N50,000 Grants, Politics, and the Realities of Empowerment

The discussion around First Lady Oluremi Tinubu’s N50,000 grants for small traders has brought back the debate about empowerment in Nigerian politics. As politicians ramp up grassroots efforts amid rising poverty, many are questioning if these programs aim to help people or simply keep them loyal and dependent on political leaders.

For the past two weeks, Nigerians have been talking about Mrs Tinubu’s comments on supporting women with grants to start small businesses like frying akara, roasting corn, making kuli-kuli, and selling vegetables.

What was meant to showcase one of the Federal Government’s empowerment programs has turned into a bigger national conversation about poverty, governance, and the real impact of these so-called empowerment programs.

Many people see the First Lady’s remarks as proof of how out of touch the political elite is with the struggles everyday Nigerians face.

Instead of quieting the criticism, the backlash grew stronger after Mrs Tinubu, during her visit to Jigawa State on June 29, insisted that the negative comments would not stop the program.

She announced that the Federal Government had given out N100 million to 2,000 petty traders, with each person receiving N50,000 to boost businesses ranging from tomatoes and peppers to vegetables and roasted plantains.

Just a day before, on June 28, Sunday Dare, the Special Adviser to the President on Media and Public Communication, defended the initiative. He shared how his mother raised him with money from selling akara and bananas.

“You must not miss her (Mrs Tinubu’s) point. Her point is that whatever it is, try and do something, have some level of entrepreneurial skill… The point she is making is, whatever it is, be engaged in some kind of enterprise,” Dare explained.

Yet, this defense did not calm the anger of the public. Instead, funny videos made with artificial intelligence showed President Bola Tinubu and the First Lady selling akara, roasted plantains, and other small trade items. These videos provided comic relief while highlighting public dissatisfaction with the ongoing debate.

In a nod to the ongoing conversations, President Tinubu playfully called his wife “Iya Alakara” (Mama Akara Seller) during his speech at the Presidential Press Corps Dinner in Abuja on Thursday.

The First Lady’s grants have been in place for a while, and only her office can give accurate figures on how many people have benefited.

Some political analysts believe the grants do not provide true economic empowerment. They called on the First Lady’s office to show proof of any petty trader whose N50,000 grant has really helped lift them out of poverty. This is especially concerning since the World Bank reported that the number of Nigerians living below the national poverty line has gone up from 56 percent in 2023 to 61 percent in 2024 and 63 percent in 2025.

The Reality of Empowerment

Empowerment programs are not new in Nigeria's political scene.

Across different political parties, politicians often hand out cash, food, motorcycles, sewing machines, and other items under the guise of empowering their constituents. These programs tend to become more visible as elections draw near.

While some initiatives genuinely offer vocational training, educational support, and tools that can create lasting jobs, critics argue that many are just temporary handouts meant to secure votes rather than truly help people.

Analysts believe what politicians call empowerment has turned into a tool for political mobilization. This is especially true in a situation where many citizens are vulnerable to such inducements due to widespread poverty.

Because of this, observers are questioning whether these small financial aids really empower citizens or exploit their economic struggles.

A study titled “Vote-Buying And Its Implication On Democratisation: An Interrogation Of 2023 General Election In The Southern Senatorial District Of Adamawa State,” published in the ADSU International Journal of Politics, Administration and Management, argued that many political empowerment programs are more about buying electoral loyalty than promoting real development.

The authors, Bolanje Dikimono and Amana Naphtali, stated, “Political empowerment initiatives often act as a thinly veiled form of voter inducement or clientelism. Instead of driving sustainable development, these temporary handouts are strategically deployed to buy loyalty and secure electoral support, frequently exploiting the economic vulnerabilities of the electorate.”

Critics say such programs blur the lines between social welfare and political manipulation.

According to Samson Itodo, Executive Director of YIAGA Africa, the rise of political empowerment programs is more about political strategy than helping the poor.

He said that these initiatives, especially when they happen close to elections, should be seen as efforts to mobilize voters rather than true economic development.

When asked about the First Lady’s N50,000 grants and similar efforts by politicians, Itodo called them signs of governance failure at the grassroots level.

“When politicians start implementing and distributing all sorts of empowerment initiatives or programs close to the elections, the only thing you can just say is that these are all efforts, a political strategy to build political capital and try to influence voting choices of people.

“The empowerments at build-up to the elections tell you the level of political mobilization building up to the election. It’s just an attempt to induce voters and influence their choices at the next elections.

“Sometimes, there is a thin line between when a government is implementing programs towards development and helping people benefit from democracy and improving their material conditions, and the real reasons behind that particular empowerment. And I think the question of time is really central.”

