Opinion
Oil Firms And Niger Delta Dev
Of all the stakeholders in the Niger Delta region, the multi-national oil companies should take the greater blame for the environmental devastation resulting from several decades of oil exploration and exploitation. In their search for the black gold, they have combed the swamps and ravaged the mangroves; polluted the rivers and rlvulcts; scorched the farmlands and left the people gasping for breath just like the fish 111 the region, which have been suffocated by oil spills.
With this unflattering track record, one would expect the oil companies to throw their full weight behind efforts to revive and regenerate the environment for a people that have been so unjustly treated. Given the enormous impact of their activities on the environment. they arc expected to be at the forefront in the critical task of urgently developing the oil basin that has suffered so much neglect in the past. It is. In fact, in their interest to develop the region where they operate in order to guarantee peace, which is very necessary for them to continue with their work.
Rather than lead the assault on underdevelopment and injustice, some of the oil companies are busy throwing spanners in the works. For fifty-one years, they have planted more Christmas trees (capped oil wells) than those that would yield economic benefits. It is, indeed baffling to learn that the oil companies are defaulting in the discharge of their statutory obligations to government agencies charged with the responsibility of developing the Niger Delta. The recent disclosure that oil firms owe the Niger Delta Development Commission. NDDC, a whooping N7.55 billion came to many as a rude shock.
According to the Managing Director of the commission, Mr. Chibuzor Ugwoha, the Foreign oil companies operating in the Niger Delta have accumulated $50 million in unpaid royalties to the NDDC This, he said, is besides other statutory return, payable in naira, which the oil firms have also not remitted to the commission. Ugwoha, said the 200 audit report of the Nigeria Extractive Industry ‘Transparency Initiative (NEITI) show that some of the oil firms did not remit the funds. Which represented part of the three per cent of their total budget which they arc legally obliged to pay to the NDDC every year.
He said: “We are equally aware that a certain amount of money due to the commission from the government is yet to be paid and that makes development difficult because we need a lot of money to be able to develop the region. Those who know the terrain of the region will agree with me that where it is possible to construct one kilometer of road in some please with less challenges, it takes far more to build roads in the liger Delta because of the terrain”.
He stated that the commission was committed to a comprehensive development and transformation of the region, which he believes would ultimately curb the activities of militants. He said: “President Umaru Yar’ Adua had on August 6 during the inauguration of the new Board of the NDDC charged us that the region should be transformed and that we should focus specifically onll1aJor projects that would impact on the lives of the people so that problems that had lingered in the region will be
Things of the past. However, these cannot be achieved without adequate funding as part of the funds due to the NDDC is yet to be remitted from the contributions on the part of oil companies and industries that operate in the Niger Delta”.
Certainly the NDDC needs to be adequately funded to enable it confront the challenges of developing the region that gives Nigeria its oil wealth. All the key stakeholders, which include the three tiers of government and the oil companies. have a responsibility to support the NDDC as the agency driving the implementation of the Niger Delta Regional Devc1opment Master Plan. Records show that the commission has only received 30 per cent of its expected revenue since inception in 2001. The statutory allocations to the commission have consistent been withheld for inexplicable reasons.
The NDDC Act states c1earl) how the commission shall be funded. Section 14 (2) provides that “there shall be paid and credited to the fund established pursuant to subsection II of this section: (a ) of from the Federal Government the equivalent or 15 per cent of the total monthly allocation due to the member states of the commission from the federation account, this being the contribution of the Federal Government to the commission: (b) three per cent of the total annual budget of any oil-producing company operating onshore and offshore in the Niger Delta area. Including gas processing companies: (c) 50 per cent of monies due to member states of’ the commission from the ecological fund … ‘“ and other sources such as grants and loans.
Contrary to the provisions of’ the Act, some of’ the oil companies have not been paying the three per cent of their annual budget as required by law. The records show, that they deduct first charges bc1c.m; calculating the three per cent from the balance. It is more like cutting the nose to spite the face, given that what they spend for the development of” the Niger Delta is for their own good at the end of” the day.
