Features

Published

5 years ago

March 19, 2020

CONTRIBUTIONS OF A NATIONAL CARRIER IN SOCIO-ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OF NIGERIA

by Chris Aligbe

Introduction:

The twinning of social and economic issues in the above topic is certainly deliberate. Deliberate because it can be separated and each will still remain valid. But the coinage is quite apt because it is a very sound understanding of the role of airlines – Private and National Carriers.

While the weight of the social burden is limited for the private airline, it is more dense on a national carrier. But both of them must bear the weight of the economic role. While a national carrier can and will be held accountable if it fails in its expected social role, such cannot be said of a private airline. That is why I consider the framers of the topic of our discourse today right in their thinking.

Early Days:

In the early days of airline floatation, national carriers’ primary role was social. There was no commercial motive and even though there were economic implications in their operations, they were considered mere fallouts rather than part of the objective. For instance, when Nigeria Airways was incorporated in 1961, its role was to fly the flag of the new nation called “Nigeria” and “announce” it to the global community as well as perform the social role of connecting Nigerians from city to city to help in fostering the much desired unity on which the new Nigeria-nation will rest. It would also respond to national emergencies.

However, by the middle 80s, a combination of circumstances brought in its wake the commercial/economic motive in airline operations. The new philosophy supplanted the original social motive, pushing it to the background. The resultant discourses now centre on profitability of national carriers as a measure of success since they are now considered, primarily as business concerns. Yet, in spite of this philosophical shift, most nations are not oblivious of the fact that national carriers still have great social responsibilities and that is why nations, globally, are hooked unto national carrier concept, varied as they may be, from the original concept.

BRIEF HISTORY OF AIRLINE OPERATIONS IN NIGERIA

Airline operations in independent Nigeria dates back to March 1961 with the buyout of the shareholdings of Nigeria’s two Partners – Elder Dempster (thirty-two -two-third percent) and British Overseas Airways Corporation (BOAC) (Seventeen one-third percent); and established it as a national carrier. From then till 1985, it was the sole commercial airline operator in Nigeria.

Major Policy Change

The year 1985 began land marks in the annals of the history of our airline operations:
Liberalisation and deregulation;
Emergence of Private-scheduled Operators: Flash Airline, Intercontinental Airline, Kabo Air and Okada.
1988: Decree on Commercialisation and Privatisation: Policy frontier extension.

Nine (9) attempts at floatation of a national carrier:
Joji’s Air Nigeria = 1992/3
Jani’s Turn-Around = 1999-2000
IFC New Co = 2000/1
Kema Chikwe’s Air Nigeria = 20001/2
Kema Chikwe’s Nigeria Global = 2002/3
Yuguda’s Nigeria Eagle Airline = 2003/4
Obasanjo’s Virgin Nigeria = 2004/5
Jimoh Ibrahim’s Nigerian Eagle = 2008/9
Oduah’s Nigeria One = 2010/13

Of all these, only three attempts are worth our reflection while the rest will remain collectively a sad commentary on our reverse ingenuity. But all are case studies and platforms for evaluation of government’s present effort.

Of the three, Jani’s effort was an ingenuous turnaround strategy based on Joint Venture with British Airways. It was a great successful revamp that came too late.

iii.Air Nigeria:

Prime Drivers:

Prince Tony Momoh (Chairman)/Capt. Mohammed Joji (CEO)

Date: 1992-93

Ownership: 100% Federal Government with intent to sell to the Public, and Swiss Air and Sabena as Technical Partners. (Fed. Govt 40%; Sabena 20%; Swiss Air 20%; Public 20%).

Transaction Adviser/Consultant: Keith Bolshaw & Team

Supervisory Agency: Technical Committee on Privatisation and Commercialisation – TCPC

Funds Allocated: US$100million managed by CBN to pay off Nigeria Airways debts to enable Air Nigeria take off.

Fate: Ended 1993 on the removal of Joji and Momoh and appointment of Agom as MD/CEO on 24^th August, 1993.

Nigeria Airways Privatisation = NEW CO

Prime Driver: Fed. Government. MOU signed between the Fed Govt (VP Atiku Abubakar and James D. Wolfensohn, President of World Bank).

Date: 2000/2002 under Obasanjo’s Presidency.

Ownership: Public equity (Local + Technical Partner) including Fed. Govt through Privatisation.

