Connect with us

Editorial

Time To Account For 13% Derivation Refunds

Published

on

How did the other South-South states, aside from Rivers, expend their arrears of the 13 per cent derivation refunds that were illegally deducted from the oil-producing states by the Federal Government since 1999? That is the tough question on the lips of some stakeholders mostly in the affected states.
This came after the startling revelation by the Rivers State Governor, Chief Nyesom Wike, that Nigeria’s President Muhammadu Buhari authorised and paid the arrears to Rivers, Bayelsa, Delta, Edo and Akwa Ibom States. Wike spoke on the development last Friday during the inauguration of the N17 billion Port Harcourt Campus of the Nigerian Law School.
Responding to those who had been seeking to know how the Rivers State Government was able to obtain funds to execute projects many of which are being inaugurated or commissioned, Wike replied that President Buhari’s gesture was the major source of revenue for his projects, including the flyovers, the law school, the cancer centre, among others.
Hear him: “Monies that were not paid to the Niger Delta states since 1999 mainly 13 per cent deductions, the President approved and paid all of us in Niger Delta states.” Wike had reiterated a similar remark at two separate events afterwards. Following the disclosure, stakeholders have begun to ask their governors questions on how they spent or are spending their allocations of the money.
Now that the Rivers State Chief Executive has let the cat out of the bag, some of his fellow governors in the region have come out of their comfort zones to offer explanations or tell cock-and-bull stories better told to the marines. This divulgence indicates that Wike is truly fighting for the masses, even though he stands the risk of making more enemies for himself.
Speaking on the matter through his Chief Press Secretary, Olisa Ifeajika, the Delta State governor, Ifeanyi Okowa, said the state had drawn only N30 billion from its accrued share of N270 billion from the 13 per cent derivation arrears. He said his administration opted to access its share through a bridge finance loan of N150 billion from a bank. The Delta governor declared that since the Federal Government could not pay the money in bulk, the oil-producing states agreed for some part of it to be disbursed within three years and the other within five years.
Some Bayelsa stakeholders took to social media over the slow pace of development amidst considerable resources. The big question on their lips has been what happened to Bayelsa’s stake in the money paid by the Federal Government? Similar questions are asked by residents of Akwa Ibom and Edo States. While some have threatened to use the Freedom of Information (FoI) Act to compel their government to account for the money, others have called for a probe into the seemingly looted funds.
Astonishingly, some governors in the Niger Delta could receive such a tremendous amount of money in these hard times yet decline to pay salaries and pensions regularly. In some affected states, infrastructure is decrepit and development is apprehended. While Governor Wike has been building flyovers and executing other developmentally-oriented projects in his state with the windfall, the question is, what have the other governors who got a similar treasure-trove been doing with theirs?
It is time transparency and disclosure were enforced in the administration of the 13 per cent derivation by state governments. Reportedly, eight states have been benefiting from the scheme. The eight oil-producing states received about N6.589 trillion from the federation account under the derivation principle, between 2009 and 2019. Sadly, there has been little or nothing to show for such allocation in some beneficiary states as agitations for benefits continue among the people directly impacted by oil production.
For states receiving derivation payments, translucency is even more key, given the history of state governors’ management of these funds. That way, the temptation to yield to corruption risks is reduced, wasteful spending is curtailed and oil-producing communities have a greater chance of getting these funds to work in their interest.
Governor Wike deserves commendation for exposing the non-performing governors in the crude oil and gas-rich Niger Delta region, who collect huge derivation funds and arrears but without any corresponding projects on the ground to justify the allocations. But for his bringing the situation to limelight, many would not have been aware of it. The other governors in the region must ensure that their funds reflect massive developmental and infrastructural projects, as seen in Rivers.
We hail President Muhammadu Buhari for authorising the payment of the funds to the deserving states and not playing politics with it, particularly since the benefiting states are virtually in the opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). This is an abiding testimony to the President’s political maturity and his commitment to the tenets of democracy and the rule of law. As can be seen, Buhari’s release of the money has enabled the Rivers governor to embark on more projects in the state.
Unfortunately, the 13 per cent derivation which is a form of royalty for mineral owners has been hijacked for political expediency rather than meeting the needs of the host communities. There must be a paradigm shift away from political expedience in the use of the funds to employing it to maximise the social and economic welfare of the oil-producing communities in particular and the state in general.
An energy expert and former adviser at Nigeria Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (NEITI), Garuba Dauda, said extractive revenues face a huge utilisation challenge at both national and subnational levels in Nigeria. He stressed that there were far-reaching accountability gaps in the management of oil revenues at both national and subnational levels of government, especially the 13 per cent derivation.
Accountability remains key if benefit transfer must get to the citizens. The need to imbibe and integrate corporate best practices in the oil and gas industry in Nigeria must include holding the state governments accountable for disbursement of the 13 per cent derivation funds. Oil-producing communities in derivation-receiving states must be seen to be enjoying the dividends of the derivation.

