Opinion

Appraising NAFDAC’s Export Promotion Effort (I)

Published

11 years ago

November 9, 2015

In what apparently seems an attempt to accord Nigeria a prideful place in the international non-oil export trade, the National Agency for Food,Drug Administration and Control [NAFDAC] has unfolded series of Agricultural exports redemption packages in an attempt to shore up the nation’s reputation in global non-oil export markets.
Reeling out the scientific based solutions in Abuja,the nation’s administrative capital recently ,the agency’s Chief Executive Officer and Director General Dr Paul B. Orhii, said he was outrightly uncomfortable with the orchestrated and seeming gang-up by developed nations against our resolve to explore alternative means of foreign exchange earnings through maximum participation in the highly coveted and age long non-oil export trade particularly in the exportation of value added agricultural products.
The European Union member nations under the auspices of the European Food Safety Authority had recently placed a one year[ie from July 2015 to July 2016] blanket-ban on the exportation of key value added agricultural products comprising Beans, Sesame seeds,Melon seeds,Dried Fish,Meat,Peanut chips and Palm oil emanating from Nigeria an acclaimed Giant of Africa owing to what it tagged-prevalence of very high level of injurious and deadly contaminants such as Mycotoxins,Pesticide residues as well as abnormal level of Dichlorvos pesticides [in the case of beans].
Consequently, NAFDAC has commenced frantic and very intense efforts geared towards urgently correcting this foreign exchange denying economic malady. It has eventually adopted for immediate implementation, ultra-modern cutting-edge technologies for the rectification of this economic disaster so as to avoid further extension of the hydra-headed ban upon its expiration in June 2016.
The technology based agric export solution filled package being initiated by NAFDAC under Dr Orhii renowned for his preference for digitalised regulatory engagements, will involve massive deployment/distribution of mobile motorized testing laboratories to all nooks and crannies of the nation’s 36 states and Abuja including remote farms, exportable agric products processing centers, produce market centers, sea and air ports as well as Land border stations in the country.
Also to be engaged in by the agency with the aid of the yet to be deployed ultra-modern specialized mobile scientific laboratories is the intensive training/supervision of farmers ,produce marketers and other stakeholders in Agric export business nationwide with a view to compelling them to comply with the rules of the game via meeting global standards specifications in this trade. They will be maximally furnished with the required know-how on Food storage, ideal packaging practices and other relevant quality control measures.
Consequently, funding for this urgent patriotically dynamic interventionist initiative amounting to a negligible token sum of about Two billion naira only [2billion naira] is being sought from the Federal Government either through outright operational grant or a repayable loan to enable this lofty bail out NAFDAC concept become a maximum reality inview of perceived urgency required by the situation to aid immediate acquisition, shipment, freight and deployment of these resourceful /ideal solution providing facilities.
Undoubtedly, this innovative technological adoptions is of enormous benefits to the nation. Aside successfully combating food contaminants/poisons, help analyze regulated products, effect on-the-spot quality assessment and monitoring of value chain agricultural exports, avoid a permanent European Union ban on Nigeria non-oil export and grossly reduce porverty.
The Dr Orhii’s agric export revitalisation and quality standardisation initiative will make Nigeria become agric export dependent rather than being export dependent in this regard as currently the case. It will avail the nation, mass employment opportunities, massively boost government foreign exchange earning capacity and thus becoming a steadily dependable alternative revenue source,accord the nation a befitting reputation in the committee of nations among others.