Transaction Adviser/Consultant: International Finance Corporation (IFC)

Supervising Agency: Bureau of Public Enterprise (BPE/NCP

Funds Allocated: Apart from US$400,000 paid IFC, fund needed was yet to be specified as at the time of abortion.

Fate: Was aborted in 2002 when Obasanjo decided to dispense with the entire programme based on allegations which many considered unfounded and based on political scores.

WHY DID ALL OF THEM FAIL?

Generally, the failure factors include but not limited to:

Absence of transparency;
Poor knowledge of Drivers;
Use of third rate or non-experienced Transaction Advisers;
Lack of political will;
Policy summersault;
Unclear Motives;
Poor Communication to relevant Stakeholder publics;
Non-commitment at the highest level of government;
Absence of institutional guidance and framework;
Role of the in-house Unions;
The time element – out of sync with existential realities;

CRITICAL QUESTIONS?

Why has every government made effort to float a national carrier?
Why are all African nations making efforts at reviving their collapsed national carriers or setting up one which they never had?

The answer is not far-fetched. Faced with the imperatives of globalisation, increasing population, economic development and the need to weld together the diverse ethnic components of their societies, governments in Africa, like other nations, are in endless search for veritable instruments, mechanisms and policies to achieve stated objective of national development, social and economic alike. In most recent time, the SAATM and African Free Trade Zone have added their own pressures.

Fortunately, or unfortunately, most African nations are Frontier economies with the usual indices of dangling prosperity, corruption and arbitrariness in law and regulation enforcement. Also, low per capita income, cheap labour and high return on investments. The economies possess vast potentials that are unexpected or unexploited.

Most of these countries find themselves being exploited by external business concerns.

In the search for solutions, sector by sector analysis is carried out to identify development catalysts. As in all economies, the Transport Sector has always been a key driver. Within that sector in Africa, road and air transport sub-sectors have been identified as catalytic drivers. Mostly the road transport account for between 75 – 90% of movement of people and goods while air transport account for between 10-15%. The remaining 5% is accounted by marine transport.

In Nigeria, air transport accounts for about 18% but with potential growth projection of 22% in the next 3-4 years given the right policy action and environment.

Across Africa, most nations have recognised the critical role of air transport in socio-economic development. This new realisation is the underlying reason for the upsurge in the recent floatation of national carriers by African nations – Uganda, Tanzania, Ghana, Angola, Senegal, Mozambique, Ivory Coast, Zambia, Rwanda, etc. This realisation is expressed in many comments by airline officials such as:

Rwanda: “To achieve economic and social development as part of its Vision 2020, the landlocked country has invested heavily in its national carrier…”

South Africa: “In South Africa alone, the value of SAA extends well beyond its balance sheet with the airline functioning as a substantial economic enabler”.

6.TODAY’S PROFILE OF THE LANDSCAPE OF NIGERIA’S AIRLINE SUBSECTOR

Land mass of 923,763 sq.km.
200 million population (upwardly mobile and emerging new middle-class)
Largest economy in Africa
5 International Airports and 22 other Domestic Airports
8 Domestic Airlines (3 operating regional routes and one international route;
Increasing passenger carriage (10,383,452 pax 2017 and 12,791,639 in 2018 with a projection of over 14 million in 2019),
Increase in Domestic aircraft movement (210,819 – 2017 and 243,367 in 2018).
78 Bilateral Air Service Agreement – BASA
29 Foreign Airlines;
Open Skies regimes (US and Africa) Dual Designation;
Multiple entry points;
Increasing entrants and frequencies by foreign airlines (Aircraft movements: 40,282 in 2017 and 55,961 in 2018);
Increase in passenger uplift by foreign airlines (4,056.717 in 2017 and 5,465,417 in 2018 and over 6million is projected for 2019).
Ticket sales revenue for foreign airlines (Capital Flight):
1990 – 1999 = Yearly Average of US$600million;
2000-2009 = Yearly Average of US$900million;
2010-2019 = Yearly Average of US$1.3billion;
2020-2029 = Projection is US$1.6billion yearly if we do nothing.

7.SITUATION ANALYSIS:

What are the challenges facing us today as a nation in the airline subsector one may ask?

