Connect with us

Business

Tinubu’s Executive Order: FG, states, LGs allocation may increase by N15tn

Published

on

The federal, state, and local governments may receive additional revenue allocation of about N14.57tn following the recent Executive Order signed by President Bola Tinubu, directing that royalty oil, tax oil, profit oil, profit gas, and other revenues due to the Federation under production sharing, profit sharing, and risk service contracts be paid directly into the Federation Account

This is based on an analysis of revenue inflows in 2025, drawing on monthly earnings submitted to the Federation Account Allocation Committee and obtained by our correspondent in Abuja on Thursday.

Based on estimates from 2025 remittances to the Federation Allocation Accounts Committee, the Nigerian National Petroleum Company is projected remit about N906.91bn in management fees and frontier exploration funds, while oil and gas royalties totalling N7.55tn and gas flaring penalties of N611.42bn collected by the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission will now be remitted directly to the Federation Account.

The Nigeria Revenue Service will also lose the authority to collect Petroleum Profits Tax and Hydrocarbon Tax, which generated N4.905tn in 2025, while the Midstream and Downstream Gas Infrastructure Fund recorded N596.61bn in the same period, bringing the total affected revenue streams to about N14.57tn.

It was reported on Wednesday that the President signed the executive order directing that royalty oil, tax oil, profit oil, profit gas, and other revenues due to the Federation under production sharing, profit sharing, and risk service contracts be paid directly into the Federation Account.

The order also scrapped the 30 per cent Frontier Exploration Fund under the PIA and stopped the 30 per cent management fee on profit oil and profit gas retained by the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited. The order, which took effect from February 13, 2026, is aimed at safeguarding oil and gas revenues due to the Federation and improving remittances into the Federation Account.

According to details of the directive, the President invoked Section 5 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), while the policy was anchored on Section 44(3), which vests ownership and control of all minerals, mineral oils, and natural gas in the Government of the Federation.

The PUNCH also gathered exclusively that the implementation of the directive commenced in January, and its impact is expected to reflect in the revenue allocations at the FAAC meeting scheduled for next week.

Since the implementation of the PIA in 2021, the Federation Account, shared by the federal, state, and local governments, received only 40 per cent of proceeds from Production Sharing Contracts. The remaining 60 per cent was retained by the NNPC, split between a 30 per cent Frontier Exploration Fund and a 30 per cent management fee.

Under the new directive, NNPC will no longer collect and manage the statutory 30 per cent Frontier Exploration Fund, a development expected to significantly alter the revenue landscape of the oil and gas sector.

The frontier exploration fund is designed to finance hydrocarbon exploration activities in Nigeria’s frontier basins, areas outside the traditional Niger Delta producing belt, where commercial discoveries have yet to be fully established. These include: the Chad Basin in the North-East, the Sokoto Basin in the North-West, the Bida Basin in North-Central Nigeria, the Benue Trough, and parts of the Dahomey basin.

Exploration in these locations is aimed at expanding Nigeria’s reserve base, reducing regional concentration of oil production, and enhancing long-term energy security. Activities typically involve seismic data acquisition, exploratory drilling, geological studies, and appraisal campaigns.

The fund was floated under the Petroleum Industry Act because frontier basins are generally high-risk and capital-intensive, and therefore would require sustained funding considered critical to maintaining exploration momentum.

In addition, the national oil company will no longer be entitled to the 30 per cent management fee on profit oil and profit gas revenues. The order further directed that all operators and contractors of oil and gas assets under Production Sharing Contracts must now pay Royalty Oil, Tax Oil, Profit Oil, Profit Gas, and any other government interest directly into the Federation Account.

See also  14 Ships Laden With Petrol, Diesel, Fresh Fish Arrive Lagos Ports

The directive also suspended payments of gas flare penalties into the Midstream and Downstream Gas Infrastructure Fund, instructing the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission to remit all proceeds from penalties imposed on operators directly into the Federation Account.

It further directed that all expenditure from the Midstream and Downstream Gas Infrastructure Fund must now comply with extant public procurement laws and regulations. Tinubu said excessive deductions, overlapping funds, and structural distortions in the oil and gas sector have weakened remittances to the Federation Account, warning that the practice must end to protect national revenue.

