The Senate Public Accounts Committee (SPAC) has started probing the Bureau of Public Enterprises on why they have failed to remit the sum of $679.4million realised from the concession of various ports to the 23 companies under the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA) for 10years.
The Chairman of the Committee, Matthew Urhoghide centered his investigation to a report from Adolphus Aghughu, the Acting Auditor General of the Federation (AuGF) which reads that, ‘the Auditor-General for the Federation’s Annual Report on Non- Compliance/Internal Control Weaknesses Issues in Ministries, Departments and Agencies of the Federal Government of Nigeria for the Year Ended 31st December,2019.’
The Clerk to the National Assembly, Ojo Amos, having received the report presented by Aghughu on the 15th of September, 2021; the Senate Public Accounts Committee (SPAC) approve of Aghughu’s query report to the BPE, as they launched the investigation.
Aghughu’s report queried that for 10years and above, 23 companies were granted concessional rent of various ports under the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA) with associated annual rent of $679,403,172,00 payable to NPA as at December 31,2016 but there has been no evidence nor record to show that the sum of $679,403,172,00 was collected as at when due and remitted to the Consolidated Revenue Fund.
Allegedly, the report stated that maybe the Bureau misapplied the unremitted funds or there was a diversion of funds to other uses as this has been communicated to the Bureau in a letter with reference number OAuGF/RESAD/05/2016/07 dated April 19, 2018 but in that respect, no response was received from the Bureau.
“Unremitted funds may be misapplied by the Bureau. Also, it may lead to the diversion of funds to other uses.” The report read.
It also demanded for evidence to show that the sum of $679,403,172,00 was collected from the Director General of the BPE and remitted to the appropriate authority.
BPE’s Response
In response to the query, the BPE wrote that the concession was transacted in 2005 and the clear execution to the agreement of the concession stated that the BPE was only a secondary confirming party to the concessions while NPA and the concessionaries were the primary parties to the concession.
The Bureau insisted that, the responsibility for such collection was that of NPA and not BPE.
They said; “Having midwifed the concession transactions, the BPE collected some of the remittance to the NPA. The NPA has since acknowledged the transfer made regarding the rentals received on its behalf by the Bureau.”
The Agency describing NPA as the “landlord”, stated that the revenue accruing on the ports concession beyond 2008 have been paid directly to the NPA and not BPE as the OAuGF report allegedly stated. They therefore denounced the alleged report of being aware of the $679.4 million.