Less efficient Domestic Operators arising from both external and internal factors;
Half of the nation’s airports are not well-linked;
Increasing number of unemployed or out-of-employment Professionals – technical and critical support personnel;
Only about 10% of our 78 BASAs is being reciprocated.
Multiple entry points for foreign airlines;
Huge and growing revenue loss to the Economy through Capital Flight.
High and prohibitive airfares by foreign airlines when compared to similar distances in other countries. For example, trip booked same day on BA to LHR return on economy class shows the following:

Accra-LHR-Accra (6hrs 30mins) N251,400) 27-2-20 – 11-3-20

LOS-LHR-LOS (6hrs 35mins) N346,210

Accra-LHR -Accra N241,949) 13-2-20 to 27-2-20

LOS-LHR-LOS N717,172

LOS-Douala-LOS (1hr 25mins on ASKY) = N247,235

A study of air fares in Kenya, South Africa, Egypt and Ethiopia show evidently the impact of the existence of their national carriers as they force down the exploitative fares of foreign carriers.

In Nigeria, both the Economy and the Nigerian travellers suffer this exploitation.

THREATS:

There are many threats facing the nation in the airline subsector but some are more critical, among which are:

Single African Air Transport Market = SAATM;
Global push for Open Skies at either bilateral or multilateral level;
The operational alliances being entered into by countries surrounding us within the sub-region, primarily driven by ET.

9.HOW DO WE RESPOND? Is there any hope?

To address this, we need to consider our strength. What are they?

A resolute President in his belief on a national carrier.
A focused Driver – Minister with a passion for a legacy.
A Travel Public and Stakeholders that have become restive about non-existence of a functional virile national carrier.
Nigeria’s location in the epicentre of the globe which makes it a national Hub.
A large population with a segment with high propensity for air travel; thus creating the most stable indigenous air travel market in Africa.
Potential sources of funding:
African Development Bank (AFDB) headed by a Nigerian –

Mr. Adesina.

African Export-Import Bank (AFREXIM) headed by a Nigerian –

Dr. Orama.

Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) – Has loanable intervention fund that can be drawn from if necessary.

At no time in the last 3½ decades has Nigeria ever been blessed with such a concatenation of positive circumstances that are yearning to be drawn from. For a nation that is in dire need of;

Providing jobs for Professionals of various groups in an industry like Aviation with unimaginable immense potentials;
Full exploitation of its sprawling travel market;
Building a hub which only a national carrier can do;
Connecting its peoples scattered over 85 Nigerian cities and towns;
Cutting down on capital flight of over US$1.3billion.
Creating a market that will support an MRO and absorb the products of its globally acclaimed training institution – NCAT;
Of maintaining its dominance in a continent where it is the largest economy by extending the frontier of inter-African trade and business;

Nothing, absolutely nothing can be more reasonable than creating and firmly establish the PRIMARY INSTRUMENT – a sound National Carrier to effectively draw on the vast opportunities that abound. Not to do so will lead to validly questioning the patriotism of our leaders.

10: BENEFITS:

The Benefits of a virile National Carrier can never by fully exhausted because apart from the direct benefits, the collateral benefits (backward and forward linkages) are humongous in the areas of:

Job creation;
Improved revenue generation to airports, handlers and both aeronautical and non-aeronautical businesses;
Improved airport infrastructure nationwide;
New businesses;
Connecting peoples of Nigeria between cities;
Increased contribution to Gross Domestic Product (GDP);
Manpower Development;
Connecting people in Nigeria and outside Nigeria for leisure, trade, education and business.

Just one example:

Employment: A National Carrier with about 12 aircraft for a start will employ instantly between 1,500 staff based on 125 persons per aircraft.

Egypt Air = Fleet 61, total staff 9,000 = 148 staff per aircraft;
SAA = Fleet 51, total staff 5,752 = 112 staff per aircraft;
Kenya Airways = Fleet 40, total staff 3,986 = 99.65 staff per aircraft;
ET = Fleet 125, total staff 13,942 = 111.5 staff per aircraft.

11: IN CONCLUSION:

Distinguished colleagues, let me end this with the Shakespearian quote:

“There is tide in the affairs of men which taken at the flood leads on to fortune, omitted, all are voyage is bound in shallows and misery. We must take the plunge now or lose our ventures”.

It is our responsibility as core Stakeholders to support the present ongoing effort to float a new national carrier. In doing this, we also should insist on transparency and carrying all Stakeholders along as well as a very strong airline technical partner in order to avoid the pitfalls and bane of the past failures.

