By Samuel Efosa
There is a point at which political criticism becomes an exercise in deliberately confusing the public. The latest attempt to portray Edo State as recklessly accumulating debt appears to fall into that category.
Let us be clear: a debt figure without its composition is not an analysis. It is a headline. The figures released by the Edo State Ministry of Finance deserve to be read properly.
Under Governor Monday Okpebholo, Edo’s structured domestic debt loans, bonds and other formal borrowing has not been rising. It has been falling. From approximately ₦36.03 billion in the fourth quarter of 2024, it declined consistently to about ₦22.60 billion by the first quarter of 2026.
That is a reduction of roughly 37 percent. So, if the argument is that the Okpebholo administration has been recklessly borrowing, the most obvious question is: where are the new loans?
The numbers presented by the government do not show an administration piling up fresh structured debt. They show one reducing inherited structured obligations. That fact cannot simply be wished away because it is inconvenient to a preferred political narrative.
There is another important component: pension and gratuity arrears. These fell from approximately ₦57.14 billion at the end of 2024 to ₦48.42 billion by the first quarter of 2026.
Again, that is a reduction.
And behind that reduction are real people Edo pensioners who have waited for money legitimately owed to them. Paying down inherited pension obligations is not something a responsible government should be attacked for doing.
Then we come to contractor obligations, which appear to be the principal reason for the increase in the aggregate figure.
Here is where intellectual honesty becomes particularly important. If a government undertakes substantial road construction, flyovers and other public works, certified obligations to contractors will necessarily arise. A government cannot build significant public assets and simultaneously pretend that construction has no financial consequences.
The proper question is therefore not simply: “Has the debt number increased?The proper questions are: What created the obligation? Was the work actually done? Was it certified? What public asset has been created? Was the expenditure properly authorized and is the liability sustainable?
Those are serious questions. They should be asked and answered. But simply lumping every obligation together and presenting the resulting figure as proof of reckless borrowing is intellectually dishonest.
Indeed, the figures supplied by the Edo Government present a rather different story: structured loans are being paid down; pension and gratuity arrears are being reduced; previously inherited contractor obligations were cleared; and new obligations have arisen in connection with substantial public works.
That is a much more complicated picture than the politically convenient phrase “Edo debt is rising.” And complexity is not the enemy of accountability. Misrepresentation is.
I have consistently argued that Nigeria must move away from the politics of superficial statistics. We cannot demand that governments build roads, bridges, schools and other productive assets and then condemn every certified obligation arising from those projects as though it were evidence of financial irresponsibility.
There is good debt and there is bad debt. There is productive expenditure and there is waste. There is an enormous difference between borrowing to consume and an obligation arising from an asset that will serve the public for years.
The distinction matters.
This is not an argument for giving any government a free pass. Governor Okpebholo’s administration should remain under scrutiny. Every project should be subject to transparency, proper procurement, value-for-money tests, quality assurance and timely completion. Public money must always be accounted for.
But accountability requires us to tell the whole story.
The Debt Management Office itself publishes state-level domestic debt data quarterly, underscoring the importance of looking at the actual composition and period of the liabilities rather than relying on political interpretations of a single number.
I therefore find the attempt to turn this particular set of figures into evidence of indiscriminate borrowing unconvincing.
Edo is building significant infrastructure under Governor Monday Okpebholo. If those projects are properly executed and the obligations are responsibly managed, then the appropriate conversation is about the quality, cost and economic value of what is being built—not the manufacture of alarm by presenting every outstanding obligation as though it were a new loan.
Politics should not require us to abandon arithmetic.
The people of Edo deserve better than that. They deserve the numbers, the composition of the numbers, the projects behind the numbers, and the results. Then let the people judge.
Dr. Samuel Efosa holds PhD in Development Economics and writes from Edo State
FOOTNOTE: You want to share story with us? You want to advertise with us? You need publicity for product, or service, or event? Contact us on WhatsApp +2348073463653 or email penpushing@yahoo.com