Expectedly, diversification of Nigeria’s economy from that of a majorly crude oil export dependent to an inclusively Agricultural produce exporting nation is being maximally craved for particularly as being projected by the seeming puritanical President Muhammadu Buhari led democratic administration.Undoubtedly, Agricultural export trade has the capacity to continuously and adequately sustain the nation should our potentials in this regard be ideally harnessed for a befitting socio-economic growth.
Ikhilae is a Lagos State-based Public Affairs Analyst.
However, trade in agricultural products at the global market strata is certainly not an all comers engagement as it is largely dependent on a variety of factors. To earn admissible status , agric exports must as a matter of necessity comply with specific international quality standards.Unfortunately, the nation’s desire to maximize foreign exchange earning through international agric export trade is being massively threatened by inability of operators in the sector to comply with specified quality benchmark.
Regrettably, rather than reap bountifully from this money spinning trade, Nigeria is loosing greatly and unbelievably owing to technical hitches which incidentally borders on inability to satisfy laid down standards in trade. Sadly, the nation’s status in the trade has gone so terribly bad that many exportable agric products emanating from Nigeria to foreign countries particularly members of the European Union, has earned a one year [12months] ban effective from June 2015 to June 30th, 2016 .
The trade restriction measure which affects Cashew nuts, Cocoa, Palm oil, Peanut chips, Meat, Fried Fish, Melon Seeds, Sesame seeds and Beans according to EU authorities was meant to compel the Nigerian government to institutionalize stringent and dependable quality control systems capable of guaranteeing persistent compliance with internationally specified acceptable quality standards in non-oil export trade henceforth since according to them series of previous warnings issued to Nigerian Government by the Union on this issue, were outrightly ignored.
The major areas which requires urgent government attention in salvaging the disastrous economic situation are to compel exporters/ stakeholders to fulfill global trade standards as well as urge them to desist from anti- non-oil export trade practices like poor/substandard products packaging, poor labeling, insufficient nutritional content information provision,high chemical content reduction, ,presence of Mycotoxins, Aflatoxins and presence of high level of pesticide residue.
Worried by this shameful and highly embarrassing situation which is almost dashing our hope of becoming a successful non-oil export trade nation,the Dr Paul B. Orhii led management of the National Agency for Food,Drug Administration and Control [NAFDAC] has opted to salvage the ugly situation through the adoption and deployment of modernized mobile and motorized scientific Laboratory facilities nationwide for the entrenchment and enforcement of globally specified standards in the sector.
The proposed massive procurement, adoption and deployment of these ultra-modern cutting-edge technology which will comprise of numerous units of mobile products quality certification and training laboratories will be adequately provided in all nooks and crannies of the nation [36states and Abuja] as well as all Land border stations, air and sea ports. Although Federal Government funding is being sought to make this lofty initiative a reality.
Compulsorily,Nigeria deserves to be ideally and urgently placed on a competitive edge in the global non-oil export trade pedestal by ensuring that her agric exports are not made to suffer any form of rejection by importing countries forthwith .The fact that revenue from crude oil sale has become unstable inview of its perceived dwindling and consequent unreliable status has placed on our political leaders the responsibility of finding economic succor/comfort in the non-oil export trade .
It is in this regard that the presidency, the senate, house of representatives as well as the nation’s economic managers must rise to this historic call to rescue the nation from this pending agricultural export trade doom by effecting immediate release of funds to actualize this NAFDAC well conceived and very patriotic solution filled initiative as “it will be improper for us to go to sleep while our roofs have been gutted by fire.”
Martins.F.O.Ikhilae,is a Lagos based Public Affairs Analyst Tell:08023405821.Email:martinsikhilae@ymail.com

