Editorial

Another Look At PIB Provisions

Published

6 years ago

January 4, 2021

Progress on the Petroleum Industry Bill (PIB) currently under careful considerations in the National
Assembly (NASS) may be stalled as two prominent groups in the Niger Delta region, the Pan-Niger Delta Forum (PANDEF) and the Niger Delta Dialogue (NDD), have outrightly rejected no fewer than 12 significant provisions in the Petroleum Host and Impacted Communities Development Bill (PHICDB).
Specifically, both groups are asking for the redrafting, rephrasing and restructuring of the observed provisions to accommodate the interests of the poor and neglected people of the oil and gas host and impacted communities in the Niger Delta or lose the peace and development sought by the PHICDB in the region.
PANDEF and NDD revealed their positions during the NDD’s Strategic Communication and Advocacy Training session for major stakeholders in PANDEF, NDD, and the various Policy Advocacy Committees (PACs) in Port Harcourt recently. The PHICDB is an essential part of the Petroleum Industry Bill (PIB) currently before both chambers of the National Assembly.
The PHICDB seeks to promote sustainable mutual social and economic benefits from petroleum operations to host and impacted communities. It is equally designed to enhance peaceful and harmonious coexistence between settlers and host/impacted communities as well as create a framework to support their development process.
The objectionable provisions include the Interpretations Section, which the groups claim was vague in the use of words and terms such as “host and impacted communities” to describe oil-bearing communities in the region. They also faulted the silence of the bill on how the clusters should be formed and the trust fund shared. Similarly, they rejected the vague use of the term ‘Settlor(s)’ in Part 2, Section 2, Subsection 1 and 2 of the draft bill.
Additionally, the stakeholders wondered why “sabotage spill” was not clearly defined but its effects were highlighted in the draft bill. Further, they condemned the observed silence in the sharing formula of the accruing fund from the “Settlor(s)” between host and impacted communities, particularly given that there are more impacted settlements than host communities in available oil industry records.
Furthermore, the groups took a swipe at Part 3, Section 9, Subsection 1 and 2 of the draft bill for resting the creation and determination of the membership of the Board of Trustees (BoTs) for the trust funds on the International Oil Companies (IOCs). They also picked holes in Section 11, which splits the utilisation of the Endowment Fund to 70 per cent for capital expenditure; 20 per cent for the Reserve Fund; and 10 per cent for the settlor(s) special projects.
Expressing worry that the Presidency failed to specify how the operating expenditures of the settlor(s) would be verified to ascertain the accruing funds to the cluster trusts, the stakeholders objected to Section 22 that the settlors’ Operating Expenditure (OPEX) paid into the trust fund shall be subject to Petroleum Income Tax (PIT) and Companies Income Tax (CIT) deductibles.
Section 5 of the bill was queried for failing to give specific sanctions for underpayment, late payment or non-payment of agreed money into the cluster trust fund as and when due. They lamented the insufficient clarity on time frames for the incorporation of cluster trusts for host and impacted communities and the failure to stipulate penalties for reneging on implementation of agreed projects and programmes by the settlor(s) as contained in Section 3 of the bill.
First, it must be established that the broad objectives of the PHICDB are commendable, and that is to find an acceptable framework for an active company-community engagement mechanism structure. But it shouldn’t be seen as a substitute for the government’s responsibility to provide basic services and infrastructure for the host and impacted communities.
However, the flawed provisions identified by PANDEF and NDD are troubling. These principally relate to the power vested in the oil industry to determine crucial parameters connected to how funding will be allocated. We also need to know what constitutes a host community and how the BoTs to manage the funds will be set up.
If the purported purpose of the bill is to empower host communities to take charge of their development needs, why does it give the IOCs the sole power to appoint and determine the composition of the BoT, cutting communities out of the decision-making process? This way, investors can appoint non-indigenous persons as board members. This is a source of conflict and highly undesirable for a bill that aims to build trust.
Again, the issues regarding the lack of an enforceable time frame for project implementation must not be ignored because of its likely consequences. It will probably institutionalise the perception among communities that their concerns are marginal to those of industry, hence, generate serious grievance for many.
It is equally sad that the PHICDB makes settlors the sole authority for determining areas of operation. In effect, this is the power to determine which communities are impacted by the petroleum industry and as such benefit from the trust fund. This means communities that suffer environmental damage from the petroleum industry, but which, if not designated as a host community, will be denied compensations. This enables IOCs to fulfill their obligations in a way that suits their needs, not the communities’.
The PHICDB, as it stands, downplays the role of government in the development of host communities. Instead, it places that responsibility on the oil companies, with the only role for the government that of the Nigerian Petroleum Regulatory Commission (NPRC). NPRC is to mediate in disputes with the proviso that the decision of the Commission remains valid until overturned by the Federal High Court.
But being a creation of the government, it is believed that the NPRC may not be an impartial arbiter because the likely outcome in any such dispute will be favourable to industry, not the communities. And since historical antecedents of such litigations in court have tended to take years, if they are resolved at all, likely the NPRC decision will unduly last longer.
Clearly, the PHICDB vests too much power in the IOCs, particularly in terms of deciding how development projects are determined and implemented, as well as their beneficiaries. This may further alienate communities that already consider themselves cut out of decision-making. In consequence, the Federal Government and NASS should re-examine the PIB and accommodate the recommendations of the PACs to prevent another round of tension and agitations in the region.