In a post on his verified X handle, the President stated that for too long, revenues meant for federal, state, and local governments had been trapped in layers of charges and retention mechanisms, thereby slowing development across the country.

He said, “For too long, excessive deductions, overlapping funds, and structural distortions in the oil and gas sector have weakened remittances to the Federation Account. When revenues meant for federal, state, and local governments are trapped in layers of charges and retention mechanisms, development suffers. That must end.”

Tinubu emphasised that oil and gas revenues must serve Nigerians first, noting that the ongoing reforms in the sector are aimed at promoting fairness and fiscal responsibility. He added, “Oil and gas revenues must serve the Nigerian people first, and this reform is about fairness and fiscal responsibility.”

The President explained that as the government strengthens national security, invests in education, expands healthcare, stabilises the economy, and advances the country’s energy transition, every legitimate revenue due to the Federation must be protected.

According to him, NNPC will now operate strictly as a commercial enterprise in line with the law, stressing that the era of duplicative deductions and fragmented oversight in the sector is over. Tinubu also disclosed that his administration would undertake a comprehensive review of the Petroleum Industry Act to address structural and fiscal anomalies weakening national revenue.

He further announced the approval of an implementation committee to oversee and ensure effective and coordinated execution of the executive order on the matter.

The President said, “Nigeria can no longer afford leakage where there should be leadership. We are safeguarding the Federation Account. We are strengthening our budget. We are acting in the national interest.”

He reiterated that the reforms are part of his administration’s commitment to Nigerians, adding that the policy direction aligns with his “Nigeria First” promise.

Based on the latest Federation Allocation Accounts Committee revenue data for 2025, the reallocation could have far-reaching implications for government earnings and sector institutions.

While many Nigerians and energy experts have expressed concerns over the potential impact of the policy on the oil and gas industry, a review of potential revenue reallocation suggests that the NNPC may be the least affected among the key players.

Other relevant government agencies operating within the sector could bear a heavier burden, particularly in terms of revenue losses, operational adjustments, and institutional restructuring.

Findings indicated that NNPC may lose about N906.91bn in management fees and Frontier Exploration Fund deductions. Each of the funds accounted for N453.455bn in 2025. A breakdown showed that the N453.455bn realised for frontier exploration fell short of the N710.520bn budgeted for the year, leaving a deficit of N257.066bn.

The monthly trend reveals the volatility of the fund. In January, N31.77bn was deducted from the frontier line, when PSC profits came in at N105.91bn. The February deduction rose to N38.30bn from a profit of N127.67bn, representing a 20.6 per cent increase on the January inflow.

March provided the first big surge, with N61.49bn allocated to frontier exploration from profits of N204.96bn, a jump of 60.5 per cent on February’s figure. April, however, saw deductions ease back to N36.58bn as profits slid to N121.93bn, a 40.5 per cent drop compared with March.

In May, the fund received N38.8bn, only slightly higher than April’s contribution, reflecting profit of N129.33bn. June delivered the lowest allocation so far this year, just N6.83bn, after profits collapsed to N22.77bn. That represented an 82.4 per cent fall from May.

See also  Dangote Refinery stops sales to unregistered marketers

The flow recovered somewhat in July, with N25.34bn transferred into the fund from profits of N84.48bn. In August, the trend rose sharply to its highest level so far this year, as Profit Sharing Contract earnings surged to N263.13bn. This translated to N78.94bn remitted to the Frontier Exploration Fund, more than three times the July contribution and about twelve times the amount recorded in June.

The momentum was sustained in subsequent months. In September, PSC profit stood at N275.38bn, with N82.61bn deducted for frontier exploration. October recorded a sharp decline, as profit dropped to N36.82bn, while deductions amounted to N11.05bn.

In November, profit rebounded to N112.32bn, with N33.70bn transferred to the fund. However, by December, PSC earnings moderated again to N26.82bn, resulting in frontier exploration deductions of N8.05bn.

The same 30 per cent rule also applied to NNPC’s management fees, which mirrored the frontier deductions exactly. In January, NNPC booked N31.77bn; in February, N38.30bn; in March, N61.49bn; in April, N36.58bn; in May, N38.8bn; in June, N6.83bn; in July, N25.34bn; in August, N78.94bn; N82.614bn in September; N11.046bn in October; N33.695bn in November and N8.046bn in December.

