HomeUncategorizedREPORT OF SAVE NIGERIA OIL AND GAS INDUSTRY’S ROUNDTABLE, ORGANISED IN PORT HARCOURT ON WEDNESDAY, APRIL 26 AND THURSDAY, APRIL 27, 2017

REPORT OF SAVE NIGERIA OIL AND GAS INDUSTRY’S ROUNDTABLE, ORGANISED IN PORT HARCOURT ON WEDNESDAY, APRIL 26 AND THURSDAY, APRIL 27, 2017

  • October 1, 2017
  • Posted by: acjered
  • Category: Uncategorized
No Comments

By African Initiative for Transparency, Accountability & Responsible Leadership (AFRITAL)

 

 The impulse response describes the reaction of the system as a function of time (or possibly as a function).

Report Authored By: Styvn Obodoekwe

 

PROCEEDINGS OF DAY 1, WEDNESDAY, APRIL 26, 2017

Participant’s Registration commenced at 9:00AM, with the participating stakeholders drawn primarily from National Union of Petroleum & Natural Gas Workers (NUPENG) and Petroleum and Natural Gas Senior Staff Association of Nigeria (PENGASSAN), the two dominant Labour Unions for the oil and gas sector’s (Upstream and Downstream) in Nigeria.

By 10:20AM, there was self-introduction of stakeholders present at the meeting, which immediately was followed with a welcome remark by the Convener of the meeting, Dr Louis Brown Ogbeifun, who also doubled as Convener of African Initiative for Transparency, Accountability & Responsible Leadership (AfriTAL) that chaired the Roundtable. Dr Ogbeifun’s opening remarks also encapsulates an overview of the Save Nigeria’s Oil and Gas Industry’s Project. He went further to commend the leadership of NUPENG and PENGASSAN for their mobilization of colleagues towards the roundtable and commended fellow Comrades for their interest in the program. He said, such was an indication of their readiness to salvage a sector that is treasured to their hearts. He went further to add that the Roundtable was designed to bring the two oil and gas unions together with the belief that both has what it takes to save Nigeria’s oil and gas sector before it is too late. He urged them to feel free during deliberations, which shall assist the meeting to come up with resolutions to be used for further engagements and way forward.

Providing further insight on the project, Dr Ogbeifun explained that project “Save Nigeria Oil and Gas Industry” was launched last year as a veritable platform for bringing the stakeholders in the oil and gas industry together to interact, brainstorm and offer prescriptions on how to improve the efficiency of the oil and gas operations, and in addition, assist government in bringing sanity to the sector. He informed the audience that this was the 2nd in the series of activities designed under the project.

He lamented about multifaceted problems bedevilling the oil and gas sector in Nigeria, which according to him, has exceeded the cash calls level. He said, the National Assembly ought to have changed the story, if they had passed the Petroleum Industry Governance Bill, (PIGB) into law, but seemingly, according to him, due to lack of political will, have failed to do so. He wondered about the sector’s futuristic equilibrium, which is already compounded by an imagination of what next after cash calls aeon. He urged the unions to be proactive to brain wave towards a model of where the sector should be, when cash-calls’ becomes history to avoid a belated retrogressive fight, if the next level becomes unacceptable to the unions. He charged them (unions) to be prepared, which means, preparing their members’ psychologically and technically for the future, urging them to grow beyond bread and butter struggles and sees the modern world as a community, where knowledge, competition, technology and expertise are what shapes modern day’s development vis a vis deliverables for any sector’s stability and sustainable livelihoods that is globally emerging with a tech-trends and strategic pro-activeness. He added that, he wants to see the sector transformed in order to benefit the people. He further challenged the participants to (constantly) appraise the oil and gas industry, which will help them transit from the traditional methods to something unique that, will replace the traditional methods. He advised those invited to see it as an opportunity for networking and strategising that aims at taking the industry to another level.