Editorial

Making Rivers’ 2026 Budget Count

Published

3 days ago

August 3, 2026

The Tide

The presentation of the proposed 2026 Rivers State budget marks a critical moment in the state’s development journey. Tagged the Budget of Resilience for Growth and Development, the N1.854 trillion appropriation seeks to consolidate progress in infrastructure, human capital development, and security. At a time when economic uncertainty still confronts many states, the proposal projects optimism about Rivers State’s fiscal future. However, beyond ambitious figures and lofty promises, the real measure of success will lie in disciplined implementation and measurable outcomes.

The proposed revenue projection of N1.854 trillion represents a 24.49 per cent increase over the adjusted 2025 budget. The expectation of higher receipts from the Federation Account Allocation Committee (FAAC), derivation funds, and internally generated revenue reflects confidence in improving national economic conditions. Yet, caution remains imperative. Heavy reliance on federally distributed revenue continues to expose the state to fluctuations in oil prices and national fiscal policy. Strengthening internally generated revenue through improved tax administration, expanded economic activities, and prudent financial management should remain a long-term priority.

The recurrent expenditure of N413.11 billion appears reasonably contained when compared with the capital allocation of N1.405 trillion. This translates to a capital-to-recurrent ratio of roughly 77:23, a distribution that suggests a deliberate emphasis on development projects rather than routine government spending. Such fiscal discipline deserves commendation, provided that recurrent obligations, including salaries, pensions, and operational costs, are settled promptly without compromising service delivery.

One notable aspect of the recurrent budget is the provision for new recruitments, increased overheads, and the settlement of gratuities, pensions, and death benefits. The government’s commitment to clearing inherited liabilities offers renewed hope to retired civil servants who have endured years of uncertainty. This approach reflects both compassion and administrative responsibility. Nevertheless, increased personnel costs should be accompanied by improved productivity, accountability, and performance within the public service.

Infrastructure understandably dominates the capital budget, with over N533.32 billion allocated to works and infrastructure. Roads, bridges, and other public facilities remain essential to economic growth, investment attraction, and regional integration. In a state whose economy depends significantly on commerce and logistics, better transport networks can stimulate business activities and reduce the cost of moving goods and services. The true test will be whether projects are completed on schedule and according to specification.

Education emerges as another major beneficiary, receiving an allocation of N315 billion. This substantial investment recognises that human capital remains the strongest foundation for sustainable development. Better schools, improved learning facilities, teacher development, and educational technology can transform the future of Rivers State. However, funding alone is not enough. Effective monitoring, transparent procurement, and measurable learning outcomes must accompany this transformative investment if the education sector is to achieve lasting impact.

Healthcare receives N105.43 billion, making it one of the largest sectoral allocations. While the amount demonstrates government recognition of the importance of public health, citizens will expect tangible improvements in hospitals, primary healthcare centres, medical equipment, and personnel welfare. The lessons of recent global health emergencies have shown that resilient healthcare systems are indispensable to economic stability. Every community should experience the benefits of this important investment, particularly rural and underserved areas.

Agriculture receives just over N19.26 billion, while power is allocated N15 billion. These allocations deserve careful examination because agriculture and reliable electricity remain key drivers of diversification and employment. Rivers State possesses considerable agricultural potential, but productivity remains below expectations. Increased investment in mechanisation, extension services, storage facilities, and agro-processing could generate thousands of jobs. Likewise, improved electricity infrastructure would stimulate manufacturing and small businesses. It would be unfortunate to put all the eggs in one basket by relying overwhelmingly on oil revenues while these productive sectors remain relatively underfunded.

The social sector allocation of N435.41 billion encompasses education, healthcare, youth development, women affairs, sports, and community development. These sectors directly affect the quality of life of citizens and deserve sustained attention. Youth empowerment programmes, women-focused initiatives, and community development projects can reduce unemployment, promote inclusion, and strengthen social cohesion. Such investments are indispensable if the state intends to build lasting peace and prosperity.

