Part of the debate – in the House of Lords at 6:52 pm on 18 April 2006.
My Lords, I begin by thanking you for your good wishes for the speedy recovery of my noble friend Lord Avebury. I will ensure that those thoughts are passed on to him, and am equally sure he will be fortified by your concerns.
My contribution will raise three issues, as briefly as I can. In particular, we need to look in more detail at the problems of corruption, which has been endemic in Nigeria for some decades. I will comment on the economic developments in the Niger delta, and finally on the implications for good governance of moves to amend the constitution to allow an incumbent president to continue his term of office.
To put tackling corruption in context, it would help to refer your Lordships to the recently published report of the All-Party Group on Africa, The Other Side of the Coin—the UK and Corruption in Africa. Corruption is a two-way issue. This group, of which I have the privilege of being vice-chairman, found that in evidence gathered for its report Nigeria sadly featured prominently. As the noble Lord, Lord Lea of Crondall, mentioned, Nigeria's past leaders have scaled new heights in unprecedented levels of embezzlement from the state. The national Economic and Financial Crimes Commission believes that in Nigeria some £220 billion was stolen or misused by the country's rulers between 1960 and 1999.
As the All-Party Group on Africa points out, prior to becoming president, Olusegun Obasanjo said in a letter to the Financial Times back in 1994:
"I shudder at how an integral part of my continent's culture can be taken as a basis for rationalising otherwise despicable behaviour . . . In no society is it acceptable to the people for their leaders to feather their own nests at public expense".
That was a very brave statement to be made by him at that time. He should be commended for trying his best to live by those thoughts.
President Obasanjo has been making strenuous efforts at federal level within the constraints of the Nigerian constitution to tackle corruption and introduce greater transparency—aided, it must be said, by action by our Government through the extractive industries transparency initiative.
Nigerians have welcomed the president's moves but, not surprisingly, many have yet to be convinced that they are seeing the end of the all-pervasive corruption system that has held Nigeria back for so long. Human rights lawyers in Nigeria claim that the society is permeated with corruption and that it will take more than a few high-profile sackings to make a difference, particularly when the sackings come against a backdrop of political infighting over who will be the ruling party's presidential candidate in the 2007 elections.
There was a hope that with the current president nearing the end of his second term and excluded from standing again, and free from concerns over pleasing his political allies, he would finally grasp the vicious nettle and seriously address institutional corruption. That would probably be the best possible legacy he could leave his country. Moves to change the constitution to allow him to stand for a third term have, I fear, rather diminished those hopes.
Tackling corruption also requires positive action from governments and institutions in the developed world. In this regard, I stress that the United Kingdom is a signatory to several binding international anti-corruption conventions. The Government have endorsed the report of the Commission for Africa, declaring it to be part of UK policy. Through that report's recommendations, the Government are committed to a range of measures to increase transparency in a wide range of transactions in commerce, industry and services.
President Obasanjo has played a leading role in establishing NePAD, with its emphasis on good governance, the rule of law, transparency and peer review, throughout the African continent. Given, therefore, that both the United Kingdom and the Nigerian Governments are so strongly committed to the same ends, I hope that the Minister will be able to tell your Lordships what steps have been taken recently by the Government, in consultation with Nigeria, towards achieving these aims.
On economic development in the delta region, the Nigerian economy is almost entirely driven by oil production. However, the lack of transparency means it is impossible to determine how much the Nigerian Government actually receive from this production and where that money is spent. The Niger delta region is, of course, the heart of oil production, accounting for more than 50 per cent of gross government revenues.
The oil companies face significant problems in transporting the oil to market. Major losses occur from the delta's massive pipeline system through the practice of "bunkering". This organised theft accounts for losses of between 100,000 and 200,000 barrels of oil a day, costing Nigeria up to £2.5 billion per year in lost revenues.
The all-party group on the Niger delta reports that, according to Shell, government action has resulted in the capture of 32 barges and six ships involved in the illegal trade of bunkering oil. Given the scale of these crimes, however, clearly much more needs to be done. International co-operation, along the lines to which the United Kingdom Government are strongly and publicly committed, is essential.
Efforts are being made at federal level, and the United Kingdom is promoting transparency of oil revenues through the extractive industries transparency initiative. However, there are institutional difficulties, particularly constitutional limits on federal action. Perhaps inevitably, destructive tensions have developed between the oil companies and local communities, and it is not helped by the extent of the criminal bunkering activities.
There are many individuals and groups seeking power by posing as champions of the people, demanding a greater share of oil wealth for their homelands. There are plenty of disgruntled youths whose anger can be exploited by these people. These self-professed people's champions, crucially, are able to maintain their sway through access to arms. The illegal trade in small arms seems endemic throughout west Africa, and its proliferation in the Niger delta must be a major concern to the federal and United Kingdom authorities.
I see the noble Lord, Lord Triesman, is here tonight. In his response to the Niger delta group in early January, he said that the Government were considering what support they could give. Could he provide an update on progress in the past three months? In particular, what progress has been made on identifying weapons types and their origin? Can he advise whether any UK companies have had applications for strategic export licences refused because of concerns that their eventual end use would be unregulated, and in fact they would be used in Nigeria?
The people of the delta are well aware of the huge wealth generated by oil, of which they see virtually nothing. Profits are siphoned off at various levels of federal and state government and by a criminal fraternity, in a perpetual cycle of corruption. The process demonstrates emphatically and dangerously that politics can be a route to enormous wealth, not just to power. The destabilising impact on government and the resentment generated against the oil companies and community leaders seen to be in league with the oil companies is self-evident. In consequence, this breeding ground for resentment and despair plays into the hands of the unscrupulous, ready to exploit those tensions in ways that can only damage the source of wealth itself. As the all-party group on the Niger delta emphasises, the ones who suffer are the people of the Niger delta and ultimately Nigeria as a whole.
Finally, I turn to the issue of the forthcoming presidential elections and moves to amend the constitution to remove the bar on the president standing for a third term. It is right to say that we should approach this issue somewhat delicately. After all, who are we to tell other democratic countries how to run their affairs? Nevertheless, some of your Lordships will be aware of the heat that this has generated in many quarters and will no doubt have received only today a communication from a group calling itself the Nigerian Democratic Movement, based in Maryland, USA.
For the record, the NDM is expressing fears that the ruling party is in fact seeking not one additional four-year term for Mr Obasanjo, but an additional 12 years—presidency for life in all but name. As would be expected, the NDM has supplied a raft of excerpts from across the range of Nigerian professional and civil society vehemently opposing these moves. It is not possible to corroborate these excerpts, but it is interesting that a study of reports by the BBC monitoring service for west Africa—in which I have great faith for accuracy—over the past few months confirms strong opposition to changes to the constitution from throughout society in Nigeria. The opposition ranges from Christian leaders in the north urging the president not to seek a third term, to militants in the Niger delta in the south threatening to engage the federal government in guerrilla warfare if he does not desist.
In the light of the UK Government's previous support for President Obasanjo and his professed belief in good governance, the rule of law and democratic accountability, I would hope that we could have from the Minister a detailed account of the Government's reaction to what many will see as a series of unsettling and, to say the least, challenging developments.