At the end of the welcome remarks, participants were divided into 2 groups for the first group work, and tasked to:

*Identify the present state of the oil and gas industry vis a vis issues or related challenges;

*Identify where they want the industry to be in future and how to get there;

 

Participants were advised to avoid political statements throughout the meeting.  Presentation of the group work was shifted to the second day.

The first paper presentation was an overview of the oil and gas industry: challenges and possible solutions. It was taken by Dr Louis Brown Ogbeifun. Objectives of the session were as follows:

 

*to know the brief history of oil and gas industry;

*to know the ongoing oil and gas reforms;

*to appreciate the state and challenges of the oil and gas industry;

*to appreciate the state and challenges of NNPC;

After a brief trajectory of the oil industry’s developmental history, Dr Ogbeifun identified ten challenges, which he hypothesized to include, the Niger Delta crisis, agitations for resource control, divestment/assets offloading, kidnapping/hostage taking, fiscal instability and a general (situational) volatility that gearstick the psychology of most Nigerians. He wondered, whether oil is a blessing or curse to Nigeria, and further lamented that Nigerians have remained in abject poverty with underdevelopment, unemployment and reliance on importation of petroleum products, among others. He opined on the fact that Nigerians have not really benefitted from oil, which has only enriched few powerful people and foreigners. He added that the sharing formula, as well as production (sharing) contracts never truly benefitted the poor or the country in general. He delved into historical perspectives to say, in search of how to benefit from oil, Nigeria joined OPEC, which gave the country a voice. However, from 2016, production and sales crashed, due to militancy and the abandonment of Nigeria’s oil by our major buyers like the US.

About 30 issues are what he identified among problems that need to be addressed in the sector, but said the divestment is the fundamental basis for this round table.

He noted that while divestment may not be the best for the workers as a result of negative impacts, such as, redundancies, among others. However, he said, that IOCs have the right to choose divestment as they need better environment to do their business. He argued that the environment under which they (IOCs) operate, for now, prior to the divestment conundrum has not been conducive. Arguably, according to him, some policies of the government contributed to present day environmental fluxes for the companies, including problems, such as devaluation of the country’s currency, since they (IOCs) depend profoundly on importation for most of the things they do. Participants were informed that as government brings out policies, unions, such as NUPENG and PENGASSAN ought to be (proactively) concerned. It was agreed that unions have the power to turn the industry around for the better, intellectually and otherwise, even without going to the trenches. He challenged them to be proactive and speak up in defence of the industry. Being proactive, will place the unions ahead of time and enable them design safety nets to tackle effects of any policy brought by the government or by the companies. He admonished politely!

He said, with research and investments in agriculture, the country can decide to abandon oil and go with bio fuel. He urged participants to ponder, if the unions are prepared for such a move, which is not impracticable but an evolving tilt that should not be underplayed.

Dr Ogbeifun’s paper encapsulated the fact, the government, as well as the companies can also decide to make the fuel stations automated or could even lift fuel through rails. In that case, members of the unions will loose their jobs. His paper was of the opinion that making the stations automated may end the disparities on figures from different industry players, such as, the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Department of Petroleum Resources (DPR), Nigeria Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (NEITI), International Oil Companies (IOCs), etc …lifting fuel using rail may be considered to tackle the problem of tanker drivers’ incessant strikes. Unions should be concerned about job’s security of  their members, not about redundancy packages that seems attractive, but will eventually not take them anywhere (sustainably) as a result of problems associated with start up businesses, enforcing contracts, multiplicities of taxes, getting credits, electricity, among others.

He talked about reforms in the oil sector with historical dexterity and went memory lane from different governments in Nigeria, but lamented that the problem is on implementations of reforms aimed at making the industry function effectively and able to withstand fiscal shocks or economic deflectors. He said, Nigeria’s oil sector is dying and needs urgent help.

