Nigeria’s port regulator says INTELS waived $193m to resolve stalemate on boat contract
Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA) on Sunday said INTELS Nigeria Limited has waived $193 million as part of efforts to resolve the stalemate on the service pilotage contract with the Federal Government.
NPA insisted that the agreement reached with INTELS was done in national interest, adding that revenue generation will increase as a result of the effort.
NPA also praised the Minister of Marine and Blue Economy, Adegbeyega Oyetola for working to ensure that the crisis is resolved.
Read Also: Book Review: STEPPING ON TOES My Odyssey at the Nigerian Ports Authority by Hadiza Bala Usman
The minister NPA said, was disheartened by the needless loss of revenue as a result of the impasse, adding that the minister showed concern and patriotism in resolving the dispute.
The port regulatory agency said Nigeria will save $326.895 million from the agreement it reached with INTELS on the contentious pilotage contract.
It stated that the Federal Government will earn a benefit to the tune of over $500,000,000, – taking into consideration the interest waiver of $193,317,556; the reduction in interest rate on the outstanding debt from six-months LIBOR rate + 6.5 percent to six-months SOFR rate + three percent, the spread of the repayment of the debt over 15 years, with the first two years interest-free and the reduction in commission from 28 percent to 24.5 percent.
In a statement tagged, ‘Setting the Record Straight in Respect of Service Boat Monitoring Operation in Nigerian Ports Authority: Reinstatement of INTELS Nigeria Limited as Management Agent,’ NPA decried the misinterpretation in a section of the media, citing a letter issued by the Port Manager, Lagos Port Complex, Apapa and addressed to shipping companies on the matter.
NPA said, “It has become necessary to put the record straight for the benefit of the public and the generality of stakeholders in the port industry. This is also to avoid distortions and conjectures, which may arise by reason of wrong interpretation of the aforementioned letter.”
