House of Reps Passes Petroleum Industry Bill

Channels Television reports that the House of Reps’ Ad-Hoc Committee report on the PIB has been considered and that the Bill has been passed by the lower house.

This comes after a flurry of Bills (46 in total) were passed by the Senate yesterday, June 3, after same were transmitted by the House of Reps.

The House of Reps’ passage of the PIB comes to little or no avail as the 7th Assembly wrapped up today. The Bill would have also required passage by the Senate.

Indeed, Senate president, David Mark, in his End-of-Assembly speech, admitted the lawmakers failure to pass the Bill.

The PIB has been before the House of Assembly since July 2012.

House of Representatives Move to Minimise Executive Discretion under the PIB

ThisDay and Leadership report that the House of Representatives’ Ad-hoc Committee on the PIB has recommended that the President’s discretionary powers to award licenses or leases, as well as the Minister of Petroleum Resources’ control over relevant regulatory agencies, be removed.

The recommendations, which are contained in the executive summary of the Committee’s report on the Bill, also seek to extend the coverage of the Petroleum Host Community Fund to communities where oil and gas installations are located.

The Committee will present its report on the PIB when the House reconvenes on March 31, 2015.

David Mark orders Senate Joint Committee on PIB to conclude deliberations

Following a Point of Order raised by the Senator representing the Ekiti-North senatorial zone, Senator Olubunmi A. Adetunbi, the Senate President, David Mark, gave orders that the Senate’s Joint Committee on the Petroleum Industry Bill (“PIB”) conclude work on the Bill and return same to the Senate for prompt passage.

It was reported that Senator Adetunbi’s plea was prompted after he was put on the spot at a function he attended. At the occasion, the Senate was accused of toying with critical issues affecting the economy especially the PIB.

It will be recalled that the PIB was committed to the Senate’s Joint Committee for deliberations on Thursday, March 7, 2013.

SENATE’S JOINT COMMITTEE ON PIB HOLDS PUBLIC HEARINGS (DAY 1)

The Senate’s Joint Committee on the Petroleum Industry Bill (PIB), yesterday, July 18, 2013, held the first of its two-day public hearing on the Bill.

As reported in ThisDay and the Guardian, stakeholders in the petroleum industry (including the Minister of Petroleum Resources, State Governors and representatives of both government parastatals and oil companies) made their presentations on the Bill before the Senate’s Joint Committee.

International and local oil companies under the auspices of Oil Producers Trade Section (OPTS) opposed the passage of the PIB in its current state. In a presentation made by the Managing Director, Mobil Producing Nigeria, Mr. Mark Ward, the OPTS said the PIB fell short of addressing the challenges in the oil industry.

He observed that the Bill sought to significantly increase royalties and taxes making Nigeria one of the harshest fiscal regimes in the world, a situation that will culminate in the country, as an oil and gas producing region, becoming uncompetitive as projects will now become uneconomical.

Given the enormous expenditure required to develop gas infrastructure, he also opined that an incentive-based approach to domestic gas supply obligations will be required to jump start Nigeria’s much needed gas revolution.

According to him, while OPTS supports the objectives of the Bill and the reforms it seeks, the Bill as drafted will fail in delivering such objectives and will reduce the oil and gas industry contributions to the Nigerian economy.

The Nigeria Extractive Industry Transparency International (NEITI), in its submissions, explained that for effective regulation of the industry, it was necessary to reduce the powers of the Minister and ensure the creation of autonomous institutions that would promote effective governance and control in the management of Nigeria’s petroleum resources.

NEITI also noted that the Bill did little to protect the Nigerian environment. They insisted that the Bill should provide minimum environmental standards in the relationship between Operators in the sector and the environment.

The Revenue Mobilization Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC), in its presentation, opposed the Bill’s provision mandating a ten per cent (10%)  contribution of Operator profits to the Petroleum Host Community Fund (PHCF). The Commission instead advocated exploring the open-ended opportunity available under the Constitution vis-a-vis the provision stipulating that a minimum of thirteen per cent (13%) of the revenue accruing from the Federation Account be paid to oil producing States. They also recommended that the Bill provide for the remittance of revenue by petroleum regulatory agencies into the Commission’s account.

RMAFC’s position on the PHCF was supported by the Governors of Niger and Kaduna State who described its conception as the most controversial of the entire Bill’s provision.

The Honorable Minister of Petroleum Resources, Mrs. Diezani Alison-Madueke, in her presentation, said it would take about five years before the provisions of the Bill could be fully implemented. She urged stakeholders not to personalise or politicise the Bill adding that the PIB was put together in the interest of the nation.

She downplayed beliefs that the Bill accorded enormous powers to the Minister, stressing that the current Petroleum Act actually vested more powers in the office.

She further added that “Whilst we take best practices from other developed regions, we should also work within the understanding of our own socio-economic and social-cultural norms, and create entities and policies that will work and are not destined to fail from the word-go.”

The Minister also noted that the PHCF was proposed to mitigate the human and environmental conditions in oil producing regions and to assuage the feelings of the host communities towards oil and gas companies.

Declaring the hearing open, the Senate President, David Mark, promised that the National Assembly would facilitate the passage of the bill, noting that the pursuit of the Bill must be a win-win situation.

He however urged that: “Oil companies should not take undue advantage of Nigeria. What I do not want is when people begin to threaten that if you do not do this, we will park out of Nigeria. That is not the correct thing. We are conscious of the fact that there is frustration in the oil industry”.

 

 

PIB SENATE COMMITTEES TO REPORT TO THE SENATE IN 6 WEEKS

It has been reported (here and here) that the Petroleum Industry Bill (PIB) on Thursday, March 6, 2013, scaled through the Second Reading on the floor of the Senate and has been passed on to the Senate Committees on Petroleum (Upstream and Downstream), Gas and Judiciary, Human Rights and Legal Matters.

Senators Emmanuel Paulker (Bayelsa Central), Chairman Committee on Petroleum(Upstream); Magnus Abe (Rivers South/East), Chairman Committee on Petroleum(Downstream); Nkechi Justina Nwaogu (Abia Central), Chairman Gas Committee; and Umaru Dahiru (Sokoto South), Chairman Committee on Judiciary, Human Rights and Legal Matters are charged with collating the views of the Senate on the Bill together with those of the public, which would be received through public hearings, and report same to the House within six (6) weeks.

The Senate President, David Mark commended the accord shown by his colleagues in getting the Bill passed to the Committee Stage and expressed his delight that the Bill had enjoyed robust debate as no fewer than 81 Senators had made contributions on the Bill over the past 3 days.

Mark summarized the general issues the Senate had with the Bill as:

  1. The provision for a Petroleum      Host Community Fund;
  2. The insufficiency with regards      frontier exploration; and
  3. The excessive powers of the Minister      of Petroleum.

He also made note as to the impracticability of certain portions of the Bill such as the Bill exempting the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) assets to be privatized from provisions of the Public Procurement Act.

Although he pointed out that the Bill was a “worthy Bill”, he also mentioned that no Bill had come through the Senate and not been tinkered with. He assured the House that subsequent to the public hearings, “amendments, additions and subtractions” will be made to the legislation.