Opinion

One Attack Too Many

Published

2 days ago

August 17, 2026

The Tide

Quote: “Ogoniland does not need leaders competing over who can destroy another’s platform; it needs leaders competing over who can create more opportunities, empower youths and build a better future.”

The latest attack by Chief Gani Topba on the President of KAGOTE and Chief Executive Officer of Giolee Global Resources Ltd, Chief Lesi Maol, appears to have opened another troubling chapter in the politics of leadership and influence in Ogoniland. While disagreements are inevitable, the frequency and manner of attacks directed at individuals or organisations contributing to Ogoni development should concern every stakeholder. The concluded extraordinary meeting of Ogoni stakeholders in Bori was convened to deliberate on challenges confronting the people, including insecurity, farmers-herders clashes, youth disunity, education and development. It also considered harmonising the numerous youth organisations operating across Ogoniland under a strong and representative umbrella capable of giving Ogoni youths a more coordinated voice. One would have expected such an initiative to attract constructive contributions, especially from those with reservations about it.

Instead, the gathering and its organisers have come under criticism, raising a fundamental question: what exactly is wrong with Ogoni stakeholders coming together to discuss problems affecting their people? If there are legitimate concerns about the meeting, its organisers or resolutions, such concerns should be supported by facts and subjected to constructive engagement rather than personalised attacks. Leadership is demonstrated through service, sacrifice, participation and results. If Chief Gani Topba believes the stakeholders’ meeting was unnecessary or lacked legitimacy, nothing prevents him from convening another meeting and demonstrating that he can attract traditional rulers, professionals, academics, clergy and youths. Different approaches to development should therefore be allowed to compete on their merits.

The proposal for a unified youth platform should equally not be presented as an attempt to silence Ogoni youths. Rather, it should be examined against the reality of numerous organisations claiming to represent different segments of Ogoni youths. Too many competing organisations can create confusion, weaken collective bargaining power and make it difficult for genuine concerns affecting young people to receive coordinated attention. A credible umbrella body, if properly constituted and broadly accepted, could strengthen the voice of Ogoni youths and provide an organised platform for employment, education, skills acquisition, security and governance. Ogoniland has experienced enough institutional fragmentation. Its history contains painful lessons about divisions that allow personal interests, leadership struggles and competing platforms to overshadow collective objectives. The present generation should learn that destroying institutions one does not control damages society.

The question should be: who benefits when Ogoni youths remain divided and every attempt at unity is interpreted as rivalry? Against this background, KAGOTE deserves objective scrutiny rather than blanket condemnation. Any organisation with influence must be accountable, but accountability is different from a campaign aimed at delegitimising initiatives associated with its leadership. Chief Lesi Maol’s activities through KAGOTE and Giolee Global Resources Ltd have attracted attention in areas including skills development, education, youth empowerment and community support. Such interventions should be assessed on their impact and encouraged where they serve the public good. Those who believe Chief Maol is not doing enough should not stop at criticism. They should show Ogoni what they can do better. Where are the alternative skills programmes? Where are the educational interventions? Where are the youth empowerment schemes? Where are the community development initiatives?

It is easy to criticise someone who is building; it is harder to mobilise resources and sustain programmes that benefit ordinary people. This is not to suggest that Chief Maol or KAGOTE should be immune from criticism. No leader or institution should be beyond scrutiny, and legitimate questions about accountability must be welcomed. But responsible criticism should be based on facts, evidence and alternative ideas. Personal attacks and attempts to destroy initiatives simply because their leadership is not controlled by particular interests cannot provide the solutions Ogoniland needs. What is unfolding is bigger than one meeting, one statement or even two individuals. It reflects a broader contest over influence and leadership. If anyone believes KAGOTE is taking Ogoni in the wrong direction, the response is to present a better direction. If anyone believes Lesi Maol is not doing enough, the answer is to demonstrate what more can be done. Ogoni does not need leaders competing over who can destroy another’s platform; it needs leaders competing over who can create opportunities, improve education, promote security, empower youths and contribute to development.

The people are looking beyond rhetoric. They are examining records, observing programmes and measuring results. No individual owns the permanent right to speak for Ogoni or determine which organisation must survive or collapse. Ogoni must replace the politics of personal control with a culture of ideas, service, accountability and measurable achievement. Differences should produce better alternatives, not destruction. Every Ogoni leader and stakeholder should ask whether his actions are strengthening the region or deepening divisions. Ogoni needs people who can build bridges, institutions, opportunities and hope. Those who genuinely love Ogoni should support what is good, correct what is wrong and offer better alternatives. The future of Ogoni will not be secured by destroying its builders, but by encouraging more people to build.

onest people can reach different conclusions based on different experiences and information. Public debate should therefore remain respectful, evidence-based and open to correction. Truth is strengthened by honest examination, not insults, suspicion or personal attacks. The phrase “Truth has no agenda” carries a powerful message. Truth does not belong to any political party, ethnic group, religion or ideology. It cannot be permanently owned or manipulated by those in power. Governments change, institutions rise and fall, and public opinion shifts, but truth remains indifferent to popularity.The real test of character comes when speaking honestly threatens influence, privilege or personal advantage. It is easy to defend justice when there is nothing to lose. It is far more difficult when the truth may cost us something. That is when conscience must rise above convenience.