Beyond the political timing, Itodo questioned the actual value of the interventions, noting, “If N50,000 is provided to an individual as some sorts of palliative, what would that amount do in today’s Nigeria? For me, it’s even just a weaponization of poverty.

“In an ideal society where local government delivers to the people, we shouldn’t be having this conversation about N50,000 empowerment to the people because their welfare at that micro level would have been taken care of. But unfortunately, because of that collapse of governance, people are so impoverished and poor. So, N50,000 is a big money for some people, unfortunately.

“It’s even an indictment that the political class has really failed, that N50,000 looks like N1 million or N2 million to some people at the community level. We have to get to a point where this does not become the norm. Because politicians and political leaders have governed terribly, people are poor and cannot boast of three square meals in a day.”

He added that real empowerment goes beyond one-time financial help.

“Governance is cross-cutting, and it has to think about the long-term and not the short-term or ad hoc interventions that do nothing but just puts food on the table of people for one week. That’s not what Nigerians want. Nigerians need economic support that spans all their lives. Not one that is just for a short period of time. This sort of short-term gratification is not what democracy envisions. Democracy envisions long-term gratification where people can proceed happily. Their material conditions are improved, and they can, within the society, utilize the resources that are available for them to live very good and quality lives,” he added.

Vote Buying in Disguise

Dr Yemi Farounbi, a former Nigerian Ambassador to the Philippines, sees a pattern in many of the empowerment programs pushed by politicians.

He believes they are just a clever way of doing what became known during the 2022 Ekiti State governorship election as “dibo ko s’obe”, which translates to vote and make soup, amid claims of open vote buying.

“What politicians do now is sheer buying of political loyalty. They might as well financially buy the loyalty of the voters. What they do is not different from gba-ko-sebe… an exercise in political deceit,” he said.

Farounbi, however, noted a difference between the First Lady’s message about starting small and the actual costs needed to make such businesses work. He said small businesses are vital for a strong economy and can create jobs if properly supported.

“I have no problem with the suggestion of the First Lady, if it is to illustrate the beauty of starting small. I believe that millions of small-scale businesses in Nigeria can mop up some of the unemployment pervading Nigeria’s economic landscape. In fact, I believe that akara, kulikuli, and agbado roasting can be viable businesses based on a well-studied need of the environment,” he said.

His worry is whether the First Lady understands the true cost of starting such businesses.

“I don’t know whether the First Lady has asked someone to do a financial analysis of what is needed to start any of her suggested businesses. Take akara, for example. A kiosk will be built on a rented space. Frying pans are not cheap. The ingredients, including beans, palm oil or vegetable oil, pepper, onions, and grinding, are no longer what they used to cost when she perhaps bought akara in Ibadan.

“An officer in her office can do an honest financial analysis of the other suggested businesses. The officer’s analysis will show that more than N50,000 will be needed. That makes her suggestions fall into the category of empowerment programs not designed to lift people out of poverty. And that is my worry; every program ought to seek to add value to the economy or uplift the lives of the people from multidimensional poverty,” he added.

Farounbi also pointed out that the real issue is how politicians see the people.

“Politicians see voters as items to be purchased. They don’t see them as human beings created by God as equal to them. They see them as instruments to deliver votes, not really as the pillars on which the country stands. They treat them like irrelevant dwarfs that have to be tolerated. They forget that no great country can be built by dwarfs.”

He emphasized that with over 132 million Nigerians living in multidimensional poverty, as reported by the National Bureau of Statistics, economic programs should aim to create lasting value, not just temporary political favors.

The former ambassador concluded, “The empowerment programs cannot sustain the beneficiaries because they were not designed to sustain them but to hoodwink them.”

Need for Real Change

Steve Aluko-Daniel, Director of the Civil Liberty Organisation, believes the main problem with many political empowerment programs is not the idea of helping citizens but the lack of a real strategy to change their economic situations.

He argued that most programs are not based on evidence or the actual needs of the people, making them largely ineffective against poverty.

“In most cases, some of those empowerments are misplaced because they are not resource-based, and sometimes it is over-generalization. Whatever empowerment anybody receives that does not take care of both the immediate and future needs is a drop in the ocean which amounts to nothing.

“The politician only remembers the people when they are caught in the web, and it shows the little value they attach to the voters. Many of them do not value the electorate. In fact, their empowerment is part of the trade-off game, voter inducement.

“Most of what our politicians are doing is giving people what will make them wretched, giving them what will not add value to their lives. It is part of another form of vote buying because any empowerment program that is not based on baseline analysis and the genuine interests of the supposed beneficiaries is a mark of pure deceit and deception.”

While governments and elected officials often call such programs poverty relief initiatives, critics say many are set up to yield quick political benefits rather than long-term economic solutions.