The Nation Newspaper

Tag: timely

  • Propertymart pledges timely, quality homes

    Propertymart Real Estate Investment Ltd has assured prospective home owners of its commitment to timely delivery of quality houses at its Cityview Estate in Arepo, Ogun State and other home ownership projects across Nigeria.

    The firm assured investors that all ongoing housing units would be completed and handed over to them before the end of 2019.

    Managing Director Deji Fasunwon, who spoke on the firm’s milestones, said Propertymart had delivered over 85 per cent of houses across all its housing projects in key cities and towns in Nigeria.

    He said: “Propertymart is a significant player in the Nigerian real estate sector, and since 2008, we have provided real estate solutions in Lagos, Ogun and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT).

    “Our key housing projects include Cityview Estate, Arepo; Edensville Estate, Simawa; Fairmont Apartment, Lekki; and Fairmont Hilltop, Alagbado among others.”

    Fasunwon praised clients for their patience and promised that the company was focussed on its mission of assisting Nigerians to achieve their dreams of becoming home owners.

    He explained that though Propertymart, like many businesses, experienced the harsh operating environment occasioned by the 2016 economic recession, it has consistently looked inwards and innovatively devised ways to achieve its objectives of ensuring client satisfaction.

    “As a company with integrity, the management refused to do what an average real estate company in such situation would do; like asking its customers to come and pay more for the houses they had subscribed to, or refund the monies received from customers. The company believed that of more importance is the achievement of the dreams of its customers, irrespective of the challenges of the times. Rather than the company exploring the easy way out, it decided to ensure whatever it took to deliver properties subscribed to by its customers.

    “One major step taken by the company was to dispose of some of its stock trade meant to be reserved for profit in the future. These included plots of land in prime locations in some of its estates and also some of its other properties. These efforts are yielding good results as it has resulted in delivering properties to customers…”

    “The company is constrained to work with only a few reliable and trusted contractors to ensure quality to its customers. The effect of this delay, expectedly, led to dissatisfaction of many of the customers who had subscribed to different products and were expecting delivery of same,” he added.

  •  Keep it timely

    •Deadline filing of annual reports by public companies must be sacrosanct

    The 2018 federal budget is still not passed. It is still roiled somewhere between executive lethargy and legislative insouciance. We are approaching the half-year mark. Import: some short-term projections and strategic thoughts underpinning the appropriation document are already distorted.

    Last year, the federal budget was eventually passed by mid-year and this has been the pattern in nearly a decade; Nigeria has hardly been able to kick off the year with her spending proposals as it was the norm. Reason: largely due to ineptitude and successive poor quality leadership. The effect of this on the economy can be seen all around us.

    A country’s budget is not unlike a public company’s annual report and accounts. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) statutorily requires companies to file annual accounts.

    In the interest of shareholders and investors who actually own public companies, and in keeping with corporate governance ethos, managers are required by law to prepare and submit a report of their business and financial activities at stipulated intervals. Interim reports are presented at the end of each quarter while a full report is rendered at the end of a 12-month financial year.

    Three months are allowed at the end of each financial year for final audited accounts to be filed. With a little exception, this is global standard practice. At the expiration of the grace period, sanctions are levied on errant companies unless there is a cogent reason for defaulting. And it is apposite to state that consistently meeting annual report filing deadline is a sign of a well-wired corporate entity.

    It is for this reason that we are worried that some companies in Nigeria are increasingly lax in their filings – both quarterly and year-end.

    Last week, news was abroad that about 10 major companies missed filing deadline. Notable among them is First Bank of Nigeria Holding (FBNH), probably Nigeria’s leading banking and financial conglomerate. Others include Diamond Bank, International Breweries, Linkage Assurance, Union Bank, Fidelity Bank, Mutual Benefits and Lafarge Africa.

    Many of these have put up reasons for defaulting as the rule requires of them and may well get a few more days’ breather as it is also allowable. However, some would have to face sanctions if reasons for default are found to be untenable.