The oil companies tell anyone that cares to listen that they are doing their best to be good corporate citizens and that they arc socially responsible of’ course, they know that it is in their best interest to have a peaceful relationship with their host communities. J However, despite this realization, many of them arc not doing enough to show that they are truly committed to the development of their host communities. Building a bloc of classroom here and another clinic there can at hest be descried as no more than sheer tokenism.
Apart from statutory requirements, the oil companies also have moral and .social responsibilities to fulfill. The oil workers arc the ones sharing the same neighborhood with the villagers. They cannot in good conscience he enjoying potable water while the villagers around them arc drinking polluted water or enjoying uninterrupted supply of electricity while their hosts arc in perpetual darkness or for them to live in mansions while the indigenous neighbours live in hovels
“It is even wrong for the oil companies to think that they arc doing their host communities a 1~I\’our h) allowing them to share their facilities with them. In fact such pecks arc not enough compensation for the despoliation of’ their environment. In addition to hand-outs. the oil companies have moral obligations to replenish the lands they arc destroying.
The truth is that oil companies no longer operate freely in the Niger Delta. The NDDC on the other hand does not suffer from this encumbrance, apparently because of its track record of working hands in gloves with the people at the grassroots. Obviously. The commission is well positioned to assist the oil companies to win the hearts and minds of the oil-bearing communities where they operate.
As Mr. Agwoha rightly said, it is not only the oil companies that have faded in meeting the statutory obligations to the commission. According to him, the Federal Government is equally culpable, as the interventionist agency was getting only 10 per cent from it instead of 15 per cent during the Obasanjo administration. This resulted in the much-talked about N326 billion debt that it owed the commission.
President Musa Yar’ Adua. known for his avowed respect for the rule of law, should promptly pay up the outstanding debt. This would strengthen the hands of the new board to actualize his vision for the rapid development of the Niger Delta.
Mr Agbu writes from Port Harcourt.
Ifeatu Agbu
Opinion
A Renewing Optimism For Naira
Opinion
Don’t Kill Tam David-West
Opinion
Fuel Subsidy Removal and the Economic Implications for Nigerians
From all indications, Nigeria possesses enough human and material resources to become a true economic powerhouse in Africa. According to the National Population Commission (NPC, 2023), the country’s population has grown steadily within the last decade, presently standing at about 220 million people—mostly young, vibrant, and innovative. Nigeria also remains the sixth-largest oil producer in the world, with enormous reserves of gas, fertile agricultural land, and human capital.
Yet, despite this enormous potential, the country continues to grapple with underdevelopment, poverty, unemployment, and insecurity. Recent data from the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS, 2023) show that about 129 million Nigerians currently live below the poverty line. Most families can no longer afford basic necessities, even as the government continues to project a rosy economic picture.
The Subsidy Question
The removal of fuel subsidy in 2023 by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has been one of the most controversial policy decisions in Nigeria’s recent history. According to the president, subsidy removal was designed to reduce fiscal burden, unify the foreign exchange rate, attract investment, curb inflation, and discourage excessive government borrowing.
While these objectives are theoretically sound, the reality for ordinary Nigerians has been severe hardship. Fuel prices more than tripled, transportation costs surged, and food inflation—already high—rose above 30% (NBS, 2023). The World Bank (2023) estimates that an additional 7.1 million Nigerians were pushed into poverty after subsidy removal.
A Critical Economic View
As an economist, I argue that the problem was not subsidy removal itself—which was inevitable—but the timing, sequencing, and structural gaps in Nigeria’s implementation.
- Structural Miscalculation
Nigeria’s four state-owned refineries remain nonfunctional. By removing subsidies without local refining capacity, the government exposed the economy to import-price pass-through effects—where global oil price shocks translate directly into domestic inflation. This was not just a timing issue but a fundamental policy miscalculation.
- Neglect of Social Safety Nets
Countries like Indonesia (2005) and Ghana (2005) removed subsidies successfully only after introducing cash transfers, transport vouchers, and food subsidies for the poor (World Bank, 2005). Nigeria, however, implemented removal abruptly, shifting the fiscal burden directly onto households without protection.
