The House of Representatives has halted its review of the 2026–2028 Medium-Term Expenditure Framework and Fiscal Strategy Paper.

This decision followed a disagreement among lawmakers regarding the proposed adjustments to crude oil price assumptions, which serve as the foundation for the federal government’s revenue and spending blueprints.

The framework was presented during Wednesday’s plenary by James Faleke, who serves as the chairman of the joint committees on finance and on national planning and economic development. The process stalled when members voiced concerns over discrepancies in the provided figures and the potential consequences of changing essential macroeconomic benchmarks.

A major point of contention was the committee’s suggestion to modify the crude oil benchmark prices within the framework. The executive branch had originally projected prices of $64.85, $64.30, and $65.50 per barrel for the years 2026, 2027, and 2028. However, the committee advised reducing the 2026 benchmark to $60 per barrel while increasing the targets to $65 for 2027 and $70 for 2028.

The committee explained that these recommendations were based on increased geopolitical instability in the Middle East and Europe, as well as the ongoing volatility observed in the global oil markets.

Speaker of the House Tajudeen Abbas expressed disapproval of these modifications. He cautioned that altering the oil benchmark would trigger a series of effects impacting revenue predictions, the necessity for borrowing, and the total magnitude of the national budget.

The Speaker raised questions about whether the committee had thoroughly analyzed how lower oil prices and potential changes in production levels would affect the total revenue available to the government.

Abbas pointed out that the proposed ₦54.46tn spending plan was built upon specific oil price estimates. He contended that reducing the benchmark to $60 per barrel would create a deficit of approximately $5 per barrel, a gap that he argued would diminish oil and gas earnings and likely necessitate a complete review of the budget limits.

“How do you intend to accommodate the revenue shock that will arise from lowering the benchmark price and possibly adjusting production volumes?” he queried, urging the committee to clarify whether any shortfall would be covered through higher domestic revenue mobilisation or increased domestic and external borrowing.

James Faleke stood by the proposal, emphasizing that the MTEF and FSP are constructed on assumptions that require legislative consent before the executive branch can finalize the annual budget. He noted that the government’s initial estimates are not the final say on the parameters used and encouraged his colleagues to pass the framework to prevent a delay in the budget cycle.

Deputy Speaker Benjamin Kalu aligned with the Speaker’s perspective. He remarked that while adopting a conservative oil benchmark is a fiscally responsible move, it would naturally result in a revenue deficit that must be addressed.

Following a lengthy debate that failed to reach a conclusion, Faleke moved a motion to step down the reports to allow for additional revisions. The House approved the motion, and Speaker Abbas instructed the joint committees to re-examine the data and present a corrected report the next day.