In Sokoto State, socio-economic development is not a distant dream—it is a daily demand. Across urban and rural communities alike, citizens who had long contended with poor road networks, limited access to quality healthcare, erratic power supply, and classrooms that require urgent rehabilitation want more. For many families, these challenges were not statistics; they were lived realities that affect income, health outcomes, and educational attainment. It was against this backdrop that Ahmed Aliyu assumed office, inheriting both the weight of public expectation and the structural limitations of a state that was heavily dependent on federal allocations, with internally generated revenue that was almost nonexistent.
From the very outset, the Aliyu administration understood that the central question was not whether development was necessary, because the urgency of development in Sokoto State was self-evident. The more difficult question was how to finance the transformation without jeopardizing fiscal stability. In an environment where commercial banks are willing to extend credit to subnational governments, and where political pressure often favors quick, visible results, Governor Aliyu’s firm and deliberate stance that Sokoto State will not rush into borrowing to fund its projects is commendable. Despite calls from some quarters to leverage borrowing in order to fast-track infrastructure delivery, the administration has consistently emphasized prudence, cost control, and disciplined expenditure.
Governor Aliyu’s approach has sparked a healthy debate. Some analysts argue that without borrowing, progress may be too slow to meet the scale of the state’s developmental deficits. They point to examples from other parts of the country where ambitious infrastructure drives—financed largely through loans—have delivered highways, flyovers, and large public buildings within a short period. In their view, visible infrastructure would stimulate economic activity and attract investors. Yet the Aliyu administration maintains that such models come with hidden costs. The governor is speaking from the practical experience of paying off the loans accumulated by his predecessor, Aminu Tambuwal. For states with broader revenue bases, debt may be manageable; for a state like Sokoto, with limited fiscal buffers, aggressive borrowing could quickly translate into heavy debt-servicing obligations that would crowd out essential spending on health, education, and social protection.
The logic behind Aliyu’s fiscal caution is compelling. By limiting liabilities, the government preserves flexibility in its annual budgets. It reduces the risk of future administrations inheriting unsustainable repayment burdens that will constrain policy choices. It also shields the state from vulnerability to macroeconomic shocks, including fluctuations in federal allocations or changes in national fiscal policy. In a country where concerns about subnational debt sustainability continue to surface, restraint should be commended as foresight. Prudence signals to investors, development partners, and citizens that public finances are being managed with long-term stability in mind.
It is a statement of fact that Sokoto’s development indicators reveal structural challenges that require more than incremental adjustments. Many communities still struggle with access to safe drinking water and reliable electricity. Primary and secondary schools in rural areas face shortages of instructional materials and qualified teachers. Youth unemployment remains a pressing concern in a state with a rapidly expanding population. Poor road connectivity continues to isolate agricultural producers from major markets, inflating transport costs and reducing farm incomes. Weak healthcare infrastructure affects labour productivity and long-term human capital formation. But the fact cannot be denied that the Governor Aliyu administration has given a good account of itself in addressing these issues.
Governor Aliyu’s fiscal philosophy suggests that prudence does not mean paralysis. Rather, it calls for prioritization. Instead of dispersing resources thinly across numerous projects, the administration has signaled a preference for focusing on essential sectors that need impact. Roads that connect farming communities to markets, rehabilitation of critical healthcare facilities, and improvements in basic education infrastructure represent investments with multiplier effects. When farmers can transport produce efficiently, incomes rise and local commerce expands. When schools function effectively, human capital improves. When healthcare facilities operate reliably, productivity will no doubt increase.
So it is not as if the administration does not understand the risk of excessive caution—the fact that it might inadvertently slow the very growth needed to strengthen the state’s finances—or that underinvestment will delay the expansion of economic activity that could broaden the tax base. However, it prefers its conservative approach of working within its own resources to overcome the spending constraints that have limited or slowed down development in the manner it desires, by calibrating its intervention—an approach that combines discipline with targeted boldness.
