By Our Reporter
On the roads of Abuja, politics can sometimes feel very far away.
For the trader trying to get home before dark, the civil servant navigating traffic, the resident in a developing community waiting for a good road, or the business owner hoping improved infrastructure will bring more customers, what matters is simple: Is the road being built, and who will ultimately pay for it?
But behind the construction sites, bulldozers and freshly graded roads is another battle — one involving money, accountability and the political future of the Federal Capital Territory.
At the centre of that battle are two familiar figures: FCT Minister Nyesom Wike and Senator Ireti Kingibe, who represents the FCT in the Senate.
Their disagreement over FCT borrowing has now moved beyond questions about loans and infrastructure. It has become part of a larger political confrontation ahead of the 2027 elections.
And on Tuesday, September 22, the temperature rose again.
While inspecting ongoing road projects in Abuja, Wike dismissed Kingibe’s allegations that the FCT Administration had obtained loans without the approval of the National Assembly.
But the minister did not stop at defending the borrowing.
He turned his attention to the senator’s political future.
Wike told journalists that Kingibe would not return to the Senate in 2027, while also launching a personal attack against her. He said residents had already made their choice and linked his position to support for President Bola Tinubu and former senator Philip Aduda.
The remarks added another layer to an already heated relationship between the minister and the senator.
For residents watching from the streets of Abuja, the argument may sound like another political fight among politicians.
But underneath it is a question that affects everyone who lives in the capital:
When government borrows money to build roads, who should answer for the money — and who should receive credit when the roads are completed?
The loan controversy
The disagreement began after Kingibe raised concerns about borrowing by the FCT Administration.
In August, the senator alleged that the FCT had obtained loans without securing the required approval of the National Assembly.
She said her position was based on information from the Debt Management Office covering the period from August 2023 to March 2026.
Kingibe argued that the National Assembly has an oversight responsibility over the FCT and questioned why she had not seen the minister appear before the Senate to seek approval for the alleged borrowing.
Her allegation immediately created a political storm.
Wike rejected it.
And on September 10, Deputy Spokesperson of the House of Representatives Philip Agbese also dismissed the allegation, saying there was no evidence that Wike had violated the law in financing FCT projects.
Agbese argued that borrowing for infrastructure is not unlawful where the required procedures and approvals are followed.
That response, however, did not end the controversy.
Instead, it remained part of the growing political disagreement between Wike and Kingibe.
Then came the roads
There is an irony in the latest confrontation.
Wike was not speaking from inside a political rally when he made the latest remarks.
He was inspecting roads.
The minister used the opportunity to point to ongoing infrastructure projects, including the N1 road and other stretches around Tunga Madaki, Zuba and Kagini.
His argument was straightforward: borrowing should not be judged simply by the fact that government borrowed money. The more important question, in his view, is whether the money is being used to provide infrastructure for residents.
For the people living in communities affected by these projects, that distinction matters.
A road is not simply asphalt.
It can mean the difference between spending hours travelling and reaching a destination faster.
It can determine whether farmers can move produce to markets.
It can influence the cost of transportation.
It can affect businesses, schools, emergency services and access to healthcare.
That is why government infrastructure often has a very personal meaning for ordinary people.
A politician may see kilometres of completed road.
A resident may see the road that finally makes it possible to get home without damaging a vehicle.
A trader may see a route to a larger market.
A parent may see easier access to a school.
A sick person may see a faster route to a hospital.
This is where the political argument meets everyday life.
But who gets the credit?
That is where politics enters the story.
Wike has presented the ongoing projects as evidence of the government’s commitment to infrastructure development.
He also connected the projects to the political conversation ahead of 2027, saying that residents can see what the administration is doing.
He argued that the projects themselves amount to campaigning because they demonstrate what President Tinubu’s government is doing in the capital.
Kingibe, meanwhile, has focused attention on oversight and the borrowing process.
The two positions therefore raise different questions.
Wike is asking residents to look at what is being built.
Kingibe has been asking questions about how the money used for such projects was obtained and whether the proper legislative process was followed.
For ordinary Abuja residents, both questions can matter.
A good road is important.
So is accountability over the money used to build it.
The 2027 shadow
But perhaps the biggest issue hanging over the dispute is no longer the road.
It is 2027.
Wike has previously backed former senator Philip Aduda for the FCT Senate seat, while Kingibe is the incumbent senator representing the territory.
The minister’s latest comments therefore take on a political significance beyond the immediate argument over borrowing.
When Wike says Kingibe will not return to the Senate, he is making a political prediction and expressing his support for a different candidate.
Kingibe’s future in the Senate, however, will ultimately be determined through the electoral process.
For now, the exchange has transformed an argument about public finance into a very visible political contest.
And Abuja residents are watching.
They are watching the roads.
They are watching the projects.
They are watching the politicians.
They are also watching the numbers.
The people behind the politics
There is a danger in political arguments of making the politicians the entire story.
But Abuja is bigger than Wike and Kingibe.
Behind every political statement are millions of people whose lives are affected by decisions made in government offices.
The woman selling food beside a developing road does not necessarily care which politician wins an argument.
She wants customers to reach her shop.
The commercial driver does not necessarily care who takes credit for a road.
He wants a road that will reduce vehicle repairs.
The young person living on the outskirts of the capital does not necessarily care who wins a political exchange.
He wants infrastructure that can make his community feel connected to the city.
That is the human side of the Wike-Kingibe dispute.
Politics may be about power, elections and control.
But governance eventually comes down to something much more ordinary:
How does the decision affect the person on the street?
That is why the controversy over FCT borrowing deserves attention beyond the insults and political declarations.
If money was borrowed, residents deserve clarity about how it was approved, how much was borrowed, the terms of the borrowing and what projects the funds are financing.
If the borrowing followed the required procedures, the relevant records and approvals can provide the clearest answer.
And if roads are being built with the money, residents have every reason to demand that the projects are completed to standard and that public funds deliver public value.
The political fight may continue.
Wike may continue defending the projects.
Kingibe may continue asking questions.
And the 2027 election will eventually provide voters with the opportunity to decide who represents them.
But long after political statements disappear from newspaper pages and social media timelines, Abuja residents will still be living with the roads that are being built today — and with the financial decisions being made in their name.
That may be the most important story beneath the political noise.
Because when politicians fight over Abuja, the people of Abuja are the ones who ultimately live with the consequences.
