Presidential Aide Otega Ogra Dismisses Rufai Oseni’s Misinformation On Power Sector Financial Reforms
The Presidency has dismissed claims made by Arise TV anchor Rufai Oseni regarding the federal government’s Power Sector Financial Reforms, labeling them as “misinformation.”
Otega Ogra, Senior Special Assistant to President Bola Tinubu on Digital/New Media, issued a detailed rebuttal via X (formerly Twitter), urging the broadcaster to prioritize factual reporting over “couching misinformation as critical thought.”
Addressing Oseni’s assertions on debt reconciliation, Ogra clarified that legacy obligation claims from stakeholders—spanning February 2015 to March 2025—originally totaled N4.7 trillion. However, following a rigorous regulatory review, the final negotiated settlement was reduced to N3.3 trillion.
“That is not spin,” Ogra stated, noting that the reconciliation saved the government N1.4 trillion (29.8%). “It is the difference between a claim and a verified obligation.”
Ogra reaffirmed the administration’s commitment to transparency as it continues to overhaul the power sector’s financial landscape.
Here is Mr Otega’s full response:
Dear Mr Rufai Oseni @ruffydfire,
You more than most should know better than to couch misinformation as critical thought so permit my intrusion if only to correct the misinformation you are still pushing on this issue.
1. From the government’s own programme sequence, the issue under reference is unambiguous. The legacy obligation claims by stakeholders in scope were put at ₦4.7 trillion for the period February 2015 to March 2025
2. After reconciliation and regulatory review, that figure was brought to ₦3.3 trillion as the full & final negotiated settlement. That is a reduction of ₦1.4 trillion, (about 29.8%). That is not spin. It is the difference between a claim and a verified obligation
3. Your shop analogy is emotionally convenient, but financially false. Government is not a buyer haggling prices at Obalende market. In a regulated electricity market, submitted claims are not self executing truths. They must be tested against contracts, market rules, settlement records, and admissible obligations. If a claim of ₦4.7 trillion is reconciled to ₦3.3 trillion, the question is not why it changed. The real question is whether the final figure reflects verified contractual exposure. That is exactly what the review process recommended by Mr President was meant for
4. On your suggestion that GenCos are signing only out of desperation, what do the numbers say?
– As at January 8, 2026, at the close of Series I, Phase I which raised ₦501 billion, 5 GenCos covering 8 power plants had already signed negotiated settlement agreements of about ₦827 billion.
– By March 31, 2026, that had risen to 8 GenCos, made up of 2 public and 6 privately owned entities, covering 17 power plants, with signed agreements of about ₦2.28 trillion. That is not a phantom process. It is measurable progression
5. On the bond point, this is where your argument tries to sound clever but collapses under basic finance. A bond is not the same as immediate cash, yes. But that was never the claim. The programme has moved beyond rhetoric into funding and disbursement. Phase I was structured at ₦1.23 trillion. ₦501 billion has been raised for the first series in that phase. ₦223 billion has already been disbursed to Generation Companies and gas suppliers. ₦197 billion is in process, largely for gas obligations. That is liquidity entering the system. Not paper being rearranged.
6. Now to your red herring claim. The sequence matters because policy credibility lives in sequence.
– July 2024, presidential authorisation for a comprehensive review of the sector following a policy paper presentation.
– July 26, 2025, President Tinubu’s engagement with GenCos (claims of ₦4.7T presented)
– August 15, 2025, FEC approval of a framework of up to ₦4 trillion.
– Then reconciliation leading to the verified claims of N3.3T. Then market issuance. Then disbursement. That is not evasion. That is process. And in a sector like this, long weakened by opacity, process is the core reform.
7. Where your critique comes closest to substance is on the structural gap. You are right that settlement alone will not fix the sector. That is precisely why this programme runs alongside tariff alignment where service justifies it, metering expansion, stronger payment discipline, and targeted support for the poor and vulnerable. Otherwise, the same debt cycle simply recreates itself.
8. So to reclarify all I’ve said, verified settlements exist. Go and verify. Funding has been raised. Disbursements have begun. Most of the value is already covered in signed agreements by operators. You may argue it is incomplete. That is a fair argument. But it is highly inaccurate to suggest nothing has happened or that this is merely accounting fiction. The facts and record do not support that.
P.S: This is not the end of the problem. But it is a structured attempt to fix it. And serious analysis from those in a position like yours, should be able to tell the difference.
– O’tega ‘The Tiger’ Ogra