The debate over borrowing, therefore, should not be framed as a binary choice between action and inaction. Borrowing in itself is not inherently imprudent; its impact depends on scale, purpose, and management. What distinguishes responsible borrowing from reckless accumulation is alignment with projects that generate measurable economic returns. Should the state ever consider borrowing, it would ensure that the funds are tied strictly to revenue-enhancing or productivity-boosting initiatives.
Meanwhile, the state has embarked on aggressive investment in agro-processing facilities that will strengthen agricultural value chains and create jobs. Vocational training centers, powered by the Ministry of Skills Acquisition and Development and aligned with market demand, are preparing young people for tomorrow.
In this sense, prudence becomes not a refusal to act, but a disciplined method of action—one that subjects every proposal to scrutiny before public funds are committed.
While the government is not keen on borrowing, it might consider public-private partnerships to fast-track its developmental urgency. By leveraging private capital and technical expertise, the state can accelerate infrastructure delivery while sharing financial risks. Sectors such as housing, agro-processing, and transport infrastructure offer potential for structured collaboration. If it decides to adopt this approach, it can do so because it has already re-energized the Bureau for Public Procurement and Public-Private Partnership to strengthen institutional capacity.
The Bureau is to ensure transparent procurement processes, credible regulatory frameworks, and vigilant contract monitoring, which are essential to prevent cost overruns and protect the public interest. Without these safeguards, partnerships risk becoming long-term liabilities rather than instruments of growth.
From the outset, Governor Aliyu understood the importance of improving the collection of internally generated revenue (IGR), not by expanding the tax net but through improved compliance, digitized collection systems, formalization of informal enterprises, and blockage of leakages, which have increased revenue collection. The revenue reforms were designed to avoid overburdening small businesses and low-income households. They have been helped by the people observing tangible improvements in service delivery—better roads, functional schools, accessible healthcare—so they have come to view taxation as a shared contribution to collective progress rather than an imposition. Trust between government and citizens becomes a fiscal asset in itself.
For Governor Aliyu, transparency and accountability remain central to good governance. Publishing clear criteria for project selection, disclosing financial commitments, and reporting measurable performance indicators have helped bridge the gap between the government and the public. When citizens understand why certain projects are prioritized while others are deferred, prudence is less likely to be misunderstood. Legislative oversight, civil society engagement, and independent auditing have further reinforced credibility and deterred misuse of scarce resources.
Sokoto’s demographic profile adds urgency to these considerations. A youthful and expanding population presents both opportunity and risk. With adequate education, skills training, and employment pathways, young people can become drivers of economic transformation. Without such opportunities, unemployment and underemployment may intensify social pressures. Investment in human capital, for Governor Aliyu, is therefore not optional; it is foundational. Because he understands that the cost of delayed investment in education and skills development extends beyond economics, he has prioritized these sectors.
Ultimately, the path before Sokoto State is one of alignment. Fiscal restraint and developmental ambition need not be contradictory. When carefully calibrated, they can be complementary. Governor Aliyu’s emphasis on cost control, prioritization, and disciplined spending reflects a commitment to safeguarding the state’s financial health. In a volatile national economic environment, that discipline provides stability.
The stakes are very high. The people seek tangible improvements in living standards and economic prospects. Excessive borrowing could expose the state to unsustainable debt and fiscal distress. Excessive caution could also entrench underdevelopment and public frustration. Navigating between these extremes demands both wisdom and courage—wisdom to recognize limits, and courage to act decisively where impact will be greatest. If prudence is paired with strategic investment, strengthened revenue systems, credible partnerships, and unwavering transparency, Sokoto State can pursue transformation without mortgaging its future.
In the end, the measure of this administration will not lie solely in how much it spends, but in how wisely it spends. Development in Sokoto is urgent, but it must also be sustainable. By balancing fiscal caution with purposeful action, Governor Aliyu seeks to ensure that today’s progress does not become tomorrow’s burden. If successfully managed, this approach could position the state for enduring growth and stability.
By Mohammed Bwago
