Opinion
As NAFDAC Returns To Ports …
A communiqué issued last week at the end of the National Chemical Security Training Conference in Abuja, recommended a return of officials of the National Agency for Food, Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC) to the ports and borders of the country.
NAFDAC, Standard Organisation of Nigeria (SON) and a number of other government agencies have been absent from the nation’s ports and borders since 2011. The Managing Director of Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA), Ms Hadiza Bala Usman, had on June 7, 2017, renewed the order by banning some regulatory/security agencies including NAFDAC and SON from operating at the country’s seaports.
The operations of these agencies were considered no longer relevant which made their eviction from the ports imperative to ensure a smooth operation of business at the ports.
The NPA boss could be said to have merely read out the then acting President’s (Prof Yemi Osinbajo) script, which was contained in his executive orders on May 18, 2017, in which issues bordering on entry and exit operations and other issues relating to the conduct of public administration in the country were addressed. The eviction exercise was aimed at promoting transparency and efficiency in the business environment.
The executive order which prescribed the eviction of these agencies was also believed to have the potential to bring about positive changes in the port processes and enhance the ease of doing business since the former system witnessed a clash of interest that climaxed in touting, bribery and corruption.
But, how unbiased is this eventual resolution? Given the auspicious roles of these two agencies, should they be the first to be ousted? In a business environment such as the land borders, sea and airports, where goods and consumables come in from outside the country, whose duty is it to establish the potency as well as the reliability of the goods? These and many more questions have trailed the banning of agencies like SON and NAFDAC from the ports.
However, like the proverbial toad that runs not in the day for no reason, Nigerians are aware that President Muhammadu Buhari, before his medical trip abroad last year, set up a Presidential Enabling Business Environment Council (PEBEC) to introduce reforms and change some of the ways government business and operations were conducted in the country.
The committee took time to do its work as it beamed its searchlight predominantly on the operations of Ministries, Agencies and Departments (MADs), entry experiences of visitors and travelers as well as ports operations. What we may not know is what the findings of the committee were.
All the same, behind the reasons for the eviction of these two all-important agencies, operators blame the delay in cargo clearance on the multiplicity of government agencies at the ports. This explains why they were joyful when on the strength of the executive order, the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA) announced that only seven agencies are allowed to operate at the ports.
“We are trying to reduce the time and process in what we are doing and it is only when we abide by this that we can do that” the NPA boss said.
While the reason behind the action may well be justified, I am concerned about the yardsticks used for the selection of the agencies to be dropped, even in the face of the fact that “the law that set up NAFDAC empowers it to statutorily operate at the ports. The clearance of regulated products outside the current legal framework poses immediate and life-threatening risks to the public as unregistered, spurious and falsified products exit the ports without recourse to the agency’s approval for such products to be in the market.
Only God knows how many sensitive chemical substances, food, drug and other regulated products have gained entrance into the country unchecked all these while in the absence of NAFDAC.
However, the recent recall of NAFDAC to the ports by the Federal Government, underscores its role as a key player in the national security architecture. Undisputedly, government’s efforts in securing lives and property of its citizens cannot be hundred percent fruitful without the contribution of NAFDAC which is saddled with the responsibility of ensuring that only quality, safe, efficacious and wholesome regulated products are consumed.
It is hoped that the return of NAFDAC officials to ports and borders will stimulate effective control of the importation of narcotic drugs and chemical substances identified to be grossly abused and posing threat to public health and national security.
While the reason for the initial ousting of the NAFDAC is yet to be ascertained, it is expected that members and staff of this agency should base their operations on integrity to avoid attracting undue attention. No doubt, the indispensability of their role cannot be overemphasised.
Sylvia ThankGod-Amadi
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
-
Business3 days agoNCAA To Enforce Zero-debt Rule By 2026 ……….As Airlines Face Compliance Sanctions
-
Rivers2 days agoRivers Community Absolves Kingsman of Land Grabbing Allegations, Gives Seven-Day Ultimatum
-
Rivers3 days ago
Shippers Council moves To Enhance Service Delivery At Nigerian Ports
-
Oil & Energy3 days agoEkpo, , Mshelbila Elected Gas Exporting Countries Forum Chiefs
-
News3 days agoTinubu commissions seven new projects at Unilorin
-
Business3 days agoNAICOM Tasks New NCRIB President On Innovation, Professionalism
-
Nation2 days agoOgoni Cleanup Programme, Enabling Pathways To Development Of Ogoni – Zabbey
-
Niger Delta3 days ago
Tompolo’s Visit To Bayelsa Bothers Coalition … As Stakeholders Want Security Checks