The African Democratic Congress says the £746 million deal between the United Kingdom and Nigeria, signed during President Bola Tinubu’s visit to London, mostly benefits the UK, which already sells more to Nigeria than it buys.
The party says the government is presenting the agreement to fix Tin Can and Apapa ports in Lagos as a big win, but in reality it is a commercial loan with strict conditions that keep much of the money in the UK or send it back there.
Details on the UK government website describe the deal as a strong boost for UK manufacturing. The funding will come through UK Export Finance using its Buyer Credit Facility and is arranged by Citibank in London.
UK Export Finance is the UK government agency that supports exports. Its system allows foreign buyers to take loans from banks to purchase UK goods and services, especially for large projects that must include a lot of UK input.
In simple terms, the UK guarantees the loan, the bank pays British companies directly, and Nigeria repays the loan.
Under the deal, at least £236 million in contracts will go to British companies. British Steel will supply 120,000 tonnes of steel worth £70 million, its biggest export order under this scheme, for the port upgrades.
The ADC says it is worried Nigeria accepted a deal that puts it at a disadvantage, possibly for the sake of image and foreign approval, while many Nigerians still face poverty, unemployment, and insecurity.
The party says key details are still unclear. These include how long Nigeria will take to repay the loan, the interest rate, and the full repayment terms. It also questions how much of the project will involve local materials and services, how many jobs will go to Nigerians, and when the ports will be completed and fully working.
Other concerns include whether there will be training and skill transfer for Nigerians, limits on foreign workers, and clear roles for small local businesses and community benefits.
The ADC says if the government has answers, it should share them. If not, Nigerians may see the deal as similar to old colonial agreements, risking the country’s future for limited gain.