The NUPRC is also expected to lose oversight of oil and gas royalty collections, a development that could significantly reduce its revenue from cost-of-collection fees, which are intended to fund its operational activities. Based on 2025 figures, the commission is projected to forgo approximately N7.55tn, while gas flaring penalties during the same period totaled N611.42bn.

Under the Petroleum Profits Tax, Hydrocarbon Tax, and other levies administered by the NRS, a total of N4.905tn was collected in 2025. This revenue will now be channelled directly to the Federation Account. The earnings, however, exclude company income tax on upstream activities and other revenue streams.

Similarly, the MDGIF, which was established to finance strategic gas infrastructure projects and improve domestic gas utilisation, recorded total collections of N596.61bn in 2025. With the recent directive, these funds will now be subject to the same public finance rules governing statutory allocations, signalling a shift in oversight.

Monthly inflows into the MDGIF in 2025 were highly variable: N35.07bn in January, N31.82bn in February, N52.99bn in March, N29.19bn in April, N41.27bn in May, N66.18bn in June, N50.98bn in July, N57.04bn in August, N66.32bn in September, N66.32bn in October, N59.42bn in November, and N46.90bn in December. The highest single-month collection of N66.32bn in both September and October accounted for about 11.1 per cent of the annual total each, while the lowest in April (N29.19bn) represented just under 4.9 per cent of the year’s total.

Cumulatively, these revenue streams would amount to a total of N14.72tn, although the actual inflows could rise or fall depending on fluctuations in crude oil production and exploration activities, which directly determine the amount of revenue generated.

The anticipated upsurge in oil and gas revenue remittances is expected to deliver a significant boost to sub-national earnings, providing state and local governments with much-needed fiscal resources. This inflow could sharply reduce budget deficits, easing financial pressures across the federation and enabling more consistent funding for critical infrastructure and social services.

Over the years, concerns have been raised by the Nigeria Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative and the National Assembly of Nigeria over revenue leakages, delayed remittances, and opaque deductions in the oil and gas sector.

With the new directive, Nigeria may be entering a new phase of fiscal discipline and transparency in its most critical revenue-generating industry.

Experts react

Commenting, the Chair of the Oil, Gas, and Energy Policy Forum, Professor Wumi Iledare, urged careful consideration of the recent Executive Order by President Bola Tinubu directing the direct remittance of oil and gas revenues to the Federation Account.

The order, described by Iledare as a “significant fiscal intervention,” aims to strengthen revenue transparency, curb discretionary retention, and ensure statutory remittances flow efficiently to the three tiers of government.

In a statement obtained by The PUNCH on Thursday, titled “PEWI Responds to Presidential Executive Order on Direct Remittance of Oil and Gas Revenues”, Iledare acknowledged the government’s stated objectives.

See also  North-East logs nearly 2,000 explosions in seven years – Report

“Safeguarding public revenues, curbing inefficiencies, and enhancing fiscal discipline are legitimate public finance priorities, particularly in a period of budgetary strain and debt sustainability concerns,” he said.

However, Iledare warned that parts of the Executive Order may intersect with statutory provisions under the PIA 2021, including the Frontier Exploration Fund, the Midstream and Downstream Gas Infrastructure Fund, and existing Production Sharing Contract fiscal arrangements.

“While Section 5 of the Constitution empowers the President to implement and enforce laws, substantive changes to statutory fiscal frameworks may require legislative amendments to ensure constitutional alignment and institutional certainty,” he noted.

The energy expert highlighted the importance of distinguishing between contractual entitlements, corporate retained earnings, and statutory earmarked funds under the PIA.

“Clarity in these distinctions is critical to avoid conflating contractual entitlements with discretionary fiscal practices,” Iledare explained.

On the issue of direct remittance of royalty oil, tax oil, and profit oil to the Federation Account, PEWI recognised potential benefits in enhancing transparency and reducing intermediation. Yet, the statement stressed that reforms must be carefully sequenced to maintain contractual stability and safeguard investor confidence.

“NNPC Limited’s dual role as both commercial operator and concessionaire under certain arrangements has long presented institutional tensions within the post-PIA framework.” Iledare said. “Any reform aimed at reinforcing NNPC’s commercial identity must be anchored in legal clarity and predictable governance mechanisms.”