The allocations to the judiciary and the Rivers State House of Assembly equally deserve attention. Strong democratic institutions are fundamental to accountability, the rule of law, and effective governance. Adequate funding should strengthen judicial efficiency and legislative oversight rather than merely expand administrative expenditure. Public confidence will increase only when institutional funding translates into better justice delivery, transparency, and responsible governance.

While the budget’s ambitions are commendable, enforcement remains the decisive challenge. Nigeria’s public finance history is replete with budgets that promised much but delivered far less. Timely releases, strict procurement processes, independent monitoring, and regular public reporting should, therefore, become the cornerstone of execution. Transparency is not merely a slogan but an indispensable requirement for sustaining public trust. In this regard, the government’s pledge that every kobo will be spent wisely must be matched by verifiable evidence.

In all, the proposed 2026 Rivers State budget presents a bold opportunity to accelerate development across critical sectors. Its emphasis on infrastructure, education, healthcare, and social investment aligns with the state’s long-term aspirations. Yet, as the popular saying goes, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. The Rivers State House of Assembly must subject the estimates to rigorous scrutiny before approval, while the executive must ensure faithful implementation. If transparency, fiscal discipline, and accountability guide execution, this budget could indeed become a genuine blueprint for resilience, inclusive growth, and sustainable development for Rivers people.

Editorial

Improving Surveillance in Rivers’ Boundary Communities

Published

1 week ago

July 27, 2026

The Tide

The Rivers State Government’s promise to improve boundary security has given residents hope at a time when insecurity is becoming a serious concern. Speaking at the 3rd Annual National Assembly/Border and Boundary Community Stakeholders’ Interface in Abuja, Deputy Governor Ngozi Nma Odu called for stronger cooperation between the Federal Government, security agencies, traditional rulers, and local communities. The meeting focused on how better border/boundary management can improve security and support economic growth. Rivers people now expect these promises to lead to real action.

However, many residents are asking whether enough is being done to protect the state’s boundaries. Crimes that were once common only in some northern parts of the country are now being reported in Rivers State. According to the Nigeria Security Tracker of the Council on Foreign Relations, the South-South recorded 287 violent deaths linked to crime in 2025, representing a 19 per cent increase compared with 2023. These figures show that strong action is urgently needed.

Many communities, especially those near state boundaries, have little or no police presence. Some have no police post or station at all, making it easier for criminals to operate. The Nigerian Bureau of Statistics reported in its 2024 Crime Survey that only 31 per cent of rural communities in the South-South have a functioning police presence within 10 kilometres. This leaves many residents without adequate protection.

There are also repeated reports that armed herders have entered forests in the Ikwerre area and other parts of the state. If these reports are correct, they should be treated as a serious security threat. Many people say they face kidnapping, attacks, and harassment from armed criminals hiding in the forests. Slow official responses have increased public worry and reduced confidence.

Although the Federal Government controls the country’s security agencies, the Rivers State Government also has an important role to play. Governor Siminalayi Fubara, as the state’s chief security officer, should take stronger steps to protect lives and property. Criminals should not be allowed to enter the state freely while people live in fear. Waiting for others to act is like burying one’s head in the sand.

Security at the state’s boundaries should start with thorough screening of everyone entering Rivers State through officially recognised entry points. The Nigeria Police Force has the authority to carry out stop-and-search operations where necessary. Well-planned, intelligence-based checks can help prevent criminals and illegal weapons from entering the state without affecting lawful travellers and businesses. Weak borders/boundaries encourage crime.

Local government chairmen should also play a leading role because they are closest to the people. They can work with vigilante groups, traditional rulers, and community leaders to gather and share useful security information. According to the CLEEN Foundation’s 2023 report, Policing and Public Safety in Nigeria, 68 per cent of Nigerians believe that properly supervised community policing helps to reduce crime. Rivers State should make better use of this approach.

The Deputy Governor’s call for inclusive border/boundary governance should include local chiefs, youth leaders, women groups, and other community stakeholders. Their involvement will improve the sharing of information and make it easier to respond quickly to security threats. After all, prevention is better than cure.

The state should also invest in modern security equipment such as drones, communication radios, and solar-powered surveillance posts at important boundary locations. These are practical tools that can improve security in a state as important and geographically complex as Rivers. No community can truly develop where people live in fear.

Better security will also strengthen the economy. Boundary communities support farming, trade, and social ties with Abia, Imo, Akwa Ibom, and Bayelsa states. Insecurity disrupts business activities, discourages investors, and affects lawful trade. The World Bank stated in its 2024 Nigeria Development Update that insecurity at the state level can reduce local economic growth by as much as 2.5 per cent each year.

