In June, when the Eight National Assembly was inaugurated, it signaled the commencement of 17th year of the Nigerian legislature since the return to democracy on May 29, 1999. Thus the present crop of lawmakers have effectively commenced their term which expires same time in 2019.
The nation’s maritime sector has been a beneficiary of democracy through the instrumentality of the National Assembly’s various committees and their oversight functions.
But at the onset of the democratic experience in 1999, stakeholders (especially port operators) who were not used to what was initially perceived as meddlesomeness on the part of the legislature had kicked against the frequent visitations by the lawmakers who often come calling; albeit, in the name of performing oversight functions.
But, all that have changed as stakeholders now see the legislature as partners in progress. The lawmakers also see stakeholders as co-travellers. The relationship has blossomed to the extent that the marine transport committees of both chambers often rely on informed suggestions from stakeholders at their public hearings as veritable instruments in the law-making process.
Since 1999, the committees have facilitated the enactment of certain key bills, such as: the NIMASA Act, Cabotage Act and the Council for the Regulation of Freight Forwarding Act.
But, there are some equally important Bills that are at various stages of enactment at both the House of Representatives and the Senate. The Bills are: Port and Harbour Bill, Chartered Institute of Shipping of Nigeria Bill, Maritime Zone Bill and the controversial Maritime Security Agency bill. They have all been subjected to the mandatory first and second readings and have also been subjected to public hearing at various times. While the Maritime Security Agency Bill was thrown out, others were just simply kept in abeyance.
Fact is: The last National Assembly didn’t do well for the maritime sector.
The importance of these bills can not be over-emphasised as they are as critical to the engendering of a more robust maritime sector as the ones that have been passed previously. For instance, the Port Harbour Bill (which ought to have been enacted alongside the 2006 port concession programme) is still pending at both chambers. This is most painful because the Bill would have created an independent port regulatory agency; the absence of which is currently causing friction among providers and users of port services in Nigeria.
While we acknowledge that though public hearings are not mandatory pre-requisites in the process of enacting a Bill, the sixth House of Representatives held public hearings for all the Bills, during which the views of all stakeholders were collated and subsequently reflected in the final drafts which are now awaiting clause-by-clause considerations at the legislature, we are equally concerned about the slow pace of work on these bills. There was no such during the life of the Seventh Assembly.
While the lower chamber may enjoy some measure of sympathy from stakeholders over the bills, we are very sure that the Senate is fast losing its respect on account of the apparent nonchalant attitude of the upper chamber as regards the maritime sector bills.
A few examples will suffice here. The House held public hearings on the Port and Harbour Bill, Chartered Institute of Shipping of Nigeria Bill, Maritime Zone Bill and the Maritime Security Agency Bill. It has passed the Maritime Security Agency bill, while the remaining bills are awaiting final clause-by-clause considerations. On the contrary, the Senate is yet to show any seriousness in the handling of these bills, except the feeble attempt to deliberate on the Maritime Security Agency bill.
At the twilight of the Sixth National Assembly, concerted efforts were made by maritime sector stakeholders to persuade the lawmakers to consider these bills, but to no avail. It is our expectation that the incumbent legislators will demonstrate more seriousness in the quest to enhance the fortunes of the Nigerian maritime sector by accelerating the consideration of the outstanding bills.
As much as we are not excited about the composition of the marine transport committees of both chambers, we do hope that they would look at the books and kick-off from where the sixth Assembly stopped, because the Seventh Assembly didn’t register its presence in the maritime sector.
The committees were more after things other than the common good of the maritime sector. Otherwise, why would the National Assembly fail to either pass of thrown out the Ports and Harbour Bill, almost 10 years after the ports were concessioned?
The task before the Marine Transport Committees headed by Senator Ahmed Sani for the Senate and the Committee on Ports, Harbours and Waterways, and Committee on Maritime Safety, Education and Administration headed by Patrick Asadu and Mohammed Umar Bago, respectively is to dare to be different.
Just as this newspaper noted for their predecessors, the achievement of the Eight National Assembly will be judged by the level of impact that they are able to bring to bear on the maritime sector.
The tenure of the present crop of members of the marine transport committees of the two chambers will be juxtaposed with that of their predecessors; especially fifth Assembly under the leadership of Senator Ibiapuye Martins Yellowe (now deceased) and Honourable Emeka Ihedioha.
Discussion about this post