    What we find worrisome though, is the fact that non-timely filing is seemingly becoming the norm; the list continues to grow each year as many more companies join the defaulters’ club. And more remarkably, reasons for default get flimsier.

    For instance, one of the companies currently in default (an insurance firm) gave reason to be that it just filed the report to its industry regulator on March 29, 2018; the time it ought to be filed at the Exchange. Some others cite technical hitches, software challenges and consolidation of group accounts.

    While it is not our place to determine which reasons are tenable, the rules were not set today and there is a 15-month cycle from the last filing. If one company can meet the deadline, we believe everyone ought to.

    It was the same story this time last year; less than 30 per cent of quoted companies met the deadline. Some of the major companies in default today were also in default last year.

    SEC was much alarmed by this growing bad behaviour of public companies that in January 2017, it had launched a new sanction regime for laggards which ranges from N100,000 to N100 million in penalties.

    While we sympathise with managers who have to endure a peculiarly debilitating business environment in Nigeria today, we must not allow a breakdown of crucial corporate governance rules. Timely filing is sine qua non to the proper running of a corporate entity. Not filing in time is always the first sign of distress and by all means, investors and shareholders must be protected from inept and wayward managers.

    We commend the SEC/NSE for their wakefulness. We urge them to monitor closely and engage members of the market widely. But ultimately, we must always remember that the shareholder is the reason for the existence of the market.

  •  Keep it timely

    •Deadline filing of annual reports by public companies must be sacrosanct

    The 2018 federal budget is still not passed. It is still roiled somewhere between executive lethargy and legislative insouciance. We are approaching the half-year mark. Import: some short-term projections and strategic thoughts underpinning the appropriation document are already distorted.

    Last year, the federal budget was eventually passed by mid-year and this has been the pattern in nearly a decade; Nigeria has hardly been able to kick off the year with her spending proposals as it was the norm. Reason: largely due to ineptitude and successive poor quality leadership. The effect of this on the economy can be seen all around us.

    A country’s budget is not unlike a public company’s annual report and accounts. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) statutorily requires companies to file annual accounts.

    In the interest of shareholders and investors who actually own public companies, and in keeping with corporate governance ethos, managers are required by law to prepare and submit a report of their business and financial activities at stipulated intervals. Interim reports are presented at the end of each quarter while a full report is rendered at the end of a 12-month financial year.

    Three months are allowed at the end of each financial year for final audited accounts to be filed. With a little exception, this is global standard practice. At the expiration of the grace period, sanctions are levied on errant companies unless there is a cogent reason for defaulting. And it is apposite to state that consistently meeting annual report filing deadline is a sign of a well-wired corporate entity.

    It is for this reason that we are worried that some companies in Nigeria are increasingly lax in their filings – both quarterly and year-end.

    Last week, news was abroad that about 10 major companies missed filing deadline. Notable among them is First Bank of Nigeria Holding (FBNH), probably Nigeria’s leading banking and financial conglomerate. Others include Diamond Bank, International Breweries, Linkage Assurance, Union Bank, Fidelity Bank, Mutual Benefits and Lafarge Africa.

    Many of these have put up reasons for defaulting as the rule requires of them and may well get a few more days’ breather as it is also allowable. However, some would have to face sanctions if reasons for default are found to be untenable.

    What we find worrisome though, is the fact that non-timely filing is seemingly becoming the norm; the list continues to grow each year as many more companies join the defaulters’ club. And more remarkably, reasons for default get flimsier.

    For instance, one of the companies currently in default (an insurance firm) gave reason to be that it just filed the report to its industry regulator on March 29, 2018; the time it ought to be filed at the Exchange. Some others cite technical hitches, software challenges and consolidation of group accounts.

    While it is not our place to determine which reasons are tenable, the rules were not set today and there is a 15-month cycle from the last filing. If one company can meet the deadline, we believe everyone ought to.

