Babatunde Irukera, Executive Vice-Chairman/Chief Executive Officer Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC)
By Isaac Asabor
If there is any message that the leadership of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) has repeatedly conveyed to manufacturers and service providers, in line with its consumer education policy, it is unarguably the one that says that “Consumer Education’ is a shared responsibility, in order words that ‘Consumer Education’ is everybody’s business.
Ostensibly agreeing with the position of the commission, Jeff Imudia, a marketer, “When consumers buy a product or service, they rarely have perfect knowledge of its quality and safety. Rather, they are justifiably concerned about getting “ripped off”, thus the need for consumer protection.
He added economic activity flourishes when consumers can trust producers, but the consumer must have grounds for trust.
He explained that consumers value not only quality and safety, but also the assurance of quality and safety, and that trust depends on assurance.
Ostensibly to buttress his position, he said: “Free markets generate numerous forms of assurance. While it may be impossible to verify the quality of prospective transactions, you can often verify that of past transactions. Reports circulate in various forms, from informal gossip to carefully tended data banks and evaluations, generating a producer’s reputation”.
For the sake of clarity, “Reputation” may be defined as the relevant current opinion of the producer’s trustworthiness.
At this juncture, it is expedient to say that producers gain by providing assurance, so they seek to build, expand, and project a good reputation.
They create and display brand names, logos, and trademarks, umbrellas under which their transactions are grouped in the minds of consumers.
They manage the extent and scope of their services to generate the repetition and pattern of dealings that give their name and reputation cogency.
Once established, a good reputation can be extended to other lines of service where trust had previously been limited.
Gasoline suppliers, for example, built brand names so motorists would trust the product at roadside filling stations, and then extended the trusted name to automotive services. Conversely, a producer’s failings or misdeeds damage his reputation and induce consumers to shun him.
Babatunde Irukera, Executive Vice-Chairman/Chief Executive Officer of the commission in response to question in a recent interview conducted by DAILY INDEPENDENT said, “As long as the challenges persist, we will continue to sensitise the industry on the need to mitigate these challenges.
“We never relent in making it clear to industry that the responsibility of protecting their customers primarily rests on their shoulders, and also that protection of consumers cannot be supplementary to their business, rather it must be the core of their business.
“We have continued to insist that consumer education is a shared responsibility, especially because they have messages that are peculiar to their operations, and which they can apply in a manner consumers understand best, and have created the most effective channels to reach all in advertising. In fact, they must deploy both tools to educate consumers about their rights and what protection is available”.
According to Mr. Robert Ebiowei, “If Nigerians in various businesses of offering their products or services to consumers have been considerate as to the quality of products or services they offer to consumers as been pushed by FCCPC through its efforts in consumer education, the prevailing fuel crisis would not have occurred in the first place”.
As gathered, and widely reported, the contaminated petrol was reported to have being contaminated with higher than normal concentrates of methanol that was shipped into Nigeria through NNPC’s oil trading arm, Duke Oil in the last week of January 2022.
The disclosure, which was conveyed in a statement by MRS Oil Nigeria Plc on Wednesday February 9, 2022, and titled “PMS Contamination in MRS Retail Station.”, unmistakably stated that it is not an importer of contaminated PMS into the country, nor does MRS sell substandard products, adding that the PMS they received contained up to 20% methanol.
The company said it became expedient for it to respond following several speculations on social media platforms and in other national dailies as being solely responsible for the importation and distribution of substandard and contaminated Premium Motor Spirits (PMS) in the country.
It said, “For this reason, the management of MRS writes to inform the public of the facts which has resulted in product scarcity in the country
“Due to current subsidy regime, NNPC is the sole importer of all PMS in Nigeria. Consequently, NNPC through their trading arm Duke Oil, supplied a cargo of PMS purchased from international trader Litasco and delivered it with the Motor Tanker (MT) Nord Gainer.
MRS added that the vessel discharged at Apapa between 24th to 30th January 2022, with MRS receiving 5,000mt, and the highest allocation going to Total and OVH at 10,000mt each.
MRS says it distributed the product to 8 stations in Lagos, however, following delivery “observed that the product appeared hazy and dark” and immediately directed that further sales should be stopped and the product isolated.
“The product analysis revealed that PMS discharged by the MT Nord Gainer has 20% methanol, which is an illegal substance in Nigeria.
“Alchol/ethanol is not permitted to be mixed with PMS specification. We immediately informed NNPC, and it was confirmed that other members has similar experiences,” it said.
As at the time of releasing the Statement, the company said there were still 350,000 litres in tanks at 8 stations and awaiting regulatory approval for the return of the product.
MRS said it will continue to work with NNPC and NMDPRA, for the evacuation of the contaminated product to NNPC, who is the sole supplier of the product.
“We are aware that NNPC has taken necessary steps to reject further imports of this product from Litasco/Duke Oil and/or any other trader, supplying fuels which contain ethanol/methanol into Nigeria.
The allegation reported against the company that MRS imported contaminated products, is therefore mischievous, false and untrue. MRS is not an importer of this contaminated PMS into the country, nor does MRS sell substandard products,” it added.
Be that as it may, the fact remains that Nigerians in the businesses of offering either products or services to Nigerians are not consumer-centric in adherence to FCCP’s consistent advocacy by through its consumer education.
It would be recalled that after the damages have being done that it is the same FCCPC that seemingly had its messages ignored was the same commission that engaged relevant regulatory agencies under the energy sector to uncover the leakage and source of the adulterated Premium Motor Spirit (PMS), popularly known as petrol, into some parts of the country.
In performing its constitutional roles in this regard, it can be conjectured that resources that would have been expended to other needs of the commission were spent on an avoidable crisis caused by unscrupulous businessmen.
It would also be recalled that in the apogee of the crisis that Irukera in a statement said FCCPC is aware that a certain but limited quantity of Premium Motor Spirit (PMS) that does not comply with established, applicable, and prevailing standards has been distributed and sold in certain parts of Nigeria.
As unrelenting as the leadership of FCCP is, Irukera when asked, about the key challenges FCCPC is faced with in the interview mentioned in this context, he responded that “The key challenges include how vast our nation is and the nature and scope of resources to fully protect consumers; both from a human capital standpoint and otherwise, and added that it is challenging educating consumers to the point of sufficient sophistication and full understanding of their rights, considering literacy and access levels, especially farther away from urban areas”.
He, however, assured that as long as the challenges persist, the commission will continue to sensitise the industry on the need to mitigate those challenges, and insisted that his team will never relent in making it clear to industry that the responsibility of protecting their customers primarily rests on their shoulders, and also that protection of consumers cannot be supplementary to their businesses, rather it must be the core of their businesses.
He said: “We have continued to insist that consumer education is a shared responsibility, especially because they have messages that are peculiar to their operations, and which they can apply in a manner consumers understand best, and have created the most effective channels to reach all in advertising. In fact, they must deploy both tools to educate consumers about their rights and what protection is available.”