The policy forum therefore recommended a three-pronged approach: prompt legislative consultation to ensure statutory coherence, transparent engagement with operators and investors, and a sequenced reform rollout that balances fiscal urgency with institutional stability.

“Reforms that improve transparency and fiscal integrity are welcome,” the statement concluded, “but sustainable reform must align with constitutional processes, statutory frameworks, and investor predictability. PEWI will continue to monitor developments and provide objective, technically grounded analysis in the public interest.”

Meanwhile, the Capital Market Academics of Nigeria has thrown its weight behind President Bola Tinubu following his recent signing of Executive Order 9 of 2026, which mandates the direct remittance of 60 per cent of oil and gas profits back to the Federation Account.

In a statement released on Thursday, the President of CMAN, Prof Uche Uwaleke, described the move as a “bold and historic” decision that corrects a long-standing fiscal imbalance created by the Petroleum Industry Act of 2021.

“This marks one of the most courageous reforms of his administration and a decisive step toward strengthening fiscal transparency and equity in revenue distribution,” Uwaleke stated.

Uwaleke noted that this structure undermined the principle of collective ownership of national resources. “By correcting this anomaly, the President has ensured that all tiers of government benefit equitably from the nation’s oil and gas wealth. NNPCL, as a limited liability company, must operate independently on its own revenues rather than relying on public funds,” he added.

While praising the reform, CMAN emphasised the need for institutional safeguards to ensure the new policy achieves its intended goals. Specifically, the institute called for the Chairman of the Revenue Mobilisation, Allocation and Fiscal Commission to be included in the committee overseeing the implementation of the Executive Order.

“CMAN underscores the importance of including the RMAFC Chairman to ensure transparency and accountability. This development is a victory for the Federation Accounts Allocation Committee and for fiscal justice in Nigeria.”

The group also urged the administration to extend these reforms to Joint Venture assets, arguing they should also be returned to the Federation Account to maximise national revenue. According to the statement, the anticipated surge in revenue will enhance the capacity of all government tiers to deliver essential services and stimulate the capital markets.

“We remain committed to advocating for policies that strengthen transparency and fairness. We call on all stakeholders to support the President’s reform agenda for the benefit of all Nigerians,” Uwaleke concluded.

punch.ng

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

TUMBLR

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Business

Court orders Virgin Atlantic to pay N13m for missed flight

Published

on

A Federal High Court in Lagos has ordered Virgin Atlantic Airways Limited to pay Mrs. Joy Ezetah the sum of $5,906.50 in damages after it failed to allow her board a scheduled Lagos-London flight, an incident that disrupted her onward trip to Canada and caused her financial loss.

Justice Ibrahim Kala in the judgement delivered on Monday, held that the airline was liable for the losses suffered by the claimant after she was denied boarding at the Murtala Muhammed International Airport on 6 April 2024.

The claimant had asked the court for N100m in general damages, arguing that she bought a business-class ticket through Air Canada for a four-leg trip from Lagos to Toronto and back, but was stopped from boarding the Virgin Atlantic flight “without justification.”

She told the court that she arrived early, completed check-in, and was issued a boarding pass for the Lagos-London leg.

According to her, airline officials later prevented her from boarding, stating they could not connect her ticket to her Air Canada connecting flight from London to Toronto.

Ezetah stated that the airline owed her a duty of care and should have resolved the issue with Air Canada or made other arrangements instead of denying her boarding.

She further maintained that when she later contacted Air Canada, the airline confirmed that her ticket was valid and that she was expected on the connecting flight.

Virgin Atlantic, however, denied liability. It said it was “not the issuing carrier” and insisted that the ticket had been purchased directly from Air Canada under a codeshare arrangement.

See also  Meta sues Brazil, China advertisers over celebrity deepfake scams

The airline also argued that an error code in the reservation system prevented it from issuing a boarding pass for the connecting flight and that it acted professionally by advising the passenger to contact the ticket issuer.

It further contended that the claimant’s inability to complete online check-in before arriving at the airport showed that there was already a problem with the ticket.

After reviewing the evidence, submissions and legal authorities cited by both sides, Justice Kala held that the claimant’s case had merit.