From here, Dr Ogbeifun, a development expert and oil sector’s dynamist, proceeded to his second paper, which was on Organisational Change Management. He began with a psychological leap for participants through flagging the fact; change is an imminent thing in the oil and gas industry in Nigeria, urging the unions to be prepared for it. He said, as management changes, unions should also learn how to change or adapt to changes, just as missions of organisations, visions, research methods or evolutionary thoughts had changed from time to time, which requires strategies. The paper advised participants to use contacts of friends and allies at the policy levels and through government agencies as an influencing tool and strategy to begin to influence needed changes, otherwise; the world will change them or leave them behind. He theorized about internal and external changes and sampled the realities on ground as regards to challenges in the oil industry that require changes to occur. He listed types of change to include; organisational- wide change; subsystem; transformational; incremental; remedial; developmental; planned and unplanned change. Change, according to him, can bring positive or negative results on productivity or clear productivity dip. He armed his audience with the fact; people react to changes in diverse forms; including resistance. Resistance may come as a result of defence, fear of unknown, fear of adaptation. He advised union leaders to begin to think and work towards adapting to changes, which are inevitable in order not to be taken unawares. Union leaders should, in managing organisational changes, work with the management; present employee’s concerns to management; build their trust; engage with management in open and transparent manner; be flexible, show empathy, be proactive and act as business leaders. He said change will succeed, if unions and management agree. It was an intellectualized gift from Dr Ogbeifun’s wealth of experience to his humbled audience.

Comments/questions:

  • Ceasing the rare moment, one of the participant took the floor to commend Dr Ogbeifun’s in-depth knowledge of the sector. He agreed to the fact, attending the event is an eye opener for him, concurring further that, most leaders are never proactive to see change as a consequential circumstances of life. “…we wait till complications come, before we begin to react”. He noted that in 2010, when oil prices started nose-diving, Total’s staff thought the management would begin to come after them in terms of redundancy or downsizing. “The workers quickly started agitations against the number of expatriate staff in the company’s employment, agitating that they (expatriates’) be reduced to lower the effects of the price fall. From about 700 persons, the expatriate staffs were trimmed down to about 200, whilst the local staffs were not affected. He suggested the importance of unions to have research (think tank) organ’s that can always come up with strategies vis a vis solutions. He added his voice to say that labour leaders should learn how to be pro-active.

 

  • Another question from a participant: Talking about change in leadership, is it always advisable to consider total change of leadership of a union?

Expert’s answer: There may be situations, which we may need total change. But as leaders, you need structural leadership to apply, manage and study the challenges and constraints of such… He said, when talking about changes, we need structural changes but for a change of leadership, there should be cautioned… Wiping out the entire leadership will create vacuum. New teams that may take over may not have where to fall back on institutional memories, that is; if systematic pillars are wiped out, which therefore portrays such change-strategy as counter-productive. There should be transitory information flow.

 

After this session, participants were given 6 minutes break, thereafter, Chika Onuegbu (former TUC Chairman in Rivers State) took the floor for the third presentation. His presentation was entitled: The Funding Regimes In The Nigerian Oil and Gas Industry: Challenges, Failures and Panacea. Chika Onuegbu, (a renowned Labour Activist) started his presentation with a commendation to the organisers of the program. He applauded the timing of this program as strategic, in view of the crises in the oil and gas sector. He noted that one of the greatest challenges confronting Nigeria’s oil industry is funding, saying; funding regimes and methodology adopted several years back are obscured, inadequate and unsustainable. His presentation bewailed the factors concerning previous targets of the past, such as, eliminating gas flaring by 2008, increasing crude production to 4mbpd in 2010 and raising crude oil reserves to 40bn barrels by 2010, which had all drooped due to funding issues. He said, with JVs funding benchmark at 15 billion USD per year and cash calls arrears mounting to over 9 billion USD as at 2016, regrettably, has thrown Nigeria into serious problems. He enumerated about historical contexture of funding regimes used at different periods, such as, Joint Venture Agreement (JVAs), Production Sharing Contracts (PSC), Service Contracts (SC) and Sole Risks (SR). He shared the fact, since the JV’s arrangements are unincorporated; the operators are not permitted to secure funds from the capital market. Sourcing funds from International Banks will attract huge interests, he said. Saliently, he lamented about government’s inability to meet up with its own contributions to the JV funding architecture, therefore, resorting to alternative funding models in its search for ways to overcome the challenges of Joint Venture funding. Such methods, includes; Crude Swap, 3rd Party’s Financing, Lifting Arrangements and Modified Lifting Arrangement. These alternatives also posed their own problems, further compounding such special purposed quick-wins and leaving a trailed of complications to this present day…

