The National President of the Victory Advocates of Nigeria (VAN) and a member of the opposing People’s Democratic Party (PDP), Prince Seyi Ajibola, has challenged the Ekiti State Government to respond to questions raised by an aspirant of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Kayode Ojo and his team over how more than ₦200 billion disbursed to the state in the past two years has been spent.
Ajibola, in an exclusive interview with VEONEWS, further urged the government to address former Governor Kayode Fayemi’s remarks on the worsening hunger and deplorable road conditions in the state.
While dismissing claims that the PDP as an opposition is weak in the state, the Ekiti PDP youth leader hopeful accused the governor of attempting to suppress critics by sending loyalists to attack opposition members. According to him, criticisms from the PDP have kept the government in check, pointing to an instance where a PDP aspirant fixed a bad road, only for the government to dismiss the effort and claim such interventions could not be used as a yardstick for its own achievements.
“…you say there is no opposition in Ekiti state, majority of the comments that we are just using our handles and every other thing to do, you are sending your data boys to attack us. In fact within their party, they have been arresting themselves, causing unnecessary unrest in Ekiti”.
“If you say there is no opposition in the state, then continue to sleep, whenever opposition makes a statement or tries to draw your attention to what is wrong in the society, don’t act on it!…let me direct your attention to one thing, Mr Kayode Ojo and his teams query the present state government of not doing anything with the money that the federal government has given to them, what have we use over 200 billion to achieve in Ekiti for the past two years? Please, let the governor account for it, so that we will know.”
Beyond the controversy over roads, Prince Ajibola faulted the government’s handling of the economy, infrastructure, and education. He condemned the hike in school fees, alleged favouritism in the distribution of palliatives, and dismissed the government’s defence that certain neglected roads were federal responsibilities.
He argued that the state should have engaged the Federal Government to ensure such critical infrastructure was fixed.