Fred Agbedi challenges Benjamin Kalu over a tuition waiver motion as lawmakers review student support and NELFUND’s ₦372.6bn disbursement.

The Minority Leader of Nigeria’s House of Representatives, Fred Agbedi, has challenged Deputy Speaker Benjamin Kalu over the handling of a proposed one-year tuition fee waiver for students in federal tertiary institutions, questioning the decision to invite House Leader Julius Ihonvbere to address lawmakers after the motion had been stepped down in Abuja on Thursday, 29 October 2026.

Also read:Dangote Refinery Closes $1.6bn IPO After Global Rush

The disagreement unfolded during plenary after the motion’s sponsor, Ahmed Satomi, an All Progressives Congress (APC) member representing a constituency in Borno State, withdrew the proposal from immediate consideration following consultations with Ihonvbere.

Agbedi argued that the subsequent invitation for the House Leader to speak on the matter was inconsistent with parliamentary procedure, insisting that the motion was no longer before the House for debate.

Citing Order 8, Statute 1, which governs the arrangement of business, the minority leader questioned the decision to reopen discussion after the proposal had been stepped down.

“We have passed personal explanation, we have passed orders of the day, and Mr Speaker, you stepped down a motion that was brought by Honourable Satomi, and then, you called on the Leader of the House to intervene on a matter that is not within the order,” Agbedi said.

He also challenged the rationale for the proposed waiver, arguing that the Nigerian Education Loan Fund (NELFUND) already provided a statutory framework for supporting students who struggle to finance their education.

“You cannot bring a motion to amend the NELFUND law,” Agbedi said, adding that a proposal for the Federal Government to pay tuition fees for all eligible students would need to be considered alongside the existing legislation.

He maintained that inviting Ihonvbere to address the House after the motion had been stepped down was an “aberration” that had no place in the House rules.

Kalu rejected the objection and ruled Agbedi out of order, repeating: “You are ruled out of order. You are ruled out of order.”

Earlier, Satomi had explained that he consulted Ihonvbere, who addressed some of the concerns surrounding the proposed intervention.

The motion was subsequently stepped down for further consultation rather than adopted as a resolution.

Following the exchange, Kalu invited Ihonvbere to brief lawmakers on NELFUND’s performance and the extent of financial support provided to students and tertiary institutions.

Ihonvbere disclosed that the fund had disbursed approximately ₦372.6bn as of 29 September 2026, including ₦192.9bn paid directly to tertiary institutions for fees and ₦179.7bn released to students as upkeep allowances.

The figures are consistent with NELFUND’s published disbursement report, which recorded total payments of ₦372.62bn across 319 institutions.

The fund had processed approximately 1.66 million applications since its student loan portal opened in May 2024.

The number of applications processed should not, however, be interpreted as the exact number of individual students who received funding.

The House Leader urged lawmakers to inform constituents about the scheme and encourage eligible students to apply, noting that applications could be completed online without personal connections or visits to government offices.

The exchange highlights a broader policy question facing Nigeria’s tertiary education sector: whether student loans, direct government subsidies or temporary fee relief offer the most effective means of keeping higher education accessible as household finances come under pressure.

Satomi’s proposal was presented against the backdrop of rising living costs following the Federal Government’s economic reforms, including the removal of the petrol subsidy.

The sponsor argued that higher food, transport, accommodation and electricity costs had made it increasingly difficult for parents and guardians to meet university and other tertiary education expenses.

Under the proposal, the Federal Government would introduce a one-year emergency tuition waiver for eligible students in federal universities, polytechnics, colleges of education and other federal tertiary institutions.

The motion warned that financial difficulties could force some students to abandon their studies, defer graduation or struggle to meet compulsory charges.

It also argued that barriers to education could deepen inequality, undermine social mobility and contribute to youth unemployment.

Satomi called for any relief programme to be time-bound, periodically reviewed and adequately funded, with safeguards to ensure that institutions could continue providing quality education.

The proposal was not adopted, and the decision to step it down leaves the suggested waiver without legislative approval at this stage.

NELFUND, meanwhile, represents the Federal Government’s existing approach to student financing.

Its scheme provides support for eligible students through payments towards institutional fees and upkeep allowances, with the aim of reducing the immediate financial barriers to tertiary education.

The programme’s substantial disbursements indicate the scale of demand for financial assistance, but the wider debate over affordability remains unresolved.

Tuition payments alone do not cover all the costs associated with attending university or another tertiary institution, particularly accommodation, transport, food, learning materials and other daily expenses.

For students from low-income households, the distinction between a loan and a fee waiver is also significant.

A waiver would remove eligible tuition costs for the specified period, whereas a loan provides financial assistance subject to the scheme’s applicable terms and repayment arrangements.

The parliamentary disagreement therefore reflects two related but distinct questions: how the House should handle motions under its rules and how the Federal Government should balance financial assistance with the long-term sustainability of public tertiary education.

For now, Satomi’s proposal remains stepped down for further consultation, while NELFUND continues to operate as the established student financing mechanism.

Also read:Dangote Refinery Closes $1.6bn IPO After Global Rush

Any decision to introduce a temporary waiver would require further consideration of its funding, eligibility criteria and relationship with the existing loan framework.