The African Democratic Congress (ADC) has criticised the £746 million port rehabilitation agreement signed by President Bola Tinubu during his recent state visit to the United Kingdom, describing it as a “mugu deal” that favours the British economy at Nigeria’s expense.
In a statement issued on Sunday and signed by its National Publicity Secretary, Bolaji Abdullahi, the opposition party argued that the agreement, which targets the rehabilitation of Tin Can and Apapa ports in Lagos, could leave Nigeria with significant debt while delivering more economic benefits to the UK.
The ADC alleged that the Federal Government was misrepresenting the deal as a diplomatic success, insisting instead that it primarily serves British industrial interests.
READ MORE:ADC starts sale of forms ahead of national conventio
Peter Obi expresses uncertainty over ADC presidential ticket ahead of 2027 elections
“While the APC government has tried to pass off the deal as President Tinubu’s major achievement, it is in fact an achievement of the UK Government, which, through this deal, has managed to save its steel industry, protect thousands of UK jobs, and get Nigeria to pay for it,” Abdullahi said.
According to the party, the agreement is structured as a commercial loan facilitated through the United Kingdom Export Finance (UKEF) Buyer Credit Facility and arranged by Citibank, London branch. It explained that under such arrangements, loans obtained by foreign governments are used largely to procure goods and services from UK-based companies.
Citing details available on the UK government’s website, the ADC noted that at least £236 million from the total contract value would go to British firms, while British Steel is expected to supply 120,000 tonnes of steel billets under a £70 million contract.
The party expressed concern that the terms of the deal appear to ensure that a substantial portion of the funds would be retained within or repatriated to the UK.
“In simple terms, UKEF guarantees a loan obtained by a foreign buyer from a commercial bank, which is then used to pay for UK goods and services, with the bank paying the UK exporter directly on behalf of the buyer,” Abdullahi stated.
The ADC further warned that the agreement could put Nigeria at a disadvantage, accusing the government of prioritising “pomp and pageantry” over national interest.
“The Nigerian government has entered into an agreement that leaves the country at a clear disadvantage, seemingly in exchange for a few hours of pomp and pageantry,” the statement added.
The party also raised several questions about the transparency and structure of the deal, including the interest rates, repayment terms, level of local content, job creation prospects, and provisions for skills transfer.
“What percentage of local goods, services, and subcontracting is involved in the port rehabilitation project? How many direct and indirect jobs will be created for Nigerians?” Abdullahi queried.
It also sought clarification on the project timeline, training opportunities, limits on expatriate staff, and whether there are defined quotas for small and medium enterprises and community benefits.
The ADC urged the Federal Government to disclose full details of the agreement, warning that failure to do so could reinforce public suspicion about its fairness.
“If the APC government has answers to these questions, it should make them available to Nigerians. Otherwise, Nigerians are justified in concluding that… the agreement resembles a colonial-era treaty,” Abdullahi said.
The Federal Government has yet to respond to the ADC’s claims as of the time of filing this report.
