Tinubu’s Flyover Critique and Road Push

President Bola Tinubu has publicly urged Nigeria’s state governors to halt the construction of flyover bridges in areas with little or no traffic, insisting that capital budgets should instead be directed towards roads and artery networks that genuinely improve citizens’ welfare and security access.

Speaking on Thursday in Abuja while receiving a delegation of traditional rulers from Oyo State led by Oba Rashidi Ladoja, the Olubadan of Ibadanland, Tinubu argued that state revenues have grown significantly since the era when both he (as Lagos governor) and Ladoja (as Oyo governor) held office. “The money that I’m pushing to the states, if you had had it during your own time or during my time, it would have been different,” he said, urging Ladoja to help communicate the message to sitting governors.

Tinubu directly linked infrastructure choices to the fight against insecurity, stating that better road networks would enable security agencies to penetrate hard-to-reach communities. He also outlined his administration’s plans to establish state police and strengthen forest guards to tackle criminals using forests as hideouts.

Why Governors Favor Flyovers Despite Tinubu’s Call

The Political Economy of Nigerian Flyovers

Flyovers and other highly visible infrastructure projects have long been signature achievements for Nigerian governors seeking re-election or political legacy. They are quick to photograph, easy to brand, and often tied to influential contractors. The president’s plea highlights a tension between politically expedient spending and projects that deliver long-term economic and security returns. His argument that state coffers are now fatter than in his own governorship days is a direct challenge to incumbents who plead resource constraints.

Will Governors Listen?

Tinubu’s remarks carry moral weight but no legal force. State governments retain autonomy over their capital budgets, and the federal government cannot compel them to abandon projects already approved. Some governors may quietly shelve low-priority flyovers that have not yet reached advanced contracting stages, but those already underway—often supported by powerful local interests—are likely to proceed. The real test will be in the next budget cycle, when allocations for new projects are made.

The Security-Infrastructure Link

By framing road construction as a security enabler, Tinubu elevates the argument beyond simple fiscal prudence. Rural roads that allow swift police and military movement are a tangible response to banditry and kidnapping, especially in the northwest and north-central regions. If governors adopt this framing, it could unlock new political support for road spending, as security remains a top voter concern.

What State Governments and Contractors Should Do Next

  • State governments: Commission traffic surveys for all planned and ongoing flyover projects. Where vehicle counts fall below acceptable thresholds, consider redesigning interchanges as simpler at-grade improvements and re-allocate savings to rural road networks that connect farming communities and improve security patrols.
  • Construction firms: Expect a gradual shift in tender opportunities. Companies heavily exposed to flyover contracts should prepare to bid for road and bridge works in underserved areas, potentially partnering with security-focused agencies for faster clearance.
  • Citizens and civil society: Use forthcoming budget hearings to demand that state governments publish traffic justifications for capital projects over N500 million. Public scrutiny can reinforce the president’s call and reduce vanity spending.
  • Federal oversight: The Presidency could attach clearer infrastructure performance conditions to future disbursements from the Federation Account, linking federal transfers to state road-network targets—though this would require political consensus.

Risk & Opportunity Assessment

Commercial RiskMediumIf governors heed Tinubu’s call and cancel or downscale low-traffic flyovers, construction firms holding contracts for such works could see revenue shortfalls. The risk is moderate because many projects are politically backed and cannot be halted instantly.
Competitive RiskMediumFirms specialised in urban flyover construction may lose market share to rivals better placed to deliver road networks if state capital spending pivots sharply. The impact depends on how quickly governors re-align procurement.
Regulatory RiskLowTinubu’s statement is advisory, not a binding directive. No legislative or administrative rule currently forces state governments to follow his spending guidance. Risk remains low unless the Presidency ties federal allocations to specific infrastructure criteria.
Reputation RiskMediumGovernors who continue building low-traffic flyovers in the face of this public criticism risk being portrayed as wasteful, especially if state finances tighten or security deteriorates. Reputational damage could become a campaign issue.
Technology DisruptionLowNo new technology is altering the market for bridges; the story concerns spending priorities, not a technological shift.
Commercial OpportunityHighA redirection of state capital budgets from prestige flyovers to functional road networks opens a large market for civil engineering firms and materials suppliers, particularly for rural and security-access roads that may attract federal co-financing.