Comrade Unuegbu recommended (implementable) legislations as a long term solution to the dilemma. He reminded the gathering, that such, legislative processes commenced as far back as year 2000, through a processed that later led to the introduction of the Petroleum Industry’s Bill (PIB), currently renamed, Petroleum Industry Governance Bill (PIGB). He believed the PIGB has had up to 7 different versions, thereby; becoming confusing and unclear, which version the government wants to work with. He recommended that as contained in the PIGB, government should divest its shares in the JVs funding structure.

At about 1.30pm, a short break was taken, followed by a Press Briefing by the Convener of AfriTAL, Dr Louis Brown Ogbeifun. Several journalists from both electronic and the print media participated at the briefing.

After the media briefing that lasted for 20 minutes, Comrade Chika Onuegbu proceeded with his session at winding down his presentation. He urged the unions to ensure they interrogate what is emerging concerning the PIGB, to avoid the unions to be taken by surprise. He said the content of the Bill should be scrutinised at ensuring interest of workers and the communities are taken care of, adding, that interest of workers should include job security. He urges the unions to put in their best to ensure the passage of the PIGB, which; of course, has to be peoples, workers and community friendly. 

Session ended at 2.05 pm.

Questions/comments: 

  • One of the participants commended Comrade Chika Onuegbu for the presentation, which he described as “very rich” and went ahead to say that the unclear nature of Incorporated JV is very worrisome and unacceptable from the union’s perspective. He said it amounts to government, cunningly, trying to take over the companies from the IOCs. He said it is a bad omen for government to try a takeover under circumstances unclear to the union and a section of Nigerians.
  • One of the resource persons (Chuka Mordi) in his comment, suggested that the government should be allowed navigate the route of Incorporated Joint Ventures. However, he suggested, that efforts should be channelled on how such can incorporate the welfare of the workers. Arguing that, union members should be given money and opportunity to participate. He re-echoed on the fact, unions should design strategies to force the government to listen and operationalise the IJVs appropriately.

 

  • Dr Ogbeifun intervened at this juncture. He informed everyone that there is nothing wrong by saying; there are variances in the IJVs. If government insists it must be by IJV, then, labour should force them to do so appropriately in a way it will favour workers and Nigerians.

 

  • Another participant also took the floor to reinforce the point by saying, workers should be given opportunity to own shares in the IJVs.

 

  • Comrade Chika Unuegbu, took the floor and said clearly, that the IJV model is a takeover of the IOCs. He pointed out the fact, it has been suggested to government to reduce its equity shareholdings and also use the LNG model, but government is not keen on following the suggestions. He said, the IJV is not mentioned in the PIGB, but they only talk of divestment. He said the unions should strive to ensure such be crafted into the Bill. He argued further that such could be a good model but has to be handled cautiously and went ahead to suggest for the unions to make sure the government removes contentious section(s) from (the PIG) Bill.

 

  • Another participant asked about how workers and Nigerians, in general, can make inputs into how IOCs budget and quotations for their operations are directed? He pointed to an information concerning 2016, when they (workers) had issues about a JV funding as a result of high production costs that was quoted by the IOCs. He asked to know how such can be check mated?

 

  • Responding, Comrade Chika Unuegbu acknowledged the importance of team’s spirit, insisting that everyone has a role to play concerning circumstances such as narrated. Advising that the role of government is to ensure prices are benchmark to international standard. However, he said, the problem with benchmarking is that, there are things, which constitute production cost here, but not in other climes. On electricity, health allowance, etc, he implores the unions to do more at balancing interest of its members through dialogue with the government and the IOCs.

