GOVERNORS, NOT THE PRESIDENT, TO BE BLAMED FOR THE ECONOMIC WOES OF THE STATE
By Olusegun HOSEA, Akure
23rd April, 2026
Introduction: The Blame Game in Nigeria’s Economy
The strength of a nation lies in the effectiveness and robustness of its economy for proper growth and speedy development in all ramifications. But when the expected changes fail to take place, people begin to complain and grumble, directly or indirectly, while shifting blame to different tiers of government. It is against this background that Olusegun HOSEA explores the theme that governors, not the President, are to be blamed for the economic woes of the state.
Understanding Economics and Wealth Distribution
A lot of definitions have been given by various economists on the concept of economics and how nations distribute their wealth for the betterment of their citizens. The most widely accepted definition is the one given by the famous economist Adam Smith, when he described economics as “an inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations.” This came from his renowned book, The Wealth of Nations (1776), where he focused on how nations create, distribute, and grow wealth.
Governors as Chief Drivers of State Development
To this end, one would rightly say that the causes of the economic woes of Nigeria, in particular, lie not with the President but with the governors, who are the chief accounting and security officers of their respective states. They receive allocations directly from the federal purse and are expected to manage and utilize these resources to better the lives of their people. It is the governors, not the President, who are primarily responsible for the development of their states. State governments are meant to cater for the security of lives and property because they are the closest tier of government to the people, with local government structures within communities, making it easier for them to control and make their states viable for citizens to thrive.
Misplaced Blame on the Federal Government
The economy of any state lies in the hands of the governor who is in charge of that state. He controls the key to development because the people have given him their mandate to govern and utilize the state’s resources for growth and development. But when governors fail in this responsibility, people begin to shift their economic woes to the federal government, based on the erroneous belief that the federal government controls all the nation’s resources. In the words of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, GCFR, Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, who said on national television that “governors should go and wet the ground more,” this statement carries deep meaning for political analysts and citizens alike, leading to various interpretations. Firstly, the President was urging governors to intensify their efforts in delivering dividends of democracy to their people. Secondly, it implies that states are now receiving increased allocations, making it easier for them to implement projects and cater to the welfare of their citizens.
Increased Allocations and Expectations from States
Similarly, statements from several governors in public forums have confirmed that more funds are now accruing to states compared to the past, especially during periods when some states struggled to pay salaries. In some states, that era was referred to as “AFUSA” or “HAFUSA,” a derogatory term used to describe the payment of half salaries to civil servants due to poor federal allocations. Today, however, the difference is as clear as the popular Seven-Up slogan. Therefore, poor development in any state can largely be attributed to the actions or inactions of its governor, not the federal government.
Education Sector: A Decline from Past Standards
Furthermore, internally generated revenue (IGR) serves as an additional source of income for states, complementing federal allocations. Yet, many states still cannot provide free and qualitative education as was done during the era of Chief Obafemi Awolowo and Chief Adekunle Ajasin of blessed memory. In most cases, governments only succeed in paying for external examinations, while other aspects of the education sector suffer. Some principals and headmasters exploit students in various ways due to weak policy implementation. Books are not freely provided to students in many public schools, unlike during the old Western Region era. Today, infrastructure in several public schools is nothing to write home about, despite increased funds in state coffers, with little corresponding development.
Water Supply and Basic Social Amenities Crisis
Similarly, in the area of water supply, which should be a basic social amenity, pipe-borne water—supposed to be widely available across urban and rural areas—is now largely confined to state capitals, often sold to residents. As states expand, water corporations should also expand their services to reach more people, since not everyone resides in the capital. This could also serve as a source of revenue for the government, as citizens would be willing to pay water bills just as they do for electricity. However, what is common today is the widespread digging of boreholes and wells across states. If not properly managed, this could pose environmental risks, including potential ground instability in suburban areas.
Reviving Industries Through Public-Private Partnerships
Governors must also do more to revive moribund industries and, where necessary, establish new ones through Public-Private Partnerships (PPP). This would create employment opportunities and reduce unemployment. The resources—both human and natural—are available within the states. What is required is sincerity of purpose and the political will to execute such projects.
Energy Challenges and the Need for State Innovation
Of course, this cannot succeed without stable energy supply. However, governments have the capacity to attract investors and even generate their own power. Institutions such as Covenant University generate their own electricity to sustain operations. If a private institution can achieve this, then state governments have no excuse for failing in this regard.
Security Responsibilities and Government Accountability
Security is everyone’s responsibility, but those entrusted with leadership must rise to the occasion. Although security agencies may face challenges such as sabotage from individuals seeking to destabilize the system, the ultimate responsibility lies with the government. The power to address insecurity rests with those in authority, who must deploy resources, equipment, and political will to tackle the issue effectively and restore peace. Leadership requires action, and decisive action commands respect when adequate resources are properly utilized to achieve desired results.
The Role of Federal Oversight and Monitoring
The Presidency, however, also shares part of the blame for the nation’s economic woes due to inadequate monitoring of how funds are utilized by states. During the administration of Chief Olusegun Obasanjo, local governments were required to publicly account for their stewardship on a regular basis. This promoted accountability, as citizens could challenge discrepancies. If the federal government adopts similar oversight for states, requiring periodic public accountability for funds received, it would compel governors to be more responsible and competitive in delivering development.
Refineries, Fuel Prices, and Economic Impact
Additionally, the state of the nation’s refineries remains a major concern. Promises made during election campaigns have yet to be fully realized. Nigerians urgently need functional refineries to reduce the cost of petroleum products. Currently, fuel prices hover around ₦1400 per litre in many filling stations, despite Nigeria having multiple refineries. The government has struggled to ensure that even one operates efficiently to ease the burden on citizens. Although the Dangote Refinery has provided some relief, it is insufficient for a country with a population exceeding 200 million people. A reduction in fuel prices would automatically lower food costs and other services, thereby improving the standard of living.
Conclusion: Reassessing Responsibility for Economic Woes
In conclusion, having examined this issue from various perspectives, it is left to the public to either agree or disagree with the position expressed in this piece. However, the argument remains that the economic woes of the state can largely be attributed to governors rather than the President, given the significant resources allocated to states alongside internally generated revenue, without commensurate developmental outcomes. I so submit.
