The political contest ahead of the 2027 governorship election in Oyo State has reopened debate over old alliances, public-sector salary arrears and the records of politicians moving between rival camps, with former finance commissioner Bimbo Adekanmbi emerging as a central figure in the discussion.

Adekanmbi, who served under the late Governor Abiola Ajimobi, is now the governorship candidate of the Allied Peoples Movement (APM) and is backed by incumbent Governor Seyi Makinde, a development that has prompted critics to revisit the political history of the two administrations.

Also read:AEF empowers 80 graduates with business start-up tools

The debate has gained attention on social media, where commentators have questioned what they describe as inconsistencies in how political supporters discuss the Ajimobi administration’s record on workers’ salaries and Makinde’s current political alliances.

At the heart of the discussion is the fact that Adekanmbi, who held a senior financial position during Ajimobi’s tenure, is now being presented as a continuity candidate by Makinde’s political camp.

The situation has created an awkward political contrast for some supporters, particularly those who criticise the former administration over unpaid salaries while backing a candidate who served as its finance commissioner.

Makinde’s emergence as governor in 2019 was shaped by a coalition of opposition figures who came together to challenge the then-ruling All Progressives Congress (APC).

Among the influential figures who supported Makinde were former Oyo governor Rashidi Ladoja and Sharafadeen Alli, who contested the election under the Zenith Labour Party.

Alli and other opposition candidates stepped aside in support of Makinde, helping consolidate votes against the APC candidate, Adebayo Adelabu.

The alliance was formed against the backdrop of public dissatisfaction with aspects of the Ajimobi administration, including controversies surrounding workers’ welfare and traditional leadership in Ibadan.

The salary issue was a significant part of the political conversation at the time. In July 2016, the Ajimobi government acknowledged salary arrears and explained that declining federal allocations had affected its ability to meet its obligations to workers.

Adekanmbi, then Commissioner for Finance and Budget, publicly discussed the administration’s plan to use a proposed N14.1 billion Federal Government loan to address salary payments.

The historical record, however, also shows that the salary situation changed over time, with the administration using bailout funds and other financial interventions to reduce arrears.

Adekanmbi served as Deputy Chief of Staff before becoming Commissioner for Finance, Budget and Planning under Ajimobi.

His responsibilities placed him at the centre of the state’s financial management during a period of economic pressure, including efforts to manage salary obligations, revenue collection and government spending.

In a recent interview, Adekanmbi recalled that salary arrears were among the first major challenges he was asked to address after joining the administration.

“When I became a commissioner, that was the first assignment the late governor gave me, and he appealed to me to solve the problem,” he said.

Adekanmbi has maintained that his work included seeking fiscal support from the Federal Government and using available funds to settle outstanding workers’ payments.

His supporters argue that his experience in public finance gives him the background needed to manage the state’s resources, while critics say his record should be assessed against the financial difficulties workers experienced during the Ajimobi years.

Traditional leadership disputes also formed part of the political atmosphere surrounding the 2019 election.

Ajimobi’s administration faced criticism over its handling of Ibadan’s traditional institutions, including the elevation of several high-ranking chiefs to the status of obas, a move that generated tensions with the then Olubadan, Oba Saliu Adetunji.

The issue has resurfaced in a different form under Makinde, whose administration signed the Oyo State Council of Obas and Chiefs (Further Amendments) Bill, 2025, into law.

The legislation introduced a rotational chairmanship of the council among the Alaafin of Oyo, the Soun of Ogbomoso and the Olubadan of Ibadanland.

Makinde inaugurated the council in January 2026, with the current Olubadan, Oba Rashidi Ladoja, selected to serve as chairman for the first two years.

The development has prompted some commentators to question whether political actors who opposed aspects of Ajimobi’s handling of traditional institutions are applying the same standards to Makinde’s decisions.

However, the two situations involve different policies and legal frameworks, making direct comparisons a matter of political interpretation rather than an established equivalence.

The debate comes as Oyo’s political parties prepare for the 2027 governorship election, with Makinde backing Adekanmbi as his preferred successor and the APC rallying behind Sharafadeen Alli.

The contest has already become a test of whether Makinde can transfer his political influence to a candidate with a different party background and a history in the previous administration.

The Guardian has noted that Oyo’s political history offers few examples of outgoing governors successfully installing their preferred successors, making the 2027 race particularly significant.

For Adekanmbi, the challenge will be to defend his record under Ajimobi while convincing voters that his current political alignment represents a credible path forward for the state.

For Makinde’s supporters, the central argument is that competence and performance should matter more than party history. Critics, meanwhile, are asking whether that principle is being applied consistently.

As the campaign develops, Oyo voters are likely to hear renewed arguments over salary payments, public finance, traditional institutions and the political alliances that shaped the state’s recent history.

Also read:AEF empowers 80 graduates with business start-up tools

The debate may be framed as political irony, but its deeper significance lies in a familiar electoral question: should a candidate be judged primarily by the administration in which they previously served, the work they personally performed, or the promises they make for the future?