For the records.... GEOPOLITICAL DISTRIBUTION of MINISTERIAL PORTFOLIOS

SOUTH EAST:
1. Foreign Affairs,
2. Commerce & Industry,
3. Science & Technology,
4. Labour & Productivity,
5. Education (state)

SOUTH SOUTH:
1. Transport,
2. Niger Delta,
3. Budget & Planning,
4. Petroleum (state),
5. Health (state),
6. Agriculture (state)

SOUTH WEST:
1. Power, Works, Housing
2. Finance,
3. Health,
4. Solid Minerals,
5. Communication,
6. Niger Delta (state),

NORTH CENTRAL:
1. Agriculture,
2. Youths & Sports,
3. Information,
4. Environment (state),
5. Labour & Employment (state),
6. Solid Minerals (state)

NORTH EAST:
1. Education,
2. FCT,
3. Environment,
4. Women Affairs
5. Power (state),
6. Foreign Affairs (state),

NORTH WEST:
1. Defence,
2. Justice,
3. Interior,
4. Water Resources,
5. Aviation (state)
6. Budget & National Planning (state),
7. Investment & Industry (state)

I hope all regions are represented as against the notion that some part of the zone where marginalize?

.

Whether you like it or not, the usual suspects would still find something to wail about in this spread. E.g. why should defense, justice and interior go to only one zone?

obailala:
Whether you like it or not, the usual suspects would still find something to wail about in this spread. E.g. why should defense, justice and interior go to only one zone?

and why should . Science & Technology,
Labour & Productivity go to one zone?

Seems Fair Enough. Only That One Zone Needs One More State To Create Balance And Equity.

W

Fair distribution, one must admit.
The distribution isn't as important as the overall efficiency and performance of the government though

Why does North West have 7 while South East have 5?

That is not Equity as all zones should have 6 Ministers each...so the South East should have more states.

Best GMB follows the National Conference report.

. Whether they admit it or not, the distribution was fair and just. Unless of course, if you're an irredeemable detractor!