 

By 2.40PM, there was lunch break, which ended at about 3.45pm.

 

Riding from the exhilaration of the lunch break, participants were divided into 3 syndicate groups. Each group’s task was to do a synopsis of the 3 presentations made, bring out their thoughts concerning issues thrown up from the presentations on what to do after now? How to? When to? Whom to?

 

Presentations of each group’s work were to be made on the morning of the second day. Each group’s were told to choose a leader and a secretary.

 

On the task-mandate for each group, group 1 was to work on paper 3, which covers fiscal regime and funding (auxiliary and otherwise), in oil and gas industry in Nigeria: failures, challenges and panacea by Chika onuegbu

Group 2 was to work on paper 1, which is overview of Nigeria’s oil and gas industry: challenges and solutions by Dr Louis Brown Ogbeifun.

Group 3 was to look at paper 2, which was on organizational change management by Dr Louis Brown Ogbeifun.

 

The Lead Facilitator informed the audience that the last paper, being paper 4, would be presented the next day (Day 2), and thereafter, shall be dissected at plenary, after the presentation. Day one proceedings was brought to a closed at 4:06 PM.

 

PROCEEDINGS OF DAY 2- THURSDAY, APRIL 27, 2017

Day Two was declared open at 9.55AM by Dr Louis Brown Ogbuifun.  The Convener commended participants for their robust participation the previous day. He further commended the 3 groups by acknowledging their commitment at the plenary, informing the meeting that he’s on receipt of all the groups’ presentations. In view of this, group presentations commenced with group 1. Each group was given 10 minutes with Styvn Obodoekwe appointed as time keeper.

 

Comrade Efe presented on behalf of Group 1. (Please refer to this group’s report):

After his presentation, a member of the group added, that corruption in leadership has led to youths’ restiveness in oil producing communities.  According to him, such habit disrupts oil producing activities, even with fatalities. He summated the points, by urging for transparency to be guaranteed with the PIGB, which is already before the National Assembly. He emphasized for youth’s employment to be encapsulated in the Bill, praying that, whatever model of funding that shall be adopted, should be backed with necessary political will.

 

Group 2 (Please refer to this group’s report):

Comrade Wada presented for this group. The group looked at the overview of the oil and gas sector. They had grouped all the identified challenges into 6 clusters as follows, which is in their group’s report.

 

Questions, Comments and Observations:

  • A participant observed that the government wants to sell off refineries and are firstly declaring them dead in order to sell them at give away prices. He implored the unions to follow up with the government to ensure that, as they sell old refineries, new ones are set up. He said, Nigerians are tired of hearing that our refineries are old. They should be sold off with the government mandate to build new ones.

 

  • Another participant responded that oil sector’s unions are not saying, “Do not sale the refineries”. But are simply saying, “Do not sell as dead refineries”. We are now saying, “Do not sell as scraps”. If they sell as scrap, they will only sell at give away prices to enrich the buyers at the expense of the country…We want investors to be allowed to invest in modular refineries. He further said, Nigeria can privatise, but let the process be opened and let Nigerians and the workers participate.

 

  • Equally, another participant added that the unions should learn from failures and successes of privatisation and should begin a campaign for employees and communities to be co-owners companies. The participant further said, the unions should be concerned about whom the companies are to be sold to… Such should be to those, who have interest at making the companies to work.
  • A participant lamented about lack of transparency and honesty, saying, as justification for increasing fuel pump prices, the government promised that increased in fuel prices would make refineries to work. “Yet, we have experienced series of increases over the years and we are now at N145 per litre, yet, refineries have refused to work”. We should begin to hold them accountable, using their own pronouncement..

