 You're welcome back to the breakfast on Plos TV Africa. Our first major conversation today would be about the Petroleum Industry Bill, P.I.B. and the 3% host community fund that is seaming to divide Nigerians along different lines. Today we have Mr. Peter Mehdi, the Commissioner of Energy. Good morning Mr. Mehdi. Good morning. Thank you for joining us. Regarding this 3% host community fund, let's know where you stand regarding this. Would you say that at the end of the day it's great that this P.I.B. has been passed and that we can all just move on with it? Or do you feel that they deserve more and that host communities should demand for more? Well, thank you for being here. This issue is very very clear. The fact that whether we should move on or without more or more, the conclusion to this matter is that we are absolutely disappointed as in states and as in people, what it's been passed today as the Petroleum Industry Bill, you agree with me that the National Assembly could do for us to make an attendee public hearing. Unfortunately, what it's been passed today is not a reflection of effort we've made during the public hearing. I actually was part of a team that represented the River State and Waterloo's community in the Major Delta during the presentation. I was there at the House of Rebs. I was there at the Senate for the four days of this program and on. I was there. Unfortunately what we have seen today being passed as the Petroleum Industry Bill does not in any way reflect the new gains and the aspiration as well as the position of not just River States but all the 9 Major Delta States. I remember believing that all the Commissioner for Energy in all these states, we all came together. We had a gift of peace and all of us feel we have a common position that we presented during the public hearing. Unfortunately, look at what is being passed. First and foremost, let's take it. We asked for 10% 3% is being passed. What was proposed was 2.5%. What exactly does that mean? It means that only what was considered was 0.5% because they proposed 2.5% and we asked for 10%. In fact, the thing we asked for is exactly what... We really apologize for that technical glitch. Mr. Mehdi... ...been promoting earlier bills, earlier passions of these people. So we think we're not asking for too much. I can hear you. Yes, please go ahead. We couldn't hear you earlier. I can hear you. I'm saying that what was passed is not a reflection of the effort we made similarly at the public hearing to be able to put a better deal for our people, not just in River States and those communities that rule up the 9 Major Delta. For example, we asked for 10% and the 10% we asked for was not too much because that was what was earlier proposed in earlier passions of these people. And so, this time around, they came with 2.5%. The 2.5% they came with... We asked for 10% and they ended up passing 3%. Meaning that it was just 0.5% that was being added. Is 0.5% what the effort that we all made to be able to make submission at the public hearing? So I think the National Assembly is not sensitive to the pride of the 9 Major Delta people because if they were sensitive, at least they should have passed 5% and not 7%. But they passed 3%. Now the question is 3% of what? 3% of what they passed. Is it 3% of equity participation or 3% of profit? Now look at the level of devastation in the 9 Major Delta. Look at the environmental challenges we are having. Look at the issue, the destruction in the area. Look at the kind of thing that has happened to the economy of Major Delta. We no longer go to farm, we no longer go for fishing. Now, 3% of profit. What does that mean to us? Because it is the companies that are operating that determines what is their cost of production. It is them that will also take care of it. It's sad that we have this technical glitch this morning. We'll apologize for that. But we're really talking about the 3% host communities are found that, you know, is a matter of controversy. Lots of questions they have for that commission and River State regarding what exactly is the host community. There are also debates about what constitutes a host community. Is it communities where we have this oil? Or is it communities where these oil companies are situated? Is it communities? We need to find out what exactly we're talking about. And 3% of what? The facts we're seeing here is that this 3% will come from the expenses of the oil companies that are operating in the communities. And also, this 3% we're talking about, what exactly is it going to be deployed into? What would the money be used for? What exactly in the community are we going to look towards developing? And this 3% exactly, is it going to be enough long term? Because, you know, just like we've been talking about, when you strike a conversation and you have negotiations like this, if you think in the long term, it would take a lot of conversations to change this and adjust this in future. And then looking towards making sure that they have a negotiation towards a figure that is suitable for all parties involved now, instead of looking forward to renegotiating later. I hope we can reconnect with Mr. Peter Medi, Commissioner for Energy in River State. Yes, go ahead. As we wait to reconnect, I would say I understand their concerns. I hope that he can connect with us quickly. I could also ask him all the questions. I understand their concerns. The environmental damage that has been done to places in the Niger Delta for the last 60 years will take a lot more than just some of all these bills to repair, to fix. Since the current administration came in, we've been talking about the cleanup of the Niger Delta. We've not gone very far with that. I don't think we've gone up to 30% with regards to success of that. So it would take a lot more. And I hope that they, and of course representatives of the Niger Delta ministers, commissioners, local government chairmen, House of Representatives, Senators and the likes, are being honest with