By Nnamdi Elekwachi
The port deal the Tinubu government signed during the just-concluded official state visit to the United Kingdom will not promote maritime competitiveness in the nation. The Niger Delta, which hosts the Eastern ports lost out, since only the Apapa and Tin Can ports in Lagos are set to benefit from the over £700 million-worth investment. Of the six ports in Nigeria, Tinubu, in his usual manner of exclusion, chooses to refurbish and redevelop Lagos ports alone.
As the thrust of Tinubu’s maritime agenda since he was sworn in, the policy has been long in coming. Sometime around April 2024, Tinubu’s government publicly announced its plan to borrow $700 million from Citibank to fund the redevelopment of the two port complexes in Lagos. The statement, shared via the official X handle of Mr. Mohammed Bello-Koko, the Managing Director of the Nigerian Ports Authority, NPA, said that the federal government had ‘signed the Mandate Letter and Term Sheet’ for the loan, and was only waiting for approval by the Minister of Marine and Blue Economy, the Minister of Finance, and the Debt Management Office.
What Tinubu did in the UK was to formerly get the United Kingdom to guarantee the funding of the project through the United Kingdom Export Finance, the UKEF.
UKEF, known officially as the Export Credits Guarantee Department, ECGD is a UK credit agency focused on providing funds for UK firms abroad to help grow export of the UK. According to Wikipedia, the aim of the UKEF, which was established in 1919 following the First World War, is ‘to benefit the UK economy by helping… UK firms invest overseas by providing guarantees, insurance and reinsurance against loss, taking into account HM [His/Her Majesty] Government’s wider international policy agenda.’
This is known as ‘tied aid’ in the field of international relations. A situation where a loan is guaranteed with an agreement that the borrowing state or party as the project sponsor will in turn import project materials from the guaranteeing state.
The meaning is that Nigeria is borrowing from the UK on the condition that it will also import a significant chunk of project materials (capital goods) from the same UK!
The loan, the British government said, ‘will be delivered through UKEF’s credit buyer facility and coordinated by Citibank, N.A. London’. This is a simple advantage to the United Kingdom which only recently revived its steel sector. What is more, at least £236 million of supplier contracts are directed to British companies, to quote the British government official website. In fact, all British releases celebrated this as a massive win. The United Kingdom is set to enjoy both tangible and immediate benefits in terms of contracts, jobs and exports as Nigeria looks to benefit more in the long run.
Up until the first quarter of 2025, British Steel was going under until government intervention saved it. With £700,000 retained in loss daily prior, the British parliament had to swiftly enact a piece of legislation that helped bring about stabilisation and sustainability – the Steel Industry Act. The Act, passed on April 12, 2025, helped the government take control of British Steel thereby saving it from total collapse and final closure. That the firm would, in less than one year of this intervention, land an order of 120,000 steel billet at £70 million from Nigeria is no mean fortune.
In the words of Peter Kyle, the British Business and Trade Secretary:
‘Hot on the heels of our landmark Steel Strategy, this is a major win for British Steel made possible by UK Export Finance which is testament to the quality of UK-made steel and the booming UK-Nigeria relationship.’
While indeed Nigeria expects to witness decongestion, improved access, digitalisation and automation of port services, according to the Minister of Marine and Blue Economy, Adegboyega Oyetola, one is left wondering what this would have meant for local production if the Ajaokuta Steel Mill or any other Nigerian private steel company were functional. We are importing steel from the United Kingdom.
The project has a timeline of forty-eight months, though its loan tenor wasn’t published in any of the releases I have seen so far. But that is not all there is to the whole project.
Hitech Company and ITB Company, both construction giants owned and affiliated to the Chagouri Group, had been named as interested parties in the deal. The two firms are expected to receive the 120,000 metric tonnes of steel from the UK, raising fear among Nigerians. The Tinubu and Chagouri families are political and corporate allies. Both had been named in many businesses before, especially contracts; the Lagos-Calabar Coastal Expressway being the latest example. Sources claim that Seyi Tinubu, son of the president, has interest in Hitech Company too.
Granted, the two ports in Lagos enjoy over 80% of Nigeria’s international trade value, but the eastern ports (Calabar, Warri, Port Harcourt, and Onne) must not continue to suffer neglect when only dredging and desilting and other logistical interventions can make them the oil and gas hub on the continent. Sadly, nobody remembers the Escravos and Forcados channels in Delta State. Granted, Lagos ports may hold certain advantages and facilities, but a decentralised maritime sector will guarantee competitiveness.
Developed in late 2022, the Lekki Deep Sea Port is a ‘Public-Private Partnership (PPP) project regarded as ‘the first foreign-invested port in Nigeria’. China Harbour Engineering Company, CHEC has a controlling share of 52.5% (indirect), Tolaram Group enjoys 22.5% (indirect), the Lagos State Government owns 20%, and Nigerian Ports Authority 5%, respectively. It is a forty-five-year Build, Own, Operate, and Transfer, BOOT. Nigerians now wonder what the latest deal with the UKEF, even though an equity deal is not part of it, means for Nigeria.
What does a foreign company operating and owning a controlling share, say the largest venture capital, in another country’s port mean, and what does it mean when a country relies on borrowing and importation from its colonial masters to fund the redevelopment of its ports? Neocolonialism? Debt-trap diplomacy? Or just funding for the sake of it?
Tibubu is both the head of state and head of government, going by our system – presidential government. It means his visit in the UK is split into two phases. The Windsor Castle meeting with the monarch who, like Tibubu, is the head of state of Britain and that with the prime minister who is the head of government in Britain. The first phase featured pomp and pageantry with gun salute, carriage procession, ballroom dinner, clinking of glasses, proposing and making toast and elaborate speeches. The second phase is the deal aspect; government-to-government talks. Because Tibubu is the head of government, he would hold talks with Keir Starmer, the head of the government of Britain. Here, Britain secured its interest through export credit finance. Nigeria looks to maximise its developmental necessity.
The monarch at Windsor Castle gave Tinubu a wonderful hosting with Britain’s taxpayers’ money, whereas the prime minister at Number 20 Downing Street secured contracts, jobs, and exports in hundreds of millions of British pounds (GBP) from Tinubu’s Nigeria.
According to Section 12 of the 1999 constitution, as amended, the National Assembly can stop any treaty obligation or agreement entered into by the federal government which does not serve Nigeria’s interest. So there is still legislative hurdle for the port deal. But Nigerians do not believe in the tenth Assembly, to say nothing of its independence. So, while this may not reflect the true aspirations and interest of Nigerians, it is a particular interest that must be protected.
Long live Nigeria, long live Britain, the master too.
Nnamdi Elekwachi wrote from Aba, Abia State.
