Opinion
The New PHCN Tariff
In the heat of the
power sector reform in 2010, Nigerians thought their prayers for stable power supply had been heard. Their elation knew no bounds because for a very long time they had been used to a culture of darkness with outrageous bills coming their way like water flowing unabated from a broken cistern. Three years after, the story remains the same. Consumers still pay through their nose while questions are asked without answers.
When the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) was established, a new tariff was introduced with effect from June 1, 2012, which was pegged at N500. Prior to that time, Nigerians only paid fixed basic access charge regardless of the power consumed. Today, that fixed charge has been increased to N750, leaving one question on the lips of many – where is the electricity to justify the hike?
Defending the hike at a recent press briefing, NERC chairman, Dr. Sam Amadi, maintained that the new tariff was fair, reasonable and necessary to guarantee continual improvement in electricity supply to Nigerians. He said that power had improved significantly and the new charge was not much, being the lowest in the world.
But the NERC chairman’s argument flies in the face of sound logic. It makes no difference to the masses whose lives have been drastically affected by the increase. Indeed, it runs afoul of NERC’s initial payment plan which recognized different classes of consumers such as the poor, wealthy and corporate organizations. Pre-paid meters, once believed to be the much-awaited solution to power supply hiccups, have not measured up.
In the new tariff plan, consumers will pay higher tariff on two fronts, viz, fixed cost and energy cost, referred to as cost per kilowatt hour. This amounts to double hazard for electricity consumers who have been lamenting under low performance of the power sector.
The annual tariff adjustment would have been reasonable if there was a corresponding stability in power supply before transferring the cost of electricity generation to the consumers. With power generation and distribution still falling short of the projected megawatts annually, any hike in tariff is tantamount to putting the cart before the horse. It is unacceptable.
The truth is that consumers would be unmindful of periodic and reasonable hike if they are assured of stable power supply. But to compel such astronomical increase down their throats is to enforce regulations without any visible and corresponding improvement in service delivery.
This review stands condemned as it will negate whatever gains expected to be recorded by the much vaunted reform in the power sector. The multi-year tariff structure as designed by the NERC and tacitly approved by the government deserves review as it only protects the interest of the investors in the sector and has little or no consideration for consumers most of whom are poor and incapable of paying.
Judged from the yearly percentage increase (which covers a fifteen-year period in the first instance), one can predict that less than ten percent of the current consumers will be able to pay these outrageous tariffs in the next few years.
The consequences of structuring electricity tariffs that are unreasonable and unaffordable have grave implications for the economy and the people. This is a sad commentary on the power reform process, as it speaks volumes about its transparency, viability and ability to deliver in the interest of the nation. A viable power sector is key to revamping and repositioning the economy. Nothing should be done to undermine this objective.
About N3.5 billion is generated annually by PHCN most of which is alleged to be misappropriated by officials of the company. Amidst all this, the average household pays between N5,000 and N10,000 as electricity bills despite having power supply only for a week or sometimes even two or three days a month.
Undoubtedly, the tariff hike by the PHCN is another policy by the government to rip off Nigerians who have already been pauperized by the system. A reform process which does not carry along its people or protect their interest has only one direction to go – the abyss.
Arnold Alalibo
Opinion
Professor Kamene Okonjo: A Life Beyond Motherhood
Quote “Professor Kamene Okonjo
Some women leave behind more t
Yet, to remember Professor Kam
Professor Okonjo was the belov
one of the most dramatic chapt
On December 14, 2012, the then
She leaves behind children, gr
Professor Kamene Okonjo deserv
By: Sylvia ThankGod-Amadi
Opinion
On Ancestrial Worship: My Take
Quote: An African who invokes
This is the concluding part
… Given the fact that I was
At the end of the visit by the
Back to my apartment, at abo
Under normal circumstances, yo
That all she asks is that Chie
For some reason that I do not
I believe that everyone in hu
Our ancestors have not gone fa
By: Jason Osai
Opinion
FG’s Transport Support And Rivers Workers
The Federal Government’s approval of a N70,000 monthly transport intervention for public service workers for six months, beginning in November 2026, offers hope to employees struggling with the rising cost of living. The agreement with the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC), reached at a conciliation meeting in Abuja on October 27, is intended to cushion transport costs and ease pressure on workers’ incomes. But for public servants in Rivers State, it raises a familiar question: will the State Government key into the intervention and ensure that its workers benefit? The agreement provides for N70,000 monthly across all levels, for six months. The Federal Government also approved peculiar allowance arrears effective from May 1, 2026, to be paid in three equal instalments beginning in November.