themselves as to the fact that it's not just about approving 3% or 5% or 10 or 20 or 40%. It's about political will and the implementation and the proper use of these funds. I hope that I would, I just want things, I'm going to ask it now. How sincere are they really with regards to these funds and the usage of these funds? Because if they approve 10%, for a long time we've heard about the NDDC. Billions of Nair has been sent through the NDDC for many, many years. We couldn't even successfully probe the NDDC. I think it was late last year when somebody fainted. That probe now seems to have been either swept under the rug or is stolen. But those are sincere questions. And if there was some sincerity and some truth and some proper management of funds that were going through the NDDC, there probably wouldn't be an argument about 3% or 10% or 5%. I think where this challenge really might be coming from is because of the 30% that has been allocated for oil exploration in frontier states. There is that, and so people then will not start to compare while you're given frontier states 30% and you only get to give host communities 3%. But I don't think it would be, I don't think it would be honest, it would be good to have this conversation without reminding the leaders of the Niger Delta and people in those positions that have been there for the last couple of decades of what their responsibilities are with these funds. While we argue about what the figure should be, 2.5%, 30%, 40% doesn't matter. But their responsibilities, you know, are the ability to use these funds properly to fix the Niger Delta. If there was proper governance, if there was proper utilization of funds in the Niger Delta for the last couple of decades, I don't think this would be such a big problem. Yes, they have the right to demand whatever they choose to demand because it is their communities that these companies exist. Oil exploration takes from their communities, they can be Dubai. They can be even better than Dubai with the amount of money that is made from those communities every year. But they are a complete opposite of what Dubai looks like. So they have that right. But I don't think they're also asking enough questions at the government closest to them, government at the local level, the state government, and before we get all the way to Abuja. Mr. Mayday, welcome back. Can you hear us clearly? Yes, I can hear you clearly. Okay, that's better now. Welcome back. We apologize for the glitches here and there. So I want you to go now. I saw an article online that criticized the call for 3% and the complaints by representatives of the Niger Delta. The article almost described the representatives of the Niger Delta as being greedy, seeing that 3% is enough and also reminding the Niger Delta leadership that there has been the NDDC that has been in existence for many, many years. There's also the 13% derivation fund that has continued to go to these communities and to these states that doesn't seem to have changed much with regards to living standards of people of the Niger Delta. So I want you to respond to that. Why aren't there enough questions as to how much, you know, what the use of these funds, the NDDC and the 13% derivation fund have been used for? Now, before we start talking about 3% to the Niger Delta or to host communities. Thank you for that. The question I want to ask back is, who are the people in charge of NDDC? Who are the people in charge of it? When you hear of 13%, do you ask exactly how much that comes to these states? Do you ask, see, these are the realities of it. We don't have to perceive ourselves. What is the condition under the mineral arts that exists in other parts of the country? Why is it that what applies there is not what is applying here? If you are exploring other mineral resources in other parts of the country, what is the relationship that exists? So when you talk about NDDC, take them for example, who determines those on the board of the NDDC? Are they nominated from the Niger Delta states? Are they nominated from the host communities? They are nominated from Aguja and he who detects the, but detects the tomb. So where are we on this? So it is a very big plot to underdevelop the place. Who are the people who take the best contracts in NDDC? Who are the people who are abandoning the jobs in NDDC? Today go and look at the East West Coast route. What is happening to it? People in the Niger Delta suffering. There is no way to their farmland. There is no way to their communities. So the reality is obvious. We saw this PID as another way that the reality of the Niger Delta state would have been made better. But unfortunately, okay, why did they give us the 50% of it? Just as it applies to other solid minerals. So when you talk about 30%, 30% of what? 30% of what they declare. When you talk about the NDDC, NDDC of what? Who determines the leadership of NDDC? Who are the board members? Who are the board members? You know how many people from other parts of the country that are on the board of NDDC doing what? How many persons from the south are on the board of the, not this commission? And how many non-tenants are on the board of NDDC? You see, there are a lot, a lot that are fundamentally wrong with the reality of the situation we faced. So we must be able to understand that 100% of these resources is coming from Niger Delta. So even if 100% is coming and then you are talking about 30%, you are talking about 3%, that's 60%. What about the other 90%? What about the other 80%? Where is it going to? Who are the people in charge? Who determines this? These are the fundamental issues that need to be raised. So it's not job to criticize. Yes, I also need to ask you, what's the plan for the usage of the funds that plan to come to the community? What are 3%? What are 10%? What exactly is the plan for that money? Thank you. This is another point because if you look at the BRD, there is what they call the SecLoc, which is the people that will administer the trust