Continue Reading

Editorial

HIV, Transiting From Donor Dependence

Published

on

The initial announcement by United States President, Donald Trump, to cut funding for international
HIV/AIDS initiatives sent shockwaves through the global health community. In Nigeria, a country facing a significant HIV/AIDS burden, the potential consequences were dire. However, the subsequent waiver granted by the administration has provided a lifeline for the millions of Nigerians who rely on the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) for their treatment and support.
PEPFAR has been an important partner in Nigeria’s fight against HIV/AIDS. Since its inception in 2003, PEPFAR has committed more than $7.8 billion to the country, catering to approximately 90 per cent of HIV treatment requirements. With this funding, Nigeria has been able to enhance its HIV prevention, treatment and support services and has witnessed a reduction in HIV/AIDS deaths.
The waiver granted by the Trump administration guarantees that PEPFAR’s life-saving medicines and medical services will continue to reach the needy. Antiretrovirals (ARVs) are the most common type of medicine used to treat HIV and reduce the virus’ spread. Through the provision of ARVs, PEPFAR helps prevent the spread of HIV and enhances the quality of life of those with the condition.
Although Nigeria was recently exempted from the requirement, the signs are evident: the country has to graduate from dependence on donor funds for its HIV/AIDS control programmes. Over the years, partners including the U.S. government have been central to the provision of treatment to people living with the virus. However, it is time for Nigeria to own its national response to HIV/AIDS.
Nigeria’s HIV/AIDS burden remains critical, accounting for 10 per cent of the global total. In 2023 alone, there were 75,000 new infections and 45,000 HIV-related deaths. The battle against Mother-to-Child Transmission remains challenging, with only 35 per cent of the target 75 per cent being met. Nearly 1.7 million Nigerian children have been orphaned due to HIV. Vulnerable populations, especially women and children, continue to disproportionately suffer.
To transition away from donor dependence, a multifaceted approach is necessary. Firstly, the country must increase its domestic financing for HIV/AIDS programmes. This can be accomplished through innovative funding mechanisms, such as leveraging public-private partnerships and exploring local revenue sources. Secondly, the government needs to strengthen its healthcare system to ensure equitable access to testing, treatment, and care. This involves expanding access to antiretroviral drugs, investing in community-based models, and addressing the stigma associated with HIV.
Thirdly, Nigeria must prioritise prevention efforts. This entails promoting condom use, providing comprehensive sexual education, and increasing awareness about the risks and modes of transmission. By focusing on prevention, the country can decrease the incidence of HIV infections and ultimately lessen the burden on its healthcare system.
Finally, Nigeria should develop a sustainable human resource strategy for its HIV/AIDS response. This involves training and equipping healthcare workers, engaging community volunteers, and empowering people living with HIV to advocate for their rights. A well-trained workforce is essential for delivering high-quality services and ensuring the long-term success of the response.
The transition beyond donor dependence is a complex but necessary journey for the country. By increasing domestic financing, strengthening healthcare systems, prioritising prevention, and investing in its human resources, the country can create a sustainable and effective response to HIV/AIDS. Also, the government should consider alternative funding mechanisms, such as increased domestic funding, public-private partnerships, and philanthropic initiatives. The time to act is now, for the well-being of present and future generations.
Nigeria’s National Agency for the Control of AIDS (NACA) has made momentous strides in combating HIV/AIDS, including expanding access to testing, treatment, and education. However, challenges persist, hindering the effectiveness of these efforts.
One major obstacle is limited access to healthcare facilities, particularly in rural areas. This impedes timely diagnosis and treatment, reducing the likelihood of optimal outcomes for those living with HIV. Additionally, stigma surrounding the disease remains a formidable barrier, preventing individuals from seeking testing and care. Inadequate awareness campaigns further contribute to low testing rates and delayed diagnosis.
Addressing these challenges requires concerted action by the government and stakeholders. Allocation of adequate funding is crucial to expand healthcare infrastructure and ensure the availability of essential services. Moreover, targeted interventions to reduce stigma and promote awareness are vital for increasing testing and early detection.
Collaboration between civil society organisations and grassroots movements is also essential for advocating for protection of HIV funding. Advocacy campaigns can mobilise public support and pressure lawmakers to prioritise the fight against HIV/AIDS. By addressing these challenges and ensuring sustainable funding, Nigeria can depend less on donor countries, drastically reduce HIV transmission, and provide the necessary care to those affected by the disease.