Society must therefore cultivate a culture where integrity is valued more than comfort and accountability is welcomed rather than feared. Leaders should learn to accept criticism without hostility, while citizens should express disagreement responsibly. Progress becomes difficult when honest questions are treated as acts of disloyalty. Ultimately, every society must choose the future it desires. A nation built on silence cannot sustain justice, while a community where comfort consistently outweighs conscience risks making injustice ordinary. But people committed to truth, even when inconvenient, lay the foundation for stronger institutions, trustworthy leadership and lasting progress. The call is not to condemn those who succeed or to glorify perpetual criticism. It is to remember that privilege should never silence principle, influence should never replace integrity, and personal gain should never outweigh the public good. Truth has no hidden agenda. It seeks neither applause nor favour. It simply asks to be spoken, defended and lived. When truth is silenced by comfort, everyone eventually pays the price.

By: King Onunwor

Opinion

When Comfort Silences The Truth

Published

2 days ago

August 17, 2026

The Tide

Quote: “Privilege should never silence principle, influence should never replace integrity, and personal gain should never outweigh the public good.”

There is an old saying that truth does not fear investigation. Genuine truth neither depends on applause nor seeks permission to exist. It remains constant whether celebrated or rejected, defended or ignored. Yet, in today’s society, truth often competes with comfort, convenience, loyalty and personal interest. This raises an important question: Can a person remain objective after beginning to benefit from the very system he once criticised? Throughout history, reform movements have been driven by courageous individuals willing to challenge injustice despite personal risks. Their commitment to truth sometimes cost them popularity, comfort, freedom and even their lives. History has also recorded instances where influential voices became quieter after receiving appointments, promotions, contracts, political favours or other advantages.

While motivations cannot always be known, such patterns remind us that personal benefit can sometimes influence public conviction. Human beings naturally seek security, stability and opportunities for themselves and their families. There is nothing wrong with success or advancement. The concern arises when personal comfort replaces public responsibility, or privilege becomes a reason to ignore problems affecting others. One of the greatest dangers facing society is not only corruption or poor governance but the normalisation of silence. Systems rarely collapse overnight. They deteriorate gradually when people who know better decide that speaking the truth is no longer worth the personal cost. Every society therefore depends on citizens willing to ask difficult questions, demand accountability and defend justice, regardless of who benefits or feels uncomfortable.

A person who benefits from a broken system may become less inclined to challenge it. This is not true of everyone, and individuals should not be judged without evidence. Many principled people continue to advocate reform while working within imperfect institutions. Nevertheless, personal interests can sometimes soften criticism, dilute conviction or redirect attention from uncomfortable realities.Perhaps the greatest threat to truth is not open opposition but quiet compromise. Censorship is easy to recognise; silence purchased through convenience is harder to detect. When people gradually stop asking questions, demanding transparency or defending principles they once considered important, society should ask whether something has changed. Perspectives may genuinely evolve with new information, but incentives can also influence what people say—or choose not to say.

This is why citizens should not place blind trust in personalities. Ideas, principles and actions should be examined independently. Loyalty to individuals must never exceed loyalty to truth. Political affiliation, professional status, financial success or social influence should not exempt anyone from accountability. A healthy democracy depends on independent thinking, not unquestioning allegiance.The responsibility to speak truth does not belong only to journalists, activists, judges, religious leaders or opposition politicians. It belongs to every citizen. The teacher who refuses to manipulate facts, the public servant who rejects corruption, the business owner who acts with integrity, the parent who teaches honesty and the young person who chooses principle over popularity all contribute to a more just society. However, defending truth also requires humility.

We must not assume that everyone who disagrees with us has been compromised.

By: Michael Abraham

Opinion

Poor Federal Roads: The Oshiomhole’s Outburst

Published

2 weeks ago

August 3, 2026

The Tide

Quote:”Although the Federal Ministry of Works is responsible for road construction and rehabilitation while the Federal Roads Maintenance Agency (FERMA) oversees maintenance, road maintenance has consistently taken a back seat”

The recent outburst by the lawmaker representing Edo North Senatorial District, Senator Adams Oshiomhole, over the deplorable condition of federal roads in Edo and Delta states has once again drawn national attention to one of Nigeria’s most persistent infrastructure challenges. During Senate plenary last Wednesday, Oshiomhole criticized the Minister of Works, David Umahi, accusing the Federal Ministry of Works of neglecting major federal highways in Edo and Delta while prioritizing new road projects. According to him, the government should focus on rehabilitating existing roads that have become impassable before embarking on new construction. He identified the Benin-Warri, Benin-Asaba, Benin-Auchi and Auchi-Okene highways as strategic economic corridors that have deteriorated to alarming levels, making travel difficult for commuters and motorists while increasing the cost of transporting goods and services.

