Editorial
No To Anti-Migration Bill

On April 6, this year, Nigeria’s lower legislative chamber, the House of Representatives, triggered an outrage. The House passed for second reading, a Medical and Dental Practitioners Act (Amendment) Bill, 2022, which seeks to make it compulsory for graduates in medical and dental fields to render services within Nigeria for five years before being licensed to practise.
The sponsor of the bill is Honourable Ganiyu Johnson, a member of the All Progressives Congress (APC) representing Lagos State. He strongly believes that once passed into law, the proposed legislation will end the massive movement of young Nigerian doctors abroad.
His argument is, Nigeria has only 24,000 licensed medical doctors in the country, which is less than 10 per cent of the number needed to meet the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) recommendation, hence, the need for the bill. He said, considering the growing trend of the Nigerian population and the current rate of emigration of Nigerian-trained medical and dental practitioners, passing this bill into law would provide Nigerians with quality medical services.
To further buttress his argument, the federal lawmaker compared the fees paid in the United Kingdom and other countries’ universities on the one side to what is paid in Nigerian universities, concluding that tuition fees in Nigeria’s public medical schools were highly subsidised. Thus, making it mandatory for the nation’s medical professionals to reciprocate.
Many Nigerian doctors have moved to the developed world, searching for greener pastures. About 5,600 of them have migrated to the United Kingdom in the past eight years. Now, in some southern states of the country, only one doctor is expected to treat about 30,000 patients while in the North, the ratio is a doctor to over 45,000 patients.
Nigeria is not the only African country losing its medical staff to developed nations. Virtually every African country is affected. Statistics from Britain’s Nursing and Midwifery Council showed that up to March 2002, over 2,000 African nurses left their countries to take up jobs in Britain. For instance, South Africa lost 2,114 nurses and midwives to Britain and Zimbabwe, 473 nurses.
Since the content of the bill became public knowledge, doctors and their unions have been lambasting the House of Representatives for the move. Tempers have been flaring, with the doctors claiming that the legislators are ill-informed to contemplate such a law, thus, picking holes in it, and vowing to stop the lawmakers on their track.
Expectedly, the National Association of Resident Doctors (NARD) rejected the bill. In a communique issued after the association’s emergency National Officers’ Committee (NOC) meeting, the resident doctors were particularly shocked by the bill’s sponsor, Hon. Johnson, and his attempts to enslave Nigerian-trained medical doctors. Also, an umbrella body of Nigerian medical doctors and dentists practising outside the country known as Diaspora Medical Association petitioned the National Assembly over the bill.
Similarly, the Medical and Dental Consultants of Nigeria (MDCAN) also faulted the bill. According to MDCAN, the proposed bill is harsh and discriminatory, lacking the basic ingredients of good faith. In a statement signed by the President, Dr Victor Makonhuola, and the Secretary-General, Dr Yemi Raji, MDCAN noted that the bill violated Section 34 (1) (b) of the Nigerian Constitution.
While we appreciate the passion and concern for the health of Nigerians as shown by Johnson in proposing this bill, we think it is misdirected, ill-informed, and poorly thought through. We wonder why the legislators should focus on medical doctors when Nigerians across all professions are fleeing the country to seek greener pastures abroad. Focusing attention only on the medical doctors is like curing one of many ailments that are threatening the life of a dying patient without finding solutions to the others.
The bill is undemocratic. It infringes on medical personnel’s freedom of movement to seek good means of livelihood elsewhere. It is laughable that these same legislators and their cronies in government who frequently go on medical trips overseas are now telling doctors where to work. Why do they not make a law against politicians going for medical tourism? Is it not our money these politicians spend abroad to treat themselves, while we have hospitals that are in dilapidated conditions?
The real motive for seeking to delay medical professionals from taking better opportunities overseas is yet to be seen. What Johnson advocates blatantly violates the acclaimed labour and market principles. The question is: how would the proposed law tackle the vexed issues of infrastructural deficits, low public investment, and poor workers’ welfare, as well as improve the quality of clinical outcomes in the least?
On the issue that medical workers must give back to society after enjoying subsidised training, it must be emphasised that bonding already exists in the civil service with clear guidelines for its application. Governments at both state and federal levels provide full sponsorship for university education at both undergraduate and postgraduate levels, with a proviso that they will bond individuals who benefit from such sponsorship for a specified number of years. This does not apply to subsidies.
Resolving the challenge of brain drain in the country’s health sector cannot be achieved through this bill. Rather, Nigeria needs to address the various factors that make skilled health workers desire to migrate from the country. They should direct considerable efforts at improving the health system, with sustainable investments, to make it conducive for health workers to work and achieve better outcomes. Besides, their work environment and career expectations must be prioritised.
Editorial
Making Rivers’ Seaports Work