The court awarded $5,906.50 in damages against Virgin Atlantic and ordered that the sum be paid using the prevailing exchange rate published by the Central Bank of Nigeria. Based on the highest official rate of N1,365.50 to a dollar, the award translates to about N8.07m.

Justice Kala also ordered the airline to pay 10 per cent interest per annum on the judgment sum until full liquidation of the debt.

Additionally, the court awarded N5m as costs against Virgin Atlantic, noting that the claimant had been forced to approach the court to enforce her rights.

punch.ng

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

Business

States kick as Senate moves to amend Electricity Act; read details

Published

on

A fresh battle over the control of Nigeria’s electricity sector is brewing, as state electricity regulators have accused the National Assembly of attempting to claw back powers already devolved to states under the Constitution and the Electricity Act 2023.

In a strongly worded memorandum submitted to the Senate Committee on Power and obtained by our correspondent on Tuesday, electricity regulatory commissions and bureaus from 16 states warned that the proposed Electricity Act (Amendment) Bill 2026 could reverse one of the most significant reforms in Nigeria’s power sector.

The regulators argued that the amendment bill, rather than strengthening the electricity market, seeks to restore extensive federal oversight over matters they insist have constitutionally become the responsibility of states.

The concerns were contained in a letter dated May 26, 2026, addressed to the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Power and signed on behalf of the State Electricity Regulatory Commissions and Bureaus.

Signatories to the document included the chairmen and chief executives of electricity regulators in Abia, Anambra, Bayelsa, Edo, Ekiti, Enugu, Gombe, Imo, Kogi, Lagos, Nasarawa, Niger, Ogun, Ondo, Oyo and Plateau states.

The regulators said they had taken advantage of the Electricity Act 2023 to begin building sub-national electricity markets and had already engaged investors based on the framework created by the law.

They noted that they had earlier met with the Senate committee and were subsequently requested to consolidate their concerns into a single memorandum for the consideration of lawmakers, the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission and other stakeholders.

The letter stated, “We represent State Regulatory Commissions/Bureaus that have taken advantage of the Electricity Act 2023 to commence the development of our sub-national electricity markets and sectors.

We are grateful for the audience you granted us to raise concerns on the ongoing consideration of the proposed Amendment Bill 2026 to the Electricity Act 2023.

“As agreed during our discussion, we have collated and consolidated the comments into one document which is hereby attached for the consideration of the Senate and House Committees on Power, NERC and other stakeholders.”

The state electricity regulators said they had identified 17 contentious provisions in the proposed amendments to the Electricity Act that they believed could undermine the constitutional powers already granted to states in the electricity sector.

According to the regulators, the areas of disagreement include the authorisation of State Houses of Assembly to legislate on electricity matters, the supremacy of state laws within state electricity markets, and provisions seeking to retain federal control over all activities connected to the national grid.

Other disputed clauses relate to restrictions on states’ participation in the wholesale electricity market, matters concerning the Nigerian Wholesale Electricity Market, the authority of states over independent transmission and distribution networks, and the establishment and administration of the Power Consumers Assistance Fund.

The regulators also raised concerns over the proposed expansion of the powers of the Nigerian Electricity Management Services Agency, the structure and decisions of the Forum of Electricity Regulators, and the provision granting the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission final administrative appellate jurisdiction on certain issues arising within the forum.

See also  See what shut House of Reps plenary down amid tension

They further opposed provisions designating electricity generation, transmission, distribution and supply as essential services, as well as clauses dealing with government-owned enterprises as licensees and obligations to host communities.

Additional areas of contention include the regulation of intra-state electricity matters that may have implications for the national grid, the imposition of timelines and phased conditions for states transitioning into independent electricity markets, and proposed federal oversight on consumer protection, anti-trust measures and tariff design within state electricity jurisdictions.

The regulators argued that the disputed provisions require further consultation to ensure that the decentralisation objectives of the Electricity Act are not weakened by subsequent amendments.

“A review of the Bill suggests that the general intention is to reverse the devolution of legislative, governance and regulatory powers over electricity matters that occur solely within the respective states to the state governments, in favour of a reconsolidation of powers at the federal level, with the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission retaining full supervisory powers over the market. Effectively, it appears that the intention of the Bill is that Nigeria should continue with the same regime that, for 20 years, has not led to any significant increase in power availability or per capita consumption for Nigerians, despite ever-increasing (and unsustainable) federal debt.”