    It was the same story this time last year; less than 30 per cent of quoted companies met the deadline. Some of the major companies in default today were also in default last year.

    SEC was much alarmed by this growing bad behaviour of public companies that in January 2017, it had launched a new sanction regime for laggards which ranges from N100,000 to N100 million in penalties.

    While we sympathise with managers who have to endure a peculiarly debilitating business environment in Nigeria today, we must not allow a breakdown of crucial corporate governance rules. Timely filing is sine qua non to the proper running of a corporate entity. Not filing in time is always the first sign of distress and by all means, investors and shareholders must be protected from inept and wayward managers.

    We commend the SEC/NSE for their wakefulness. We urge them to monitor closely and engage members of the market widely. But ultimately, we must always remember that the shareholder is the reason for the existence of the market.

  • Timely intervention

    Timely intervention

    •CBN’s order to banks on dividend payments could not have come at a better time

    Worried by the tide of rising Non-Performing Loans (NPLs), the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) last week directed Deposit Money Banks (DMBs) and discount houses (DHs) with huge bad loans and low capital base to stop payment of dividends to shareholders.

    Part of the letter dated January 31, read: “Globally, retained earnings have been identified as an important source of growing an institution’s capital. Advantages of retained earnings include being a source of long-term finance; being easier and cheaper to raise than external finance; curtailment of financial risks; and improving liquidity and profitability.

    “However, it has been observed that rather than take advantage of this beneficial means of capital generation, some institutions pay out a greater proportion of their profits, irrespective of their risk profile and the need to build resilience through adequate capital buffers.”

    It added: “In order to facilitate sufficient and adequate capital build-up for banks in tandem with their risk appetite, the following directives will now apply:

    “Any Deposit Money Bank or discount house that does not meet the minimum capital adequacy ratio shall not be allowed to pay dividend.

    “The DMBs and DHs that have a Composite Risk Rating of ‘High’ or a non-performing loan ratio of above 10 per cent shall not be allowed to pay dividend.

    “The DMBs and DHs that meet the minimum capital adequacy ratio but have a CRR of ‘Above Average’ or an NPL ratio of more than five per cent but less than 10 per cent shall have dividend pay-out ratio of not more than 30 per cent.

    “The DMBs and the DHs that have capital adequacy ratios of at least three per cent above the minimum requirement, the CRR of ‘Low’ and the NPL ratio of more than five per cent but less than 10 per cent, shall have dividend pay-out ratio of not more than 75 per cent of profit after tax.”

    The directive, apart from being explicit, is certainly timely. Aside underscoring the seriousness that the apex bank attaches to the issue of rising cases of bad loans, it comes as an emphatic signal that the corporate derelictions which allowed the problem to fester would no longer be condoned. After all, to say that the situation is bad is to put things mildly. At a time the CBN’s prescribed minimum NPL threshold is five per cent for banks, the level of NPL had long hit 15.18 per cent as of September 2017 – a leap of 50 percent from N1.6tn in December 2016 to N2.4tn.

    Whereas the development ordinarily, should have stoked the alarm button, what we have instead are pretensions by lenders that things are looking up even when their financials present a different picture; a situation where poor performers are allowed to get away with blue murder – through outlandish management expenses, fat executive compensations and crass, opportunistic dividend pay-outs, even if it involves dragging the entire financial services industry perilously along.

    The directive therefore comes across as a necessary dual-edged sword – one meant to sift the wheat from the chaff, while offering a lifeline for marginal performers to shore up their capital bases.

    Understandably, there are those who would baulk at the idea of ‘punishing’ the hordes of investors for the poor credit decisions of the banks’ management. In other words, why go after the hapless investors while sparing the executives behind most of the poor credit decisions of the regulatory axe? While the question is no doubt legitimate, no less legitimate is whether the shareholders are themselves not complicit in their acquiescence to a number of the questionable decisions by the management of the institutions.

    This leads to the question of whether the CBN can afford to do nothing. The situation, as it appears, comes basically to the simple