 

  • Government had always claimed that they are removing subsidies; such is deceptive, because the only thing they do is to adjust prices, while they continue to service the subsidies; unions should insist that these deceptions should end. Another participant insisted. Adding, that as unions, we should begin to challenge or scrutinise our traditional views. We should begin to proffer alternatives to whatever polices, actions or issues, which we’ve said no to.

 

Group 3 (Please see this group’s report)

Chuka Mordi was the presenter on behalf of group 3.

The group noted that, it is important to have a framework of change management within the oil and gas sector’s union and for the society, generally. This group adopted the contextual basis that, if union leaders fail to change proactively, they will be left behind, since as union leaders they are expected to have strategies of participating in progress of change. They observed that since year 2000 or thereabout, sector’s union have been agitating against privatisation, but they have not as unions, visited any of the privatised companies to find out how the workers are faring. They advised the unions need to visit them. It was further presented by this group, the need to re-prioritise issues; the need to get consultants for expertise; and the needs for independent valuers, including the need to start reading to be able to engage properly.

 

Questions, Comments and Observation:

  • This group was commended for their ability to spot out the failings of union leaders towards change management. They noted that this roundtable, as a platform/forum has brought another opportunity for stakeholders to begin the journey towards change.
  • It was suggested that the unions need to do a research on the privatised companies, to know why they failed or succeeded, as the case may be.

Other posers thrown from this group’s work were;

  • Where does the money realised from privatisation of companies go to? What value does it add?
  • How do the unions monitor the process, including, monitoring the services provided by the privatised entities and monitor the values added?
  • Unions were challenged to begin to interrogate the government on these issues, using the Freedom of Information Act.
  • It was agreed that unions need to arm themselves with information as part of readiness for change;
  • Change should start with union leaders and be transmitted to members. ,
  • Finally on group’s work, a participant said, it is important that unions should be mindful of the type of people they elect as leaders, so to be sure that such persons have the capacity to deal with change. He reminded the audience that a good leader can know whom to delegate duties to at any time, including research in order to achieve the desired result. It was noted, however, that many leaders have been hit by the Nigerian factor, making them not to have interest in the unions, but are more concern about what they could gain…

 

The syndicate group presentations ended at 11.31AM, with participants permitted to have a tea break   that ended at 12.04PM. All the groups were commended for a job well done!

 

Session 4: Analysis of the UJV vs IJV and the migration imperatives, by Chuka Mordi.

Just like other sections, this session was insightful and revealed instances, where Nigeria had lost billions of dollars as a result of divestments. The session’s facilitator tried to clarify differences between UJV vs IJV models, factually insisting that the joint ventures, which Nigeria has with the IOCs are unincorporated. He explained that with UJV, funding cannot be sourced at the stock market, unlike the IJV. He revealed that Nigeria is migrating from UJV to IJV, which he said is a better way of running JVs or related companies, saying, such are better models for raising funds. He said a funding structure can be moved from UJV to IJV without divestment, but that the government may decide to divest its stakes on the IJV. He noted further that the IJV is a common practice across the world for dealing with joint ventures. He disclosed that Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) will soon be privatised, whether the unions or anybody else likes it or not. “The process of privatising the NNPC has already begun”, he cautioned. This expert is of the view that what the IJV does is that, the joint venture, now given a name and incorporated as a public company could be listed in the stock market. He said the concern of unions should be on how to ensure their members benefit. He said unions should use their powers to canvass for an opportunity, where each member should be empowered with funds and opportunities to participate in the process to be (part) owners of the NNPC. He said anybody, who owns shares in a company has stake in it. Pondering further, that unions should be concerned about transparency, accountability and transfer of wealth to the workers and the public. He advised the unions to get to the National Assembly to find out the version of the PIGB they are planning to pass, urging them to move fast, because the National Assembly will soon pass the bill.