A stitch in time saves nine, they say. But since we did not stitch until we lost nine attempts, let us stitch now to at least save one; “NIGERIA AIR” our tenth attempt.

I thank you.

Chris Aligbe

Aviation Consultant & MD/CEO

Belujane Konzult

Economy

Economic Implications of Oil Subsidy Removal on Nigeria’s Rural Population

Published

6 months ago

October 26, 2024

Sunrise

By James Aduku Odaudu

Introduction

The intricate relationship between economic policy and the living standards of rural populations often reveals itself through pivotal changes in subsidy programs. In the context of Nigeria, the recent discourse around oil subsidy removal has sparked critical debates regarding its potential ramifications on rural communities, which predominantly rely on affordable fuel for agricultural and economic activities. Subsidies have traditionally served as a buffer against the volatility of global oil prices, providing essential support to an economy deeply intertwined with crude oil production. However, the potential elimination of these subsidies invites an exploration of alternative economic frameworks and the possible socio-economic repercussions that could arise, particularly for those at the grassroots level who may lack the resilience to absorb sudden increases in fuel costs. This essay will delve into the multifaceted economic implications of this policy shift, examining both immediate impacts and long-term consequences on Nigeria’s rural populace, ultimately arguing for a nuanced understanding of subsidy reform in the broader context of economic development.

* Oil subsidies in Nigeria and their historical context

The historical context of oil subsidies in Nigeria is deeply intertwined with the country’s quest for economic stability and development. Initially implemented in the late 1970s as a response to volatile global oil prices and domestic inflation, these subsidies aimed to shield consumers from the adverse effects of fuel price fluctuations. Over the years, they evolved into a critical aspect of Nigeria’s socio-economic fabric, often being justified through the lens of providing affordable essential goods to the populace. However, this well-intentioned policy also cultivated a dependency that distorted market dynamics led to inefficiencies, and exacerbated corruption. By the early 21st century, the financial burden of these subsidies became increasingly unsustainable, consuming a significant portion of the national budget. This unsustainability has prompted discussions on the necessity of subsidy removal, sparking concerns about its potential economic repercussions, particularly for Nigeria’s rural population that relies heavily on subsidized fuel for transportation and agricultural activities.

* Economic Impact on Rural Livelihoods

The removal of oil subsidies in Nigeria has profound implications for rural livelihoods, particularly regarding income stability and access to essential goods.
When subsidies are eliminated, the immediate effect is an increase in fuel prices, which disproportionately impacts rural communities that depend on affordable transportation for both the movement of goods and access to markets. This heightened cost of living exacerbates existing vulnerabilities, leading to a decline in purchasing power for rural households whose income is predominantly derived from agriculture and informal economies.
Consequently, rural producers face higher operational costs, ultimately jeopardizing food security as agricultural outputs decline due to reduced investments and higher transportation expenses.
Furthermore, the ripple effects within local economies amplify these challenges; diminished income for farmers can lead to decreased demand for services and goods in rural areas, creating a vicious cycle of economic stagnation. Thus, the removal of oil subsidies serves not only as a structural shift in fiscal policy but also as a catalyst for heightened economic precariousness among Nigeria’s rural population.

* Changes in household income and expenditure patterns

The economic landscape in Nigeria is undergoing transformative changes, particularly in rural areas, as households navigate the ripple effects of oil subsidy removal. As these adjustments unfold, a noticeable shift in both income sources and expenditure patterns can be observed.
Rural households, previously reliant on government subsidies for affordable fuel, are now compelled to reassess their budget allocations in response to increased fuel prices. This reassessment often results in a reallocation of funds, diverting resources from non-essential goods and services—such as education and healthcare—towards more pressing needs such as transportation and food. Furthermore, a significant portion of the rural population may explore alternative income-generating activities, seeking to compensate for diminished purchasing power.
The interconnections between household income fluctuations and expenditure patterns underscore a broader socio-economic challenge, suggesting that adapting to these economic changes may ultimately exacerbate existing vulnerabilities and inequality within rural communities. Such dynamics warrant close examination to inform effective policy interventions.

* Effects on Agricultural Production and Food Security

The removal of oil subsidies in Nigeria is poised to create both challenges and opportunities for agricultural production and food security. On one hand, the increased cost of essential inputs such as fertilizers and fuel could lead to higher production costs, exacerbating existing vulnerabilities among smallholder farmers. These farmers, who often operate on thin margins, may struggle to absorb increased expenses, potentially leading to reduced crop yields and a decline in overall agricultural output.

