabilities in Nigeria, revealing that the N8.2bn allocated for disability-related interventions in the 2026 national budget translates to approximately N234 per person when shared among an estimated 35 million people living with disabilities.
The experts also warned that inadequate budgetary allocations, poor implementation, alleged procurement irregularities and the exclusion of persons with disabilities from decision-making processes were undermining government efforts to improve their welfare and access to essential services.
They expressed their concerns during a monthly X Space discussion organised by PWDSpotlight in collaboration with BOFIM and BO News on Saturday, October 31, 2026.
The discussion, which examined disability-related allocations in the 2026 Appropriation Act, featured the Project Manager of PWDSpotlight, Habeeb Adisa; journalist with BOFIM and BO News, Blessing Oladunjoye; disability-inclusive development specialist and Founder of Inclusive Development Consults Ltd, Dr Adebukola Adebayo; and Oluwatimilehin Olugbemi of BudgIT’s Open Government and Institutional Partnership unit.
The panellists questioned the adequacy of the N8.2bn allocation, arguing that disability inclusion required considerably more than token financial provisions, particularly when the funding was expected to address education, healthcare, transportation, assistive devices, skills acquisition, accessibility infrastructure and social protection.
Introducing the discussion, Adisa disclosed that PWDSpotlight’s examination of the 2026 Appropriation Act revealed that the Federal Government had provided N8.2bn for disability-related interventions.
He said the analysis was necessary as Nigeria approached another election cycle in 2027, stressing the need to determine whether government commitments to persons with disabilities were translating into measurable improvements.
Oladunjoye, who described the allocation as grossly inadequate, said disability-related expenditure should not be treated as a charitable gesture but as an essential component of national development.
She explained that the additional costs associated with disability, including transportation, mobility assistance and access to public facilities, made adequate funding imperative.
According to her, a wheelchair user might have to pay for a taxi or ride-hailing service to cover a distance that a person without mobility challenges could easily walk.
She said, “In addressing issues around disability, providing funds should not be addressed from a tokenism point of view. We are all humans. Being persons with disabilities or not, we are all humans.”
Oladunjoye argued that the responsibility for disability inclusion should not be restricted to the National Commission for Persons with Disabilities or other specialised agencies, insisting that every government ministry and department had a role to play.
She maintained that road construction, education, healthcare, transportation and other public services should incorporate accessibility requirements from the planning stage rather than waiting for separate interventions after projects had been completed.
She said, “Disability is a cross-cutting issue. When building roads, are you ensuring that there is a walkway that people can seamlessly pass through? A blind person should be able to navigate that path with his or her guide cane.”
The journalist added that government agencies should mainstream disability considerations into their respective programmes instead of assuming that the responsibility rested exclusively with disability-focused institutions.