The parties agreed to reconvene after one month to assess implementation. Ultimately, the value of these resolutions will be measured not by announcements but by whether eligible workers receive the money. Transport costs consume a substantial share of many civil servants’ earnings before they can meet household needs. Support for commuting is therefore not a luxury or political favour; it is temporary assistance to help workers remain at their jobs without sinking further into hardship. For lower-paid employees, transport costs can turn modest salaries into a daily exercise in difficult choices and sacrifice.
The agreement also urges State and Local Governments to participate and unions to press for implementation. The federal agreement does not automatically guarantee that every State and Local Government employee will receive the support. State authorities must clarify how it will apply to their workforce, make the necessary arrangements and publish a payment timetable. Rivers State must approach the arrangement with urgency and transparency. The Government should State whether it will implement the intervention and when payments will begin. Any administrative or financial question should be addressed promptly with organised labour, not allowed to become excuses for delay.
The concern is sharpened by the earlier N35,000 monthly wage award introduced by the Federal Government in 2023 after petrol subsidy removal. It was intended as temporary relief pending a new national minimum wage. While several States negotiated and paid wage awards or related sums, implementation nationwide was uneven. Reports in 2024 indicated that many States had failed to pay the federal award, while others provided different amounts. In Rivers, labour and media reports raised concerns about implementation of the N35,000 award for State workers, amid separate announcements and arrangements concerning Local Government employees.
The wage award was meant to ease the immediate effects of subsidy removal, yet workers faced uncertainty over whether the promised relief would reach them. In February 2024, the Rivers State Government announced approval of the N35,000 award for local government workers, but subsequent reports showed that implementation across worker categories remained a concern. The lesson is clear: approval and implementation are not the same. A declaration at a meeting offers little comfort to a worker whose account does not reflect the promised payment. For workers who travel to their offices daily, the implications of delayed support are significant. Transportation expenses compete with food, rent, school fees, healthcare and other essential household needs.
As fares rise, employees may be forced to reduce spending on necessities or borrow to sustain their families. A timely transport intervention would therefore provide practical relief and demonstrate that government understands the economic pressures confronting its workforce. Its temporary nature makes prompt implementation even more important. It is fair to acknowledge that this transport intervention is a new agreement and that its administrative details may require clarification. Rivers State should not be condemned in advance for a failure that has not occurred. Nevertheless, the earlier experience gives workers legitimate grounds to seek assurances before the November commencement date. The State should avoid allowing uncertainty to persist until workers begin asking why the promised assistance has not arrived.
The NLC and unions in Rivers State should engage the State Government immediately and seek a written commitment, an implementation plan and a process for reporting missed payments. If clarification from the Federal Government is needed, the State should seek it without abandoning the goal of providing relief. Labour leaders must also keep members informed about progress and insist that any agreed arrangements are applied fairly and transparently. The Rivers State Government should treat this intervention as an opportunity to rebuild confidence. Timely support would show that workers’ welfare is more than a talking point and that the State recognises the economic realities confronting its employees.
Silence, delay or selective implementation, by contrast, would revive frustration over earlier relief measures and weaken trust between government and labour. Every month lost to administrative delay leaves workers facing the same transport burden without the intended assistance. The State should consult labour, publish arrangements and pay eligible workers on time. Rivers workers should not have to wonder whether federal relief will reach them. The Federal Government has announced the support; now the State must make its position clear. We hope the N70,000 monthly transport intervention will not follow the troubling path of the earlier wage award. Rivers State should learn from that experience and ensure that this time, relief is not merely promised but delivered.
Sylvia ThankGod-Amadi
-
Rivers3 days ago
Don Seeks Repositioning Of Tech Education For Dev
-
Education3 days agoPAMO MEDICAL UNIVERSITY -Nullifies Arrest warrant on VC
-
Niger Delta3 days ago
PANDEF Seeks 50% Oil Derivation Allocation Increase
-
Education3 days agoIAUE MOVES TO END GHOST WORKERS SYNDROME AS 400 NEW NON-TEACHING STAFF UNDERGO MANDATORY ETHICS TRAINING
-
News3 days agoFresh Ebola Scare As NCDC Records Two Cases
-
News3 days ago
Customs Partners EFCC, NDLEA, Others To Tackle Money Laundering, Terrorism Financing
-
Politics3 days ago2027: RIVERS GUBER CANDIDATES SIGN CHARTER TO PRIORITIZE CITIZENS’ DEMANDS
-
Politics3 days ago2027: South-East Govs Insist On Tinubu’s Re-election