Conversely, the subsidy removal could encourage a shift toward more sustainable agricultural practices, as farmers are forced to innovate and adopt efficient resource management strategies. As the market adapts, investments in alternative energy sources and improved agricultural technologies could emerge, fostering resilience in food systems. Ultimately, the net effect on food security will hinge on the government’s ability to implement supportive measures, such as providing targeted assistance and promoting access to credit for rural farmers, enabling them to thrive in a more competitive economic landscape.

* Relationship between fuel prices and agricultural productivity

Fluctuations in fuel prices directly influence the cost structures within the agricultural sector, significantly affecting productivity levels. High fuel prices increase operational costs for farmers by raising expenses associated with machinery, transportation, and inputs such as fertilizers and pesticides. Consequently, these elevated costs can deter investment in essential agricultural practices, leading to decreased yields and reduced profitability. As farmers struggle to adapt to this financial strain, shifts toward less fuel-intensive methods or even the reduction of cultivated areas may ensue, further exacerbating food insecurity.

Additionally, the cyclical nature of fuel price increases can create an unpredictable environment, making long-term planning challenging for agricultural stakeholders. This volatility undermines not only individual productivity but also broader market stability. Therefore, understanding the intricate relationship between fuel pricing mechanisms and agricultural output is crucial for policymakers, particularly in contexts like Nigeria, where rural populations heavily rely on agriculture for their livelihoods. A strategic approach to addressing these challenges could foster more resilient agricultural practices and enhance rural economic stability.

Conclusion

The culmination of this analysis highlights the intricate relationship between oil subsidy removal and its economic ramifications on Nigeria’s rural populace. By eliminating subsidies, the government aims to redirect funds towards infrastructural development and social services, ostensibly fostering long-term economic stability. However, this shift presents immediate challenges for rural communities, which heavily rely on subsidized fuel for transportation and agricultural activities. As fuel prices surge, the cost of goods and services inevitably escalates, disproportionately affecting the livelihoods of rural households already grappling with limited income and access to resources.

Furthermore, the anticipated benefits of subsidy removal, such as improved public services, may take considerable time to materialize, leaving vulnerable populations in a precarious position during the transitional phase. Ultimately, careful consideration of the socio-economic dynamics at play is essential to ensuring that the policy shifts do not exacerbate existing inequalities but rather promote equitable growth for all segments of Nigeria’s diverse society.

• Dr James Odaudu is a development scholar/administrator and a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Public Administration of Nigeria. Email: jamesaduku@gmail.com

Features

PRESS FREEDOM AND AGGRAVATED HAZARDS OF JOURNALISM

Published

12 months ago

May 4, 2024

Nats Odaudu

*By Paul Ejime

The more than 100 journalists and media workers killed as of 3^rd May 2024 in the ongoing Israel-Gaza conflict, ignited by Hamas’ unprecedented attack against Israel on 7^th of October 2023, makes it the deadliest period for journalists since the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) began gathering data in 1992.

This year alone, 25 journalists and media workers have been killed, including 20 in Gaza alone, according to the U.S.-based CPJ, a non-profit organization, that advocates for press freedom and the protection of journalists worldwide.

The Committee also says that it is investigating numerous unconfirmed reports of other journalists being killed, missing, detained, hurt, or threatened, and of damage to media offices and journalists’ homes.

Globally, more than 35,000 Palestinians have been reported killed in Gaza and the West Bank, and 1,200 in Israel since the Hamas attack and Israeli retaliations.

Every death in a conflict is one too many, journalists are not special.

However, the CPJ Programme Director Carlos Martínez de la Serna posits that: “Journalists are civilians who are protected by international humanitarian law in times of conflict. Those responsible for their deaths face dual trials: one under international law and another before history’s unforgiving gaze.”

CPJ’s President, Jodie Ginsberg, put it more succinctly: “Every journalist killed is a further blow to our understanding of the world.”

Speaking on behalf of all advocates of press freedom she said: “(We) must work collectively to ensure that journalist killers are brought to justice … and that the public’s right to be informed is protected from those whose power is threatened by the scrutiny of reporting.”

In his speech to mark this year’s World Press Day or World Press Freedom Day, Volker Türk, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights paid tribute to the “countless, fearless individuals daring to question,” including “71 journalists and media workers killed and the 320 imprisoned, in 2023, the highest number ever.”

