When we broke the story of Cargo Tracking Note (CTN) in our January 11, 2010 edition, we knew that the CTN would be like a sore thumb; sticking out with and smelling foully. We also knew that it would attract the attention of all well-meaning Nigerians to the extent that there would be a tough fight to either ‘kill’ or let it be.
This is the point in which Nigerian shipping sector stakeholders are presently. Since the recent interactive session which the Senate committee on marine transport led by Senator Gbemi Saraki organized, proponents and opponents have gone back to the trenches to re-strategize.
The Senate meeting was a pointer to many facts. Nigerians now know that the brains behind CTN were able to convince (or is it confuse) the Federal Ministry of Transport which did same to the Federal Executive Council (FEC) about the desirability of ensuring that consignments destined for Nigeria were secured through the use of a device that can monitor the consignments from port of loading to destination.
Nigerians are also suspicious that the CTN contract might have been signed with the foreign company without subjecting it to Due Process as required by law.
It also became apparent that the FEC had given approval for CTN as far back as December 9, 2009 that with effect from January 11, 2009, “every commodity loaded or unloaded (import and export) at or with Nigeria as the final destination has to, prior of shipment, obtain a Cargo Tracking Note or International Cargo Tracking document from a Nigerian Ports Authority representative all around the world”.
The groundswell of opposition against the scheme also became apparent as virtually all stakeholders kicked against the five month old CTN for different reasons, ranging from its alleged deception, to the secrecy of its introduction, the additional financial obligation on the part of shippers and a host of other reasons.
As a newspaper, we have rummaged over the CTN controversy for a while and we are worried that the issue has become a virus among stakeholders turning saints to devils, tearing the conscience of some into shreds and making nonsense of commonsense.
About two weeks after we broke the story, we had the privilege of meeting with a top official in the Nigerian Ports Authority who showed documents indicating that multinational shipping companies were already collecting the CTN levy for close to seven years; albeit unknown to Nigerian shippers. Shipping lines have however denied that claim, even as they are being joined by the duo of MAN and NACCIMA as well as the Association of Nigerian Licensed Customs Agents as the arrowhead of the anti-CTN campaign.
On the basis of what we saw, we had pleaded with those opposed to CTN to sheath their sword, deliberate with NPA with a view to finding an amicable resolution.
As a newspaper, we are also surprised at the level of secrecy, alleged deception and propaganda that is surrounding CTN. We are also disturbed about the allegation that some corporate and individual members of the shipping community have compromised and that this informs their unalloyed support for CTN.
When the mad rush to support the levy first started, it was believed that some members of the shipping community would rise above temptation, but how wrong we were.
We are equally worried about the revelation at the Senate interactive session that there is basically no difference in the CTN and existing Bill of Laden and that all TPMS does is to generate an arbitrary number on the computer and call it CTN number and for this, the foreign company collects 40 per cent of proceeds from the exercise.
The intervention of the lawmakers is quite commendable and it is our hope that it will yield the desire results; results that will meet the expectations of stakeholders who right from the first day that CTN became public knowledge have remained consistent in their resolve to fight it.
Their opposition probably stems from the discovery that contrary to the assurances that its introduction would not lead to additional financial burden, importers are now forced to part with as much as $600 per TEU all in the name of CTN.
Good enough, the permanent secretary, Federal ministry of transport, Dr Edugie Abebe who also attended the Senate parley has assured that the collection is due for review in June; having been introduced in January.
At this point, we think that the best thing to do is to submit the CTN to certain modifications. First, there is need to break the monopoly of TPMS just like the Federal Government did during the commencement of destination inspection when it broke an earlier monopoly that was granted to Cotecna Destination Services by allowing two other companies. Government should also consider a review of the sharing formulae between NPA and TPMS from the current 60% and 40 % respectively. Finally, we suggest that if it must be collected, the levy should also be reviewed downwards from the present 50 Euros to probably 30 Euros.
Discussion about this post