fund, the trust fund that is supposed to receive this money. Who are going to board membership? Who are the administrators of the trust fund? These are the realities. Are they from the communities? They are not from the communities. The BRD did not provide that. It is the same oil companies that will appoint those that will be on the management team of the trust fund. It is the same oil company that will administer the trust fund. So you can see what is playing out is that it's a situation where they are giving you something with right hand and they are using the left hand to take it back. Because there is no independence of the SecLoc, which is the trust fund that is expected to manage this money. These are areas where this BRD is completely not a reflection of the presentation we made. If I want to take you through the presentation we made, there are essential parts of this BRD that should be expunged. There are parts of it we said should be improved upon. What is passed now is actually not a reflection of what we spent the effort to make presentation. We spent the effort when they came to all the states to also consult. Every input that was made, none was taken. What was actually procured was what was passed. So it's the situation of garbage in, garbage out. So what is passed as BRD today is a complete nonsense of the situation and an insult to the people of the Niger Delta. Either the states or the host communities. So it is not a reflection of our enemies. Look at this, we are thinking that the BRD will be an improvement in terms of technology, in terms of management, in terms of being fair to the areas where these resources have been exploited from. Some people who are benefiting from the oil resources have not even gone to the Niger Delta to see the level of devastation, to see what people are suffering. The sources of livelihood have been taken away. People can no longer go to farm, people can no longer go for fishing. Our fishes are dying, our crops are dying. Now, and you talk about 30%, you talk about 3%, there's an insult. My dear people, it is important that this country must come to the reality that from whom much is given, much is expected. From whom much is taken, much should be given back. What are you giving us back? Okay, look at this, the situation where they are now asking for 30% of the same profit to go to an area. And you are saying 3% should go to where the oil is coming from. Then where they are going to look for the oil, 30% should go there. Is that not crazy? I think that the people who either propose this to you or the people who ensure this being are not sensitive to the flight of the Niger Delta. Since you've raised that point Mr. Mehdi, I need to ask you, do you think the House of Assembly members could have done more? The House of Assembly members from the Niger Delta region could have done more to ensure that their people get more. What I even think is that I was expecting all of them to also work out from the discussion and never to come back to that discussion until the right thing is done. I understand the reality of their effort, I understand how helpless they are, I understand the limitation in their numbers. But I think they should have been able to put what we call a minority opposition to the majority position. That is exactly what we have expected. Because look at it, how can the people who have majority approve 30% to themselves? And you who have majority, they give you 3% and you sit there to allow them to have their way. Yes, the minority can have their say, but the majority can have their say, but the minority need to have their way. By staging a work out and never to come back to any discussion until the BIV is concerned. I think that protest would have been better, but it's not too late. I think Mr. President can right this wrong by not signing this deal, by returning this deal that the proper thing should be done. Because if you want peace, peace must not be an absence of anchor. But it must be a situation where people will be sensitive to the plight of those suffering. Look at the people of the Niger Delta and the level of suffering in the Niger Delta. So I think that all this is not the reality of what we expect because of the kind of suffering that we are actually passing through. Another major issue is host communities. Who are the host communities? Look at the bill, they have defined the host communities to involve pipeline communities. Meaning that every other community where pipeline passes from the Niger Delta up to the Kaduna refinery. All those communities now are not defined as host communities, instead of oil bearing communities. So I think it would have been oil bearing communities, rather than host communities. Because when you say host communities, it means everywhere pipeline passes in this country. And as much as the pipeline has to do with hydrocarbon, as well as oil and gas. Then they are all going to benefit from this three percent. So we are completely so chained and I think it is not a better thing for us. Thank you so much. We genuinely wish that we had more time to have this discussion. There's a bit more of these angles that we need to explore. But thank you very much. And it's a continuing conversation, I believe. We hope that we can bring you in again with hopefully a member of the House of Representatives to share a little bit more on this. Good morning once again. Thank you. Good morning, I would have loved to give you half more time. Because if the issue of the pipeline security, where they say that if there is any problem on the pipeline. The money that they use in repairing and then cleaning the place will be deducted from the three percent. That's another way. Okay. Okay, Mr. Mehdi. Really, this is a conversation. This is a complete mess. Thank you, Mr. Peter Mehdi. Commissioner for Energy and Natural Resources, River State. We hope to continue this conversation in due course. We'll take a break here and return to discuss issues of our elections and 2023. Stay with us.