There is mounting public criticism across Nigeria’s South-East geopolitical zone over the proposed ₦140 billion 2026 budget of the South East Development Commission (SEDC), with stakeholders accusing the commission of prioritising administrative and promotional expenditures over urgently needed infrastructure projects.
The controversy is unfolding against a longstanding backdrop of complaints about marginalisation and infrastructure decay in Abia, Anambra, Ebonyi, Enugu and Imo states — the five states the commission was created to serve. For decades, the region has struggled with deteriorating federal highways, widespread gully erosion, weakened industrial capacity and limited rail connectivity.
A review of the 2026 budget proposal indicates that substantial allocations have been directed toward what analysts describe as “soft projects” and recurrent-style expenditures. Critics argue that there is no clearly defined portfolio of major capital-intensive projects such as expressway reconstruction, large-scale erosion control works, industrial park development or integrated transport infrastructure.
Among the most contentious items are travel-related expenses. The commission has proposed ₦1.1 billion for local travel and ₦1.5 billion for international travel. Observers question the scale of these allocations for a regional development agency that is expected to prioritise capital deployment within its operational territory.
Security-related spending has also generated debate. The budget earmarks ₦10.5 billion for the procurement of equipment, including CCTV systems, drones, control rooms and associated infrastructure. An additional ₦3.5 billion is allocated for “regional security operations.” Analysts have raised concerns about the institutional boundaries of the commission, noting that security management is constitutionally within the purview of state governments and federal security agencies. Some critics have asked whether the commission risks duplicating or encroaching upon existing security frameworks.
Innovation and administrative planning also feature prominently in the proposal. The budget includes ₦5.5 billion for innovation hubs, ₦2 billion for legal and administrative setup, ₦2 billion for master planning and urban design, and ₦1.6 billion for technical feasibility studies. While proponents argue that planning and institutional structuring are necessary in the commission’s formative phase, critics contend that the scale of allocations appears disproportionate relative to visible capital works.
Financial advisory and programme-related costs further add to the debate. The proposal sets aside ₦1.5 billion for financial advisory services, ₦1.5 billion for training and incubation programmes, and ₦1 billion each for programme development and coach training initiatives.
Media and public relations expenditures have drawn particularly sharp reactions. The commission proposes ₦1.3 billion for media campaigns across television, digital and print platforms, ₦480 million for public relations and advertising, and ₦535 million for branding. In addition, investor engagement activities are heavily funded: ₦1.3 billion for an investment summit, ₦1.3 billion for investor roadshows, ₦1 billion for stakeholder engagements, ₦550 million for summit-related activities, and ₦780 million for diaspora engagements.
Administrative consumables also feature prominently, with ₦650 million allocated for stationery and IT consumables, ₦320 million for refreshments, ₦500 million for advocacy and outreach, and ₦500 million for maintenance.
Training-related allocations include ₦1.7 billion for capacity building, ₦350 million for leadership certificates, ₦250 million for fellowship administration, ₦200 million for internships and ₦210 million for mentorship programmes.
Comparative financial records from 2025 indicate that ₦460 million was spent on stakeholder engagements and roundtables, while ₦121 million was allocated to investment promotion and diaspora engagement. In the 2026 proposal, stakeholder engagement spending has more than doubled to ₦1 billion, while diaspora engagement has risen sharply to ₦780 million.
The escalation of these line items has intensified public scrutiny, particularly in communities grappling with severe infrastructure deficits. Major economic corridors linking Onitsha, Aba and Enugu remain in poor condition, with some federal highways experiencing chronic deterioration. Gully erosion continues to displace residents and threaten homes and farmlands across several states.
The South-East has long been central to national conversations about uneven infrastructure development. Industrial clusters that once drove regional commerce — particularly in Aba and Onitsha — have suffered from unreliable electricity supply, inadequate logistics networks and limited federal investment in transport systems.
When the South East Development Commission was established, many residents viewed it as a strategic intervention intended to reverse decades of neglect. Expectations were high that the commission would channel significant resources into highways, bridges, rail connectivity, erosion control systems and industrial revitalisation.
However, critics argue that the 2026 budget proposal appears weighted toward conferences, advisory services, planning frameworks and branding exercises rather than brick-and-mortar development. While policy formulation, stakeholder engagement and investor mobilisation are essential components of development strategy, stakeholders insist that visible infrastructure must form the backbone of the commission’s mandate.
As debate continues, attention is likely to shift to the National Assembly’s review process and the commission’s leadership for further clarification. For many residents of the South-East, the central question remains whether the proposed ₦140 billion allocation will translate into tangible infrastructure upgrades or remain largely absorbed by administrative and promotional expenditures.