Describing 2023 as “a devastating year for journalism,” the senior UN official said: “It was a year characterized – again – by impunity. Only 13% of the murder cases have been investigated, he said, adding: “When we lose a journalist, we lose our eyes and ears to the outside world. We lose a voice for the voiceless.”

The 2024 World Press Freedom Day focuses attention on the climate and the environment under the theme “A Press for the Planet: Journalism in the Face of Environmental Crisis.”

Türk said the occasion was being marked “in an era of acute global turmoil and the profound fragmentation and polarisation of humanity,” with “conflict boiling over in many places – from Myanmar to Sudan, Ukraine, Gaza, and several other parts of the world – causing intolerable human suffering.”

According to him: “Disinformation is infecting our media and digital landscapes, fuelling hate and division. And as climate change batters our fragile planet, the lives and livelihoods of future generations are under the gravest threat this world has ever known.”

He acknowledged “journalists around the world who are working to hold polluters accountable for the damage and the devastation. They are driving open debate and critical thinking,” the UN official affirmed.

“And by separating facts from lies and propaganda, they are pushing for evidence-based policy decisions on the climate crisis that the world so urgently needs.

Environmental journalists need stronger commitments from their governments and their employers to protect them. Better and safer working conditions…

The dramatic consequences of inertia and inaction on the climate crisis are unfolding as we speak. This doesn’t have to be the case,” Türk added.

The World Press Freedom Day is observed annually on May 3rd. It was established by the UN General Assembly in 1993, following a recommendation adopted at UNESCO’s General Conference in 1991.

The day celebrates the fundamental principles of press freedom, evaluates press freedom around the world, defends the media from attacks on their independence, and pays tribute to journalists who have lost their lives in the exercise of their profession.

The date was also chosen to commemorate the Windhoek (Namibia) Declaration, on free press principles put together by African newspaper journalists in 1991.

It emphasizes the importance of freedom of the press and reminds governments of their duty to respect and uphold the right to freedom of expression enshrined under Article 19 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

As part of the commemoration, the UNESCO/Guillermo Cano World Press Freedom Prize is conferred on deserving individuals, organizations, or institutions that have made outstanding contributions to the defence and promotion of press freedom worldwide.

The prize is named after Guillermo Cano Isaza, a Colombian journalist who was assassinated in front of the offices of his newspaper, El Espectador, in Bogotá in 1986.

Cano’s writings offended Colombia’s powerful drug barons, and journalists in other parts of the World face similar threats today.

According to the 2024 World Press Freedom Index, Norway ranks the highest in press freedom, while Eritrea ranks the lowest.

According to the CPJ, of the 320 journalists and media workers imprisoned as of December 1, 2023, China with (44), followed by Myanmar (43), Belarus (28), Russia (22), and Vietnam (19), rank as having the highest number of jailed journalists.

*Ejime, a former War Correspondent, is a Global Affairs Analyst and Consultant on Peace & Security and Governance Communications

Environment

Nigeria at COP28: Separating the facts from fiction

Published

1 year ago

December 4, 2023

Nats Odaudu

By Temitope Ajayi

The number of delegates from Nigeria attending the ongoing Climate Summit in Dubai otherwise called COP28 has generated a lot of controversies and strong social media conversations in the last 24 hours. It is important to set the record straight and provide some clarity. To begin with, the Summit is tagged COP which means Convention of Parties. The ongoing Summit in Dubai with over 97,000 delegates from more than 100 countries around the world is the 28th in the series since the issue of climate change and action took preeminent stage in global affairs. COP27 took place at Sharm El-Sheikh in Egypt last year.

When the world comes together to take actions on achieving a common goal and proffer collective solutions to a nagging global concern, there are parties involved from government, private sector, civil society, media and multilateral institutions. The people coming together to advance their different agenda and interests from governments, businesses and civil societies are the parties to the convention who represent various shades of opinions and pushing for various mitigating actions.

In Nigeria like so many other countries, interested parties comprising government officials from both the Federal and sub-national governments, business leaders, environmentalists, climate activists and journalists are present in Dubai. Also participating are agencies of government such as the NNPC and its subsidiaries, Ministry of Niger Delta Affairs, NIMASA, NDDC. Many youth organisations from Nigeria especially from the Northern and Niger-Delta regions whose lives and livelihoods are most impacted by desert encroachment and hydrocarbon activities are also represented. The President of Ijaw Youth Council, Jonathan Lokpobiri, leads a pan-Ijaw delegation of more than 15 people who registered as parties from Nigeria. Among delegates from Nigeria are also over 20 journalists from various media houses.

