When former President Olusegun Obasanjo came into office in May, 1999, he made it unambiguously clear that his government was interested in opening up the nation’s economy to the private sector. The position of the government was that there was need for reforms in many sectors of the economy, including the nation’s seaports.
Perhaps, the most popular singsong is port concession, apparently because it translated to stripping Nigerian Ports Authority of its core functions and transferring same to the private terminal operators.
When former President Olusegun Obasanjo came into office in May, 1999, he made it unambiguously clear that his government was interested in opening up the nation’s economy to the private sector. The position of the government was that there was need for reforms in many sectors of the economy, including the nation’s seaports.
Perhaps, the most popular singsong is port concession, apparently because it translated to stripping Nigerian Ports Authority of its core functions and transferring same to the private terminal operators.
Needless to stress that the concession policy led to massive down sizing on the part of NPA and of course, thousands of dockworkers also went with it. The exact number of dockworkers and NPA employees who lost their jobs is still top secret.
To the government and justifiably too, the nation’s seaport were already decaying; both in terms of service delivery and security as well as infrastructures, not to mention integrity and best practices.
That was enough justification and we share government’s position on that. We also share government’s disposition that managing the ports by its employees had been most unprofitable.
The reforms led to the emergence in April of 2006, the first set of concessionaires, namely: ENL Consortium, Apapa Bulk Terminal Limited (ABTL), Greenview Development Nigeria Limited (GDNL) and APM Terminals. Between then they shared the Lagos Ports Complex.
Not too long after, the train moved over to Tin Can Island Port, Port Harcourt port, Calabar and Warri ports and so the journey into another world began for both Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA) and other stakeholders in the port system.
For NPA, the emergence of these new operators marked the beginning of reduced relevance as its core operations, such as cargo handling, shore handling, traffic and so on were taken over by profit-motivated private sector operators which in-turn balkanized the ports and erected perimeter fences to map out their areas of operations.
The Container Terminal and the Lilly Pond Container Freight Station in Ijora were concession to APM Terminal for 25 years and 10 years respectively. WhileUS$3.6 Billion was offered for Container terminal, US$9,652,834 Million was offered for the Ijora terminal.
To take over terminals C and D at the LPC for a 10 year lease period, ENL offered US $79,080,960. Dangote Group (owners of GDNL) offered US$62.75Million for terminal E for a 25-year lease. Similarly, terminal A and B went to ABTL for US$42,711,136 for 25 years also. As for Tin Can Island port, Josepdam Nigeria Ltd offered US $22,513,697Million for Terminal ‘A’ for 10 years; Tin Can Island Container Terminal offered US $174,512,679Million for terminal ‘B’ for 15 year lease. Also, Terminal’s’ at the same port went to SIFAX for US$164,980,800 Million in a 10 year lease agreement.
Apart from these agreements, the most ambitious is the new port development that was embarked upon by the Grimaldi Group for US$62Million. Others are Port Harcourt port for which between US$166,584,700Million and US$25.123Million was offered by the duo of Port and Terminal as well as Bua International.
No doubt, these are monumental financial commitments on the part of those who now operate the terminals.
Perhaps because it occupies the most strategic portion of the Lagos Port Complex (that is the old Container Terminal) for which it coughed out the princely $3.6Billion, it share of attention and blame has been phenomena.
Right from the onset, APM Terminals has been in the eye of the storm. If it is not being attacked by licensed customs agents, the attack would come from its employees. It has also had issues with the workers union; that is the Maritime Workers Union of Nigeria (MWUN). The terminal operator has recently added the Nigeria Customs Service to its increasing list of ‘enemies’.
The question that begs for answer is: who are APM Terminal supposed to be serving or relating with. Under the dispensation of port concession, the stakeholders of any terminal operator (APMT inclusive) are: NPA itself (and of course its partners), the terminal operators themselves, importers and their agents, that is the licensed customs agents, shipping companies/agents, labour (especially dock workers).
At the last count, APM Terminal has had issues with virtually all of these, perhaps with the exemption of sister terminal operators.
It is undoubtedly the recent face-off with the Nigeria Customs Service that has become the last straw which broke the proverbial camel’s back.
Prior to the condemnation by the Comptroller General of Customs; Alhaji Dikko Abdulahi Inde, at least two top level government functionaries had visited the APM Terminal and given uncomplimentary verdict about its customs facilities and examination bay.
The Customs was obviously not done yet as its controller in charge of Apapa port; where APM Terminal operates also came out in loud condemnation of the facilities.
We recall vividly that the minister of National Planning; Dr Shamshudeen Usman had come out to condemn the terminal operator for what he termed as inhuman working environment after his visit to the terminal.
Sadly however, rather than APM Terminal to engage these stakeholders in meaningful and constructive dialogue each time issues arise, it often chooses to ‘fight them’ with propaganda.
A few instances will suffice here; when the Maritime Workers Union of Nigeria an essential stakeholder to the terminal operator decided to order its members to embark on a strike, the union and its President General were viciously attacked in the media.
When the Honourable Minister of National Planning condemn what he saw, rather than accept and remedy the situation, it embarked on a white-wash of the truth, saying that the facilities it gave to the Customs and for customs examination were of best standard.
Since the current attacks on the terminal operator resurfaced, some operators have asked the most obvious question and that is: Why APM Terminals.
We quite agree with them, that what ever is wrong with APM Terminal may also be wrong with others. Certainly, APM Terminal is not worse than ENL, neither is it worse than Josepdam, ABTL, or even Port and Cargo. As a matter of fact, it is often used as an example of how a concessioned port should be: fortified, impregnable and removed
So what is it that APM Terminal is doing that others are not doing, or what is it that others are doing that it is not doing?
The simple answer is that, while others are realistic about their challenges, while they are more stakeholders-conscious, APMT is the exact opposite; believing in propaganda instead of constructive engagement with its immediate publics.
It is not about how much it paid to win the concession, it is also not only about how much it pays to NPA as royalty, it is about how much satisfied the user of its services are. The Customs, the workers and the licensed customs agents cant all the wrong and can’t all be mischievous.
Discussion about this post