Rivers politics Fubara Wike criticism as Austin Tam-George says Governor Fubara’s administration offers relief from self-serving governance
Former Rivers State Commissioner for Information and Communications, Austin Tam-George, has declared that Governor Siminalayi Fubara’s administration represents what he described as a crucial opportunity for Rivers State to move away from the political influence of Federal Capital Territory Minister, Nyesom Wike.
Also read: Aisha Yesufu Vows to Fight Election Rigging in FCT Bid
Rivers politician Fubara Wike was criticised, Tam-George delivered a strong assessment of the state’s political landscape.
He argued that Rivers State has been shaped by what he called entrenched godfatherism, claiming that the influence of a former governor has taken a deeply self-serving direction.
“Administration is our best chance to escape Wike’s self-aggrandizement,” he said.
Tam-George further described the situation in Rivers politics as one defined by excessive personal interest, alleging that governance in previous years was dominated by individual ambition rather than public service.
“The question of possible godfathers is not unique to Rivers State, but what is unique is that we have a godfather who has taken prebendal politics to a completely new stratosphere,” he stated.
He added that supporters of Governor Fubara’s administration view it as a corrective shift aimed at prioritising public needs over political patronage.
“Those of us backing Fubara’s administration do so because it is our best chance to escape the prebendal, self-aggrandizing politics that Wike embodies,” he said.
Tam-George also made claims regarding governance practices during Wike’s eight-year tenure, alleging stagnation in civil service promotions, though these claims remain part of ongoing political debate.
He, however, praised Governor Fubara for what he described as a more people-focused leadership approach.
Also read: APC Suspends Fubara Over Anti-Party Activities
The Rivers politics Fubara Wike criticism continues to reflect deep divisions within the state’s political structure as tensions between key stakeholders persist.