- Failure to Secure Food and Energy Alternatives
Fuel subsidy removal amplified existing weaknesses in agriculture and energy. Instead of sequencing reforms, government left Nigerians without refinery capacity, renewable energy alternatives, or mechanized agricultural productivity—all of which could have cushioned the shock.
Political and Public Concerns
Prominent leaders have echoed these concerns. Mr. Peter Obi, the Labour Party’s 2023 presidential candidate, described the subsidy removal as “good but wrongly timed.” Atiku Abubakar of the People’s Democratic Party also faulted the government’s hasty approach. Human rights activists like Obodoekwe Stive stressed that refineries should have been made functional first, to reduce the suffering of citizens.
This is not just political rhetoric—it reflects a widespread economic reality. When inflation climbs above 30%, when purchasing power collapses, and when households cannot meet basic needs, the promise of reform becomes overshadowed by social pain.
Broader Implications
The consequences of this policy are multidimensional:
- Inflationary Pressures – Food inflation above 30% has made nutrition unaffordable for many households.
- Rising Poverty – 7.1 million Nigerians have been newly pushed into poverty (World Bank, 2023).
- Middle-Class Erosion – Rising transport, rent, and healthcare costs are squeezing household incomes.
- Debt Concerns – Despite promises, government borrowing has continued, raising sustainability questions.
- Public Distrust – When government promises savings but citizens feel only pain, trust in leadership erodes.
In effect, subsidy removal without structural readiness has widened inequality and eroded social stability.
Missed Opportunities
Nigeria’s leaders had the chance to approach subsidy removal differently:
- Refinery Rehabilitation – Ensuring local refining to reduce exposure to global oil price shocks.
- Renewable Energy Investment – Diversifying energy through solar, hydro, and wind to reduce reliance on imported petroleum.
- Agricultural Productivity – Mechanization, irrigation, and smallholder financing could have boosted food supply and stabilized prices.
- Social Safety Nets – Conditional cash transfers, food vouchers, and transport subsidies could have protected the most vulnerable.
Instead, reform came abruptly, leaving citizens to absorb all the pain while waiting for theoretical long-term benefits.
Conclusion: Reform With a Human Face
Fuel subsidy removal was inevitable, but Nigeria’s approach has worsened hardship for millions. True reform must go beyond fiscal savings to protect citizens.
Economic policy is not judged only by its efficiency but by its humanity. A well-sequenced reform could have balanced fiscal responsibility with equity, ensuring that ordinary Nigerians were not crushed under the weight of sudden change.
Nigeria has the resources, population, and resilience to lead Africa’s economy. But leadership requires foresight. It requires policies that are inclusive, humane, and strategically sequenced.
Reform without equity is displacement of poverty, not development. If Nigeria truly seeks progress, its policies must wear a human face.
References
- National Bureau of Statistics (NBS). (2023). Poverty and Inequality Report. Abuja.
- National Population Commission (NPC). (2023). Population Estimates. Abuja.
- World Bank. (2023). Nigeria Development Update. Washington, DC.
- World Bank. (2005). Fuel Subsidy Reforms: Lessons from Indonesia and Ghana. Washington, DC.
- OPEC. (2023). Annual Statistical Bulletin. Vienna.
By: Amarachi Amaugo
-
Rivers3 days agoReps’ Committee On Health Lauds RSG On Primary Healthcare Delivery
-
Sports3 days agoLagos Women Race set to empower participants
-
Niger Delta3 days ago
Oborevwori Seeks Private Sector Partnership In Security … As Delta Launches Security Trust Fund
-
News3 days agoSERAP Demands NNPCL Account For Oil Revenues, Threatens Legal Action
-
Maritime3 days agoCustoms Intercepts N5.3BN Illicit Drugs AT TIN CAN PORT
-
Rivers3 days ago
Organization Seeks Office Space From Council Boss
-
Sports3 days agoDivision One Volleyball League kicks off in Abia
-
Niger Delta3 days ago
Bayelsa Lauds WHO, Others Over Support For Healthcare … Flags-Off Statewide Immunization