The senator also alleged that road projects affecting Edo and Delta states were repeatedly omitted from budgetary provisions and that some interventions were only undertaken following directives from President Bola Tinubu. Ironically, the Federal Government has consistently reiterated its commitment to reconstructing and rehabilitating federal roads across the country. The Minister of Works has repeatedly assured Nigerians that the government is deploying reinforced concrete technology to build more durable highways capable of withstanding the country’s climatic conditions. Despite these assurances, vast sections of federal road across the country remain in deplorable condition. The consequences are enormous. Federal highways serve as the backbone of the nation’s economy, carrying more than 90 per cent of passengers and freight.

They connect ports, airports, industrial centres, state capitals and agricultural belts, facilitating the movement of food, fuel, cement and manufactured goods. When these roads fail, the entire economy suffers. Although the Federal Ministry of Works is responsible for road construction and rehabilitation while the Federal Roads Maintenance Agency (FERMA) oversees maintenance, road maintenance has consistently taken a back seat. The result is a recurring cycle in which newly completed roads quickly deteriorate while existing ones are left to collapse. The economic consequences are severe. Bad roads increase transportation costs, contribute to food inflation, delay the movement of goods from ports to markets, increase vehicle maintenance expenses and lead to avoidable road crashes that claim countless lives every year.

To address these challenges, the Federal Government has introduced initiatives such as the Highway Development and Management Initiative (HDMI), which seeks to attract private investment into road maintenance through concessions and tolling. While the initiative holds promise, public acceptance will depend largely on visible improvements in road quality and transparent management of toll revenues. Similarly, the Road Infrastructure Tax Credit Scheme is designed to encourage companies to finance the reconstruction of strategic highways in exchange for tax credits. While the scheme has shown promise, its ability to address road infrastructure challenges equitably across the country remains to be seen. Other countries facing similar infrastructure challenges have demonstrated that sustainable road management requires a different approach.

Rwanda and Morocco, for instance, have prioritized dedicated road maintenance funds, performance-based contracts that reward quality rather than kilometers constructed, and policies that allocate a significant proportion of road budgets to maintenance instead of new construction. Nigeria can draw useful lessons from these experiences. Maintenance funding should be increased and protected because preventive maintenance is far cheaper than complete reconstruction. Public-private partnerships should be expanded with adequate safeguards, transparent tolling policies and independent monitoring. Development finance institutions should support contractors with affordable financing to minimize disruptions caused by delayed government payments. Road designs should withstand heavier rainfall and flooding, while compensation and right-of-way issues must be resolved before projects begin to avoid unnecessary delays.

FERMA should also prioritize durable, high-quality road maintenance over the shoddy repairs that have become all too common. Ultimately, Nigerians are not asking for perfect roads; they simply want roads that are safe, durable and properly maintained. While new highways are desirable, a well-maintained five-kilometer stretch is often far more valuable to road users than a much longer road that quickly falls into disrepair. The media, civil society, the National Assembly and Nigerians must continue to hold the government accountable by monitoring road projects and demanding better results. Good roads are not a privilege but a right of every citizen. With tax credit schemes, concessions and other funding mechanisms already in place, what is now required is political will, transparency and consistent implementation. However, Senator Oshiomhole’s criticism also invites legitimate public reflection.

Many Nigerians have asked what the condition of these same federal roads was during his eight-year tenure as Governor of Edo State. Several governors, including those of Rivers State at different times, undertook repairs on critical federal roads within their states and subsequently sought reimbursement from the Federal Government. It is therefore fair to ask whether similar interventions were pursued during Oshiomhole’s administration. Public officials, whether serving or former, should be judged by the same standard. Constructive criticism is essential in a democracy, but it carries greater weight when matched by a demonstrable record of action. Nigerians expect those entrusted with public office to address pressing challenges while they have the authority to do so, rather than becoming vocal critics only after leaving office