 

Questions, Comments and Observation:

  • Chuka was commended for the well researched and eye-opening presentation. A participant said, it is too bad that Nigeria has lost too much money from divestment since 2010. He said, unions should take advantage of the PIGB and ask that Nigeria moves to IJV and that unions and its members must be allowed and empowered to participate and retain certain percentage of shares. Other comments, interventions, observations and questions were:
  • IJV should be our best option; we should change our approach and intensify our lobby for the PIGB to be modified and passed.
  • A participant asked, if the migration from UJV to IJVs option is a proposal or is already factored into the PIGB? He was told it has gone beyond proposal, but is already what the government has planned to do. It is in the Bill that government should take all its JV assets and put in one company and within 5 years, sell not less than 10 percent of these assets holdings. BPE is ever ready to privatise as that is its job.

 

Clarifications:

  • It is clear that within 5 years, government will sell NNPC assets. In line with this, the unions should:
  • Insist on transparency, if these entities must be privatise;
  • There should be investment in acquiring national assets;
  • Unions should use pressures as a tool to demand transparency and accountability;
  • A question was asked, at what point should the unions react? Are they to wait until the IJV is put in the constitution before reacting?
  • Answer: the unions should act fast and should not wait.

 

  • A female participant lamented that the unions are in a dilemma. She said they have tried very hard to make inputs in the PIGB, but the National Assembly is not allowing that…
  • She was told not to lose hope but to continue to engage them. It was advised; unions should be more aggressive in engagements, spread their reach of influence and employ lobbying techniques.
  • Unions were told to look at the IJV arrangement and see how to engage in a way it can benefit the oil workers. They should not be focused on the benefits to individual companies at the moment, but to focus on benefits for oil and gas workers.
  • Question: In the past, it was known that there was PSC in place. Cash calls were also known. But today, what is in place?
  • Response from another participant: It is just confusing… They have said they have abolished cash calls, but JVs comes through Cash calls. Cash calls were still in place up to Dec 2016; and from Jan 2017, no more Cash calls. It becomes similar to PSC’s cost recovery between government and the IOCs. Produce, recover cost, share profits arrangement has been tried in the past and it has never been fair to Nigeria. It was never transparent. Government’s monitoring has never been effective. What should we do to ensure fairness and transparency?

 

  • Way forward for unions: If they initiate any funding model, unions should bring models or suggestions on how to make it work. Secondly, collective bargaining agreements (CBAs) should be reviewed to include, workers’ job security in case of divestments.

 

  • There are always problems of reconciliation between the government and the IOCs. How do we handle this?
  • Answer: We must insist on having effective metering system.

 

At about 1.48pm, participants went for a lunch break, which ended at 2.41PM.

 

Resolutions:

Wada, Adamu Song and Chuka were called to facilitate a resolution session aimed at addressing challenges of the oil and gas sector. At the end of the session, resolution was agreed upon (see the resolutions).

 

 Certification:

Certificate of participation was presented to each of the participants. Dr Louis Brown Ogbeifun was assisted by some of the participants to present the certificates. He congratulated them on their effective participation and robust contributions, while the conference lasted.

 

CLosing remarks:

Closing remarks was offered by the Convener. He thanked the participants for their contributions and interest in the affairs of the oil and gas industry and assured them that the forum was a beginning of engagements aimed at salvaging Nigeria’s oil and gas sector.

 

Vote of thanks was given by Comrade Onitan on behalf of all the participants. He thanked the organisers for the Roundtable. He re-echoed the fact, the meeting was indeed, an eye opener for them and a good learning process, which a lots has been learnt. He assured the organisers that the dream will not end as the meeting closes. He urged all the participants to see themselves as the first set of apostles to salvage the sector. He admonished all to keep in touch and regularly interact with one another in the spirit of the struggle….

 

Closing prayers were offered by a Muslim and a Christian, after which, a solidarity song was sang to bring this important historic event to an end. A group photograph was taken, with contacts exchanged.

 

Deliverables:

Press statement was presented to the media;

Resolutions adopted;

Certificate of participation issued to participants.

Results:

Resolved to revive NUPENGASSAN;

Resolved to work as a team.