When Rivers State Governor, Sir Siminalayi Fubara, received the Board and Management of the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA), led by its Chairman, Senator Adeyeye Adedayo Clement, his message was unmistakable: Rivers’ seaports remain underutilised, and Nigeria is poorer for it. The governor’s lament was a sad reminder of how neglect and centralisation continue to choke the nation’s economic arteries.
The governor, in his remarks at Government House, Port Harcourt, expressed concern that the twin seaports — the NPA in Port Harcourt and the Onne Seaport — have not been operating at their full potential. He underscored that seaports are vital engines of national development, pointing out that no prosperous nation thrives without efficient ports and airports. His position aligns with global realities that maritime trade remains the backbone of industrial expansion and international commerce.
Indeed, the case of Rivers State is peculiar. It hosts two major ports strategically located along the Bonny River axis, yet cargo throughput has remained dismally low compared to Lagos. According to NPA’s 2023 statistics, Lagos ports (Apapa and Tin Can Island) handled over 75 per cent of Nigeria’s container traffic, while Onne managed less than 10 per cent. Such a lopsided distribution is neither efficient nor sustainable.
Governor Fubara rightly observed that the full capacity operation of Onne Port would be transformative. The area’s vast land mass and industrial potential make it ideal for ancillary businesses — warehousing, logistics, ship repair, and manufacturing. A revitalised Onne would attract investors, create jobs, and stimulate economic growth, not only in Rivers State but across the Niger Delta.
The multiplier effect cannot be overstated. The port’s expansion would boost clearing and forwarding services, strengthen local transport networks, and revitalise the moribund manufacturing sector. It would also expand opportunities for youth employment — a pressing concern in a state where unemployment reportedly hovers around 32 per cent, according to the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS).
Yet, the challenge lies not in capacity but in policy. For years, Nigeria’s maritime economy has been suffocated by excessive centralisation. Successive governments have prioritised Lagos at the expense of other viable ports, creating a traffic nightmare and logistical bottlenecks that cost importers and exporters billions annually. The governor’s call, therefore, is a plea for fairness and pragmatism.
Making Lagos the exclusive maritime gateway is counter productive. Congestion at Tin Can Island and Apapa has become legendary — ships often wait weeks to berth, while truck queues stretch for kilometres. The result is avoidable demurrage, product delays, and business frustration. A more decentralised port system would spread economic opportunities and reduce the burden on Lagos’ overstretched infrastructure.
Importers continue to face severe difficulties clearing goods in Lagos, with bureaucratic delays and poor road networks compounding their woes. The World Bank’s Doing Business Report estimates that Nigerian ports experience average clearance times of 20 days — compared to just 5 days in neighbouring Ghana. Such inefficiency undermines competitiveness and discourages foreign investment.
Worse still, goods transported from Lagos to other regions are often lost to accidents or criminal attacks along the nation’s perilous highways. Reports from the Federal Road Safety Corps indicate that over 5,000 road crashes involving heavy-duty trucks occurred in 2023, many en route from Lagos. By contrast, activating seaports in Rivers, Warri, and Calabar would shorten cargo routes and save lives.
The economic rationale is clear: making all seaports operational will create jobs, enhance trade efficiency, and boost national revenue. It will also help diversify economic activity away from the overburdened South West, spreading prosperity more evenly across the federation.
Decentralisation is both an economic strategy and an act of national renewal. When Onne, Warri, and Calabar ports operate optimally, hinterland states benefit through increased trade and infrastructure development. The federal purse, too, gains through taxes, duties, and improved productivity.
Tin Can Island, already bursting at the seams, exemplifies the perils of over-centralisation. Ships face berthing delays, containers stack up, and port users lose valuable hours navigating chaos. The result is higher operational costs and lower competitiveness. Allowing states like Rivers to fully harness their maritime assets would reverse this trend.
Compelling all importers to use Lagos ports is an anachronistic policy that stifles innovation and local enterprise. Nigeria cannot achieve its industrial ambitions by chaining its logistics system to one congested city. The path to prosperity lies in empowering every state to develop and utilise its natural advantages — and for Rivers, that means functional seaports.
Fubara’s call should not go unheeded. The Federal Government must embrace decentralisation as a strategic necessity for national growth. Making Rivers’ seaports work is not just about reviving dormant infrastructure; it is about unlocking the full maritime potential of a nation yearning for balance, productivity, and shared prosperity.
Editorial
Addressing The State Of Roads In PH

Editorial
Charge Before New Rivers Council Helmsmen

-
Nation1 day ago
Cancer Care: Expert Seeks Hospice In UPTH
-
News1 day ago
Use Service Year To Build Capacity, Fubara Urges Corp Members
-
Featured1 day ago
Workers’ Audits Not Meant For Downsizing – Walson Jack
-
Nation1 day ago
Union Petitions EFCC, ICPC Over Tax Fraud Allegations Against Daewoo, Saipem
-
Politics1 day ago
Senate Confirms Amupitan As INEC Chairman
-
Nation24 hours ago
HYPREP Remains Steadfast In Adhering To International Standards—Zabbey …As Regulators, Asset Owners Hail Project
-
News1 day ago
NERC Approves N28bn For Procurement Of Meters For Band A Customers
-
News24 hours ago
Fubara Reassures Rivers People Of Completion Of PH Ring Road Project