Their participation is very important. It is not for jamboree as it is being mischievously represented on social media.

It is important to state here that delegates from all countries whether from government, private sector, media and civil society groups attend COP summits and conferences as parties and the number of attendees are registered against their countries of origin. This does not mean that they are sponsored or funded by the government. It must be said also that the fact that people registered to attend a conference does not mean everyone that registered is physically present.

As the biggest country in Africa, biggest economy and one with a bigger stake on climate action as a country with huge extractive economy, it is a no-brainer that delegates from Nigeria will be more than any other country in Africa.

Among the delegates from Nigeria are UBA Chairman, Tony Elumelu, Abdul Samad Rabiu, Chairman of BUA group, and other billionaires whose businesses are promoting sustainability and climate actions through their philanthropies. These businessmen and women and their staff who came with them to promote their own business interests are part of the 1,411 delegates from Nigeria. Their trip to Dubai is not funded by the Federal Government.

United Nations Climate summit, by its very nature, commands attendance of big names from across the world – statesmen and women, politicians, lawmakers, corporate titans, journalists and activists, etc who promote big global agenda. So, people attend the summit for many reasons. And because climate issue is the biggest global issue of the moment, it is not surprising that over 97,000 people including Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India, King Charles of United Kingdom, Prime Minister of Netherlands, Mark Rutte, U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris, US Special Envoy on Climate Change and former Secretary of State, John Kerry, President Bola Tinubu, United Nations Secretary General, Antonio Guterres, World Bank President, Ajay Banga, International Monetary Fund President, Kristalina Georgieva, World Trade Organisation Director General, Ngozi Okonjo Iweala, Africa Development Bank President, Akinwumi Adesina, former US Vice President and Nobel Peace Prize Winner, Al Gore and almost 100 Heads of States and Governments converged on Dubai for COP28. It is the first of its kind in the history of the summit because of the importance of climate change to global well-being.

After the opening and national statements by Heads of States which began from November 30 when the summit opened and up until Saturday December 2, 2023, the real work of COP28 which are the technical sessions and negotiations, financing, etc will begin from Monday, December 4 till December 12 where agreements will be reached on many proposals for consideration and ratification by the parties.

Those with sufficient understanding and knowledge on climate matters know that issues around the subject have layers and multiplicity of factors that require experts from various fields. There are lined-up technical sessions on financing climate actions at sub-national levels, regions and local governments. State Governors from Nigeria such as Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu of Lagos, Dapo Abiodun of Ogun, Umo Eno of Akwa-Ibom have been really busy with their officials at COP28, making presentations, speaking at panel sessions and pitching some of their sustainability projects to development partners and investors.

Multifaceted stakeholders from different countries including Nigeria are on ground in Dubai because they don’t want decisions that will affect them to be taken without pushing their own agenda. It is the reason delegates from China and Brazil are over 3000 respectively. China is one of the world biggest polluters and Brazil is at the centre of global climate debate with her Amazon rainforest. These two countries know important decisions that will affect them will be taken and they have to move everything to be fully on ground and ensure they are fully represented by their best brains at every level of discussion and negotiation.

Like former President Muhammadu Buhari and other African leaders who demanded fair deal and climate justice for Africa at previous UN Climate summits, President Tinubu is leading the charge at COP28 on behalf of Nigeria and the rest of the continent, demanding from the West that any climate decision and action must be fair and just to Africa and Nigeria in particular, especially the debate around energy transition.

President Tinubu has been unequivocal in his position that Africa that is battling problems of poverty, security and struggling to provide education and healthcare to her people can not be told to abandon its major source of income which is mostly from extractive industries without the West providing the funding and investment in alternative and clean energy sources. President Tinubu and other officials on the Federal government delegation are in Dubai for serious business not jamboree.

Our President has been very busy representing our country well. Since Thursday morning when he arrived Dubai, President Tinubu has spent not less than 18hours daily in attending very important sessions, pushing our national agenda whilst holding bilateral and business meetings on the sidelines.

-Ajayi is Senior Special Assistant to the President on Media & Publicity