Continue Reading

Editorial

Israel-Gaza War: Sustaining The Ceasefire 

Published

on

The recent agreement between Israel and Hamas to cease hostilities marks a significant and much-anticipated step toward peace in a conflict that has devastated countless lives and infrastructure in Gaza. The ongoing violence, which has persisted for over 460 days, has yielded catastrophic human casualties and an acute humanitarian crisis. The need for a sustainable peace deal has never been more urgent, and this temporary ceasefire presents an opportunity for all stakeholders to work diligently towards a lasting resolution.
Following the Hamas attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, the conflict saw a dramatic escalation. This attack was described as one of the deadliest in Israel’s history, resulting in the deaths of 1,210 individuals, primarily civilians. In addition to the loss of life, the assault led to the abduction of 251 individuals, with 94 still held hostage in Gaza, as Israeli military sources reported that 34 of them are believed to be deceased. In response, Israel’s military operations have wreaked havoc on Gaza, claiming the lives of approximately 46,788 people, most of whom are reported to be civilians.
Qatar, Egypt, and the United States have facilitated a ceasefire agreement that comprises multiple critical components. Most importantly, it calls for a halt to the violence, providing a much-needed respite for the people of Gaza. The deal also outlines the release of hostages held by Hamas and prisoners detained by Israel. Furthermore, it aims to facilitate the return of displaced Palestinians to their homes, contingent on their viability following the extensive destruction.
While this ceasefire is a welcome development, it is essential for all involved parties to remain committed to a permanent peace agreement. The underlying issues that led to the conflict must be addressed to prevent future escalations and to foster an environment of mutual respect and understanding. As the world watches, the hope is that this temporary cessation of hostilities can pave the way for a more peaceful and stable future for both Israelis and Palestinians.
The peace deal will happen in stages, starting with a six-week period for limited prisoner exchanges, partial Israeli troop withdrawal, and humanitarian aid access. Hamas has released four Israeli soldiers for over 1000 Palestinians, with more releases to come. Israel will reduce troops in Gaza and open the Rafah crossing a week later, with less troop presence in the Philadelphi Corridor and complete withdrawal by the 50th day. The next two phases will depend on how both sides act during the first phase.
Therefore, it is unacceptable for any party to attack the other during a ceasefire. Reports indicate that after a ceasefire was announced, Israel bombed Gaza, killing at least 75 people and injuring many others. This violence during a ceasefire is unacceptable. While Hamas did initiate the conflict by invading Israel, Israel’s response has been far too severe, causing massive destruction in Gaza. The situation has resulted in unprecedented loss of life and devastation in the region.
Gaza has been completely destroyed, and further risks to the truce may create the belief that Israel aims to eliminate Palestinians like Hitler did with the Jews. Israel’s aggressive actions have lost them international support. Young people in the United States and Europe are now openly supporting Palestinians. With a truce in place, hostilities should cease and all parties must honour their agreements.
Hamas, seeing itself as a resistance force, needs to change its tactics for lasting peace. Their attacks on Israel have caused great suffering for innocent people in Gaza and destroyed much of the area’s infrastructure, leading to many lost lives. Both Israel and Hamas must commit to peace and avoid restarting the conflict. Attacking Israeli civilians or soldiers will only provoke strong retaliation from the Jewish State, harming those Hamas aims to protect.
Hamas, like the defunct Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO), should accept peace and recognise Israel’s right to coexist, focusing on development and prosperity for Gaza. Israel unilaterally withdrew from Gaza and North Samaria on August 15, 2005, dismantling settlements and troops after an agreement with Egypt. Hamas should stop teaching hate and instead use the opportunities from this withdrawal to help the people rather than build terror infrastructure. If West Bank control is an issue, Jordan might be discussed as a potential administrator.
Should Israel decide to withdraw completely from the West Bank, it is imperative that the Palestinians residing in that region recognise their responsibility to foster a peaceful environment, similarly to how Jordan maintains a harmonious relationship with Israel. To achieve this, the Palestinian people must actively commit to rejecting violence in all its forms and manifestations.
They must understand that genuine peace is not merely the absence of conflict but requires a steadfast dedication to non-violence, coexistence, and constructive dialogue. The era of bloodshed in the area must come to an end, giving way to a future where peace can truly flourish in the West Bank, benefiting all inhabitants and paving the way for a more stable and prosperous region.
Continue Reading

Editorial

No To Hike In Telecom Tariffs

Published

on

Nigerians are outraged by the Federal Government’s approval of a 50 per cent increase in telecommunications tariffs, with organised labour threatening to mobilise workers to boycott telecom services. The Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) and the Trade Union Congress of Nigeria (TUC) have described the upcoming tariff as outrageous, lamenting that it will worsen the already harsh living conditions of workers and the masses.
Similarly, the Coalition of Northern Groups (CNG) rejected the hike, stating that it was ill-timed and did not take into consideration the struggles of Nigerians. The Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria (HURIWA) also criticised the review, calling it an illegal, unconstitutional, and oppressive policy that undermines the fundamental rights and freedoms of Nigerians. It is a difficult moment for the industry.
Recall that the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) approved a 50 per cent increase in tariffs for telecom operators last Monday, instead of the 100 per cent raise that operators had requested. This decision quickly angered the consumers’ association, which criticised the government’s approval as not only punitive but also insensitive.
We wholeheartedly agree with the stance of labour and other groups on this very sensitive matter. We unequivocally condemn the 50 per cent increase in telecom tariffs. Though telecom operators cite higher operational costs and inflation as reasons for the hike, the timing and impact raise serious concerns in the current economic situation. It is a blatant attack on the well-being of the Nigerian worker and a betrayal of the people to corporate interests.
Telecommunication services are essential for daily communication, work, and access to information. However, the average Nigerian worker already spends approximately 10 per cent of their wages on telecom charges. For a worker earning the current minimum wage of N70,000, this means an increase from N7,000 to a staggering N10,500 per month or 15 per cent of their salary, a cost that is unsustainable.
This hike exemplifies the government’s apparent ease in prioritising corporate profits over citizens’ welfare. It is shocking that the government approved a 50 per cent tariff increase for telecom companies within a month, yet took nearly a year to approve the recent minimum wage for workers, despite the rising cost of living and inflation eroding purchasing power.
The questions are: When will the government stand up for the citizens it swore to protect? When will the National Assembly rise to its responsibility and hold the Executive accountable for policies that blatantly undermine the welfare of the majority? When will the common man finally heave a sigh of relief in Nigeria? We urge the government, the NCC, and the National Assembly to review the implementation of this ill-advised increase.
It is difficult to understand the state of mind of the managers of the nation’s economy. Sadly, these managers have alienated themselves from the reality of today. How can a government approve a 50 per cent hike in the tariff of telecom services when even the N70,000 minimum wage has been eroded by inflation, electricity tariff hikes, exorbitant fuel costs, transportation, and other social services?
Even if there is a need for an increase, why does it have to be 50 per cent? If, after dialogue, it is agreed that a raise is necessary, we should all consider a more reasonable increase rather than the 50 per cent hike. Fifty per cent is excessive and will only worsen the already harsh living conditions of workers, placing a heavier burden and more suffering on them and the general population.
The recognition of telecommunication services as essential components of modern society cannot be overstated. In an era characterised by rapid digital transformation, these services are fundamental not only for personal communication but also for facilitating broader socio-economic engagement. The proposed tariffs increase in the telecom sector raises critical concerns regarding equitable access to vital services that support communication, education, healthcare, and commerce.
In a democracy, the people should be the central focus of all government actions and policies. Every decision should aim to improve their quality of life. This plan must be carefully scrutinised with the welfare of citizens in mind. An increase in telecom tariffs will negatively impact many Nigerians, as the internet has become an essential tool for business, communication, and daily activities.
The Tide calls for the immediate suspension of the 50 per cent hike in tariffs. Instead, we recommend a more reasonable adjustment of a maximum of 10 per cent, which balances industry sustainability with the current economic realities in the country. We also demand that the NCC engages in genuine, inclusive consultations with consumer advocacy groups, civil society organisations, and other grassroots stakeholders before implementing any tariff adjustments.

Continue Reading

Trending