At the centre of the dispute is the interpretation of the constitutional amendments that allowed states to legislate on electricity matters within their territories. The regulators argued that the proposed amendment bill wrongly assumes that state legislatures derive their powers from the National Assembly rather than directly from the Constitution.

According to them, any attempt by the National Assembly to grant, restrict or redefine those powers through ordinary legislation would amount to a constitutional violation.

The memorandum stated, “Section 2 of the Bill aims to amend Section 2(2)(a)-(e) of the Principal Act. By that section, the National Assembly reserves to itself the power to delegate legislative powers to States’ Houses of Assembly, suggesting that the Bill (or the Principal Act) is the source of the powers of a state to make laws on its electricity markets.

“This provision is based on a shocking miscomprehension of Nigerian constitutional law—it proceeds from the wrong assumption that the NASS, by ordinary legislation and not constitutional amendment, can confer (or restrict) the legislative power of states.

“The constitutional division of powers is fundamental to federalism, ensuring a balance between national unity and state autonomy. There is no legal framework for the NASS to ‘empower’ state governments to make law by ordinary legislation, as the language of the Bill attempts to do.

“The constitutional division of powers is fundamental to federalism, ensuring a balance between national unity and state autonomy. There is no legal framework for the NASS to ‘empower’ state governments to make law by ordinary legislation, as the language of the Bill attempts to do. Consequently, Section 2 of the Bill, seeking to amend Section 2 of the Act, is not consistent with the Constitution.”

See also  Pure Water producers announce increment in price of bag

The regulators described as “a shocking miscomprehension of Nigerian constitutional law” the provisions of the bill that appear to suggest that the National Assembly is the source of states’ authority over electricity matters.

They warned that the proposed law could undermine the principle of federalism by weakening state autonomy. Beyond constitutional concerns, the regulators said the bill could create uncertainty in the electricity market and discourage investors who had already committed resources based on the existing legal framework.

“The clear intention behind the new drafting is to reconsolidate in the Federal Government matters solely within the state electricity markets which had been devolved to the states,” the memorandum stated.

“This will defeat the key objectives of the Electricity Act and the various states’ electricity laws, even before the regime introduced by them has taken any root. It will introduce avoidable disruption in the industry as significant investment decisions have already been taken based on the Electricity Act 2023, and these investments are now put at risk by this proposed amendment.”

The state regulators specifically faulted provisions relating to federal oversight of activities connected to the national grid, restrictions on state authority over wholesale electricity transactions, the proposed expansion of NERC’s powers and changes affecting mini-grids and independent distribution systems.

They argued that allowing NERC to retain overriding authority over electricity activities merely because they have some connection to the national grid would effectively render state powers meaningless.

The memorandum stated, “What is required, in order to attain the full benefits of the decentralisation of the Nigerian Electricity Supply Industry that is the theme of the Fifth Alteration and provided for in the Principal Act, is proper coordination on transmission matters between NERC and state regulators, and not top-down federal legislation.”

The regulators also rejected provisions that would permit NERC to exercise final administrative appellate jurisdiction over disputes involving state electricity regulators. According to them, NERC and the SERCs are on equal standing within their respective constitutional spheres of authority.

“NERC and the SERCs are on equal standing within their respective constitutional spheres of authority,” the memorandum said. “The National Assembly cannot arrogate to NERC quasi-judicial authority over SERCs, especially where the dispute might be on a matter over which NERC has no authority.”

They further argued that the Constitution already vests judicial powers in the courts and that such responsibilities cannot be transferred to a regulatory agency. The proposed establishment of a Forum of Electricity Regulators also drew criticism.

Although the regulators acknowledged the importance of coordination among electricity regulators, they argued that participation in such arrangements should be voluntary rather than imposed through federal legislation.

See also  APC Chairman reveals why the party has not officially welcomed Fubara

“The better approach would be a Memorandum of Understanding or similar instrument jointly negotiated by all relevant regulatory bodies in which the principles of coordination and harmonisation will be agreed,” they said.

The state regulators equally opposed provisions declaring generation, transmission, distribution and supply of electricity as essential services covering both federal and state electricity markets.