The Rivers State Government should, therefore, move beyond meetings and public statements by taking practical steps. More police posts should be established, community vigilante groups should receive proper training and support, and regular security meetings should be held with neighbouring states. The decisions reached in Abuja will have little value unless they are fully implemented.

The safety of Rivers people should never be delayed or left to others alone. While cooperation with the Federal Government is necessary, the state must take the lead in protecting its people and boundaries. If urgent actions are not taken, lawlessness could become more common. Rivers State must act now before the chickens come home to roost.

Editorial

A Fair Wage for Difficult Times

Published

1 month ago

July 3, 2026

The Tide

The latest demand by the Federal Workers Forum (FWF) for an upward review of the national minimum wage from N70,000 to N300,000 should not be dismissed as another routine labour agitation. Rather, it should be seen as a reflection of the deep economic pain confronting millions of Nigerian workers whose purchasing power has been severely eroded by inflation, rising living costs, and a struggling economy. Whether or not the figure being demanded is attainable, the message behind it cannot be ignored.

The decision of the Forum to proceed with a nationwide protest also underscores the growing frustration among federal workers who believe that repeated appeals have produced little meaningful action. Their complaints over unpaid entitlements, wage awards, promotion arrears, and other outstanding benefits deserve prompt attention from the authorities. A government that expects dedication and productivity from its workforce must also fulfil its obligations to them.

It is significant that the Chief of Staff to the President recently acknowledged that federal workers are poorly remunerated. Such an admission is welcome because it confirms what workers have consistently argued for years. However, acknowledgement alone is insufficient. Nigerians expect practical measures that will improve workers’ welfare rather than statements that only recognise the obvious.

The economic realities confronting workers are doubtlessly harsh. Food prices have climbed beyond the reach of many families, transportation costs have risen sharply, rents continue to increase, and the cost of healthcare and education has become unbearable for many households. Salaries that appeared modest a few years ago have become grossly inadequate in today’s economic environment.

Compounding the hardship is the persistent challenge of insecurity across the country. Many workers travel daily under difficult and sometimes dangerous conditions to earn incomes that barely sustain their families. The emotional and financial burden of this situation has created widespread frustration and anxiety, contributing to the tense atmosphere that now pervades the nation.

Against this background, the call for a living wage is both reasonable and urgent. The purpose of a minimum wage is not just to keep workers employed but to enable them to live with dignity. When full-time workers cannot adequately feed their families, pay school fees, access healthcare, or meet basic living expenses, it becomes clear that existing wage structures require serious review.

The Federal Government should, therefore, approach this matter with the seriousness it deserves. It should immediately commence purposeful discussions with organised labour and representatives of the Federal Workers Forum to examine realistic options for improving workers’ welfare. Delaying action or relying on promises will only deepen public dissatisfaction and erode confidence in the government.

Equally important is the need for the government to honour existing commitments. Reports of outstanding wage awards, unpaid allowances, and promotion arrears should be independently verified and settled without unnecessary delay. Keeping faith with agreements already reached would demonstrate sincerity and rebuild trust between the authorities and their employees.

That said, the workers must also appreciate the importance of sustained dialogue. While peaceful protest remains a constitutional right, industrial disputes are more productively resolved through negotiation than confrontation. Every effort should be made to avoid actions capable of disrupting essential public services or escalating national tension.

The leadership of organised labour also has a crucial role to play. The Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) and the Trade Union Congress (TUC) must rise and provide united, responsible, and strategic leadership. Workers need strong representation that combines firmness with wisdom and places national interest alongside legitimate labour demands.

There is no doubt that the government faces enormous fiscal challenges. Declining revenues, mounting debt obligations, and competing development needs make public finance increasingly difficult. Nevertheless, these realities cannot become excuses for allowing civil servants to sink deeper into poverty. Sound economic management must ultimately translate into improved living conditions for citizens.

In truth, paying workers a fair and sustainable wage is not only a social obligation; it is an economic necessity. Better-paid workers stimulate consumer spending, enhance productivity, reduce corruption arising from financial desperation, and contribute to greater national stability. Investment in workers is an investment in economic growth.

Nigeria can ill afford another prolonged confrontation between government and labour at a time when insecurity, inflation, and public discontent already threaten social cohesion. Both sides should exercise restraint, avoid inflammatory rhetoric, and demonstrate genuine commitment to finding common ground. Nigerians expect solutions, not endless disputes.

The message from the current agitation is unmistakable. The Federal Government must heed the legitimate demands of workers by urgently pursuing a new living wage that reflects present economic realities and restores hope to millions of households. At the same time, workers should keep engaging the government through peaceful dialogue, mutual respect, and responsible negotiation. At this critical moment in our country’s history, compromise, compassion, and decisive leadership offer the surest path to industrial harmony and national progress.