The 2025 budget of Ondo State, recently signed into law by Governor Lucky Aiyedatiwa, has become a source of intense political contention. Totalling N698.6 billion, the budget allocates N265.04 billion for recurrent expenditure and N433.62 billion for capital projects. While the Aiyedatiwa administration hails it as a “Budget of Recovery,” the opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) vehemently criticizes it as a “Budget of Looting,” alleging wasteful and dubious allocations that prioritize political patronage over the welfare of the people. This disagreement underscores the deepening political divide in the state and raises crucial questions about transparency and accountability in public finance management.
At the heart of the PDP’s criticism are specific allocations that the party deems extravagant and lacking justification. A particularly contentious point is the allocation of N200 million for “phone expenses” for lawmakers and an additional N280 million for the Speaker of the Ondo State House of Assembly, also designated for phone expenses. The PDP argues that these sums are outrageous and demonstrate a misplaced focus on enriching political elites rather than addressing the needs of the populace. Furthermore, the allocation of N11.5 billion to the Ministry of Finance under the guise of a “security vote” has drawn sharp criticism. The PDP questions the rationale behind granting such a substantial security vote to a ministry, particularly when the Governor already receives a separate monthly security allocation. This raises concerns about the potential for misuse and lack of transparency in the handling of public funds.
The PDP contrasts these seemingly inflated allocations with what it perceives as inadequate funding for critical sectors like education and healthcare. The budget allocates N77.02 billion to education and N46.02 billion to healthcare, amounts the PDP argues are insufficient to address the pressing needs in these vital areas. The party contends that these allocations reflect a skewed prioritization that undervalues human capital development and the well-being of the citizens. They argue that the government should be investing more heavily in these sectors to improve the quality of life for the people of Ondo State.
The ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), however, dismisses the PDP’s allegations as politically motivated and baseless. The APC maintains that the budget is a well-crafted financial plan designed to stimulate economic growth and development within the state. They argue that the allocations are aligned with the state’s developmental priorities and reflect a strategic approach to addressing the challenges faced by the state. The APC attributes the PDP’s criticism to bitterness stemming from their loss in the previous governorship election, suggesting that their accusations are driven by political opportunism rather than genuine concern for the welfare of the people.
This clash of perspectives highlights a fundamental disagreement about the budget’s purpose and effectiveness. The PDP views the budget as a mechanism for enriching political insiders and neglecting the needs of the populace, while the APC portrays it as a strategic investment in the state’s future. This divergence reflects the broader political landscape in Ondo State, where the ruling APC and the opposition PDP are locked in a power struggle, with the 2025 budget serving as the latest battleground.
The controversy surrounding the Ondo State 2025 budget underscores the importance of transparency and accountability in public finance. The PDP’s call for an investigation by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) reflects the need for greater scrutiny of government spending and a commitment to ensuring that public funds are used responsibly and effectively. The ongoing debate surrounding the budget serves as a reminder that effective governance requires not only sound fiscal policies but also open communication and public engagement to build trust and ensure that the needs of the citizens are being met. The controversy also emphasizes the crucial role of opposition parties in holding the government accountable and demanding transparency in the management of public resources.