According to them, such provisions could inadvertently expand NERC’s jurisdiction into areas already devolved to states, including tariff regulation. “The provision is invidious, regressive and should be expunged,” the memorandum stated.

The regulators also faulted proposals empowering NERC to determine contributions to the Power Consumers Assistance Fund from electricity consumers. They argued that since electricity tariffs and retail supply have become matters for state regulation, decisions relating to subsidies and customer contributions should similarly reside with state authorities.

Other contentious areas identified by the regulators included host community obligations, the role of the Nigerian Electricity Management Services Agency, licensing arrangements involving government-owned electricity enterprises and timelines for states transitioning into independent electricity markets.

The dispute highlights the growing tension between the Federal Government and states over the future structure of Nigeria’s electricity industry. The Electricity Act 2023 was enacted following the Fifth Alteration to the 1999 Constitution, which removed electricity from the Exclusive Legislative List and empowered states to generate, transmit and distribute electricity within their territories.

Since then, several states have enacted electricity laws and established regulatory agencies to oversee emerging sub-national electricity markets. Lagos, Enugu, Ekiti, Ondo, Edo and other states have already commenced varying stages of implementation of their electricity reform programmes.

Energy experts have repeatedly described the decentralisation of the sector as a major opportunity to attract investment, improve efficiency and expand access to electricity. However, the latest amendment proposals appear to have reopened the debate over how regulatory powers should be shared between Abuja and the states.

As the National Assembly continues deliberations on the amendment bill, the position adopted by lawmakers could shape the future direction of Nigeria’s electricity reforms and determine whether the country deepens its experiment with decentralisation or returns to a more centralised regulatory model.

The Electricity Act 2023 was designed to operationalise the constitutional amendments that empowered states to participate directly in electricity generation, transmission and distribution within their boundaries. Since its enactment, several states have passed their own electricity laws and established regulatory commissions.

The proposed Electricity Act (Amendment) Bill 2026 seeks to amend several provisions of the principal legislation. However, state regulators contend that some of the proposed changes amount to an attempt to reverse the gains of decentralisation and restore broad federal control over the Nigerian Electricity Supply Industry.

punch.ng

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

Business

Africa urgently needs more fish farms, says UN

Published

on

Africa needs to urgently expand its fish-farming sector to meet its food needs, the head of the UN’s fisheries division said Tuesday, even as its latest report found record production levels globally.

Fish and seafood is now a $184-billion trade, according to the State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture report by the United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), launched at the Our Ocean Conference in Kenya.

Fish-farming, or “aquaculture”, overtook traditional “capture” fishing as a source of food production in 2021 and has continued to grow — surpassing 100 million tonnes for the first time in 2024, the latest year for data.

But Africa is lagging behind the rest of the world, with only 18 percent of its fish coming from farms, compared to around half elsewhere.

Sub-Saharan Africa’s fish production will need to grow by 68 percent between now and 2050 to keep up with its rapidly growing population, the FAO said.

“It’s an opportunity waiting to be exploited… but it’s whether the timing is sufficiently fast to catch up with that demand,” Manuel Barange, director of the FAO’s fisheries division, told AFP.

“Aquaculture can actually be a game-changer,” he said. “If we manage to develop aquaculture in Africa, there’s a lot of opportunities.”

But governments urgently need to create regulations and incentives to attract investors, Barange added.

More than 700 different species of fish are raised for consumption on aquaculture farms around the world and the FAO argues it is a more predictable and sustainable approach than traditional fishing at sea.

See also  Blackout fears grow over gas plant maintenance

It is also more manageable in the face of climate change, which is causing rapid changes in the volumes and locations of ocean fish.

Climate change is “a disruptor of everything that we do,” said Barange.

More work is also needed to reduce over-fishing: the report found that only 62 percent of global fisheries were sustainably fished.

The 11th edition of the Our Ocean Conference began in the Kenyan port city of Mombasa on Tuesday — its first time in Africa — bringing together politicians, NGOs, investors and innovators.

Since its first edition in 2014, organisers boast that it has led to more than 2,900 commitments valued at over $169 billion, covering marine conservation, sustainable fisheries, climate adaptation, security and pollution reduction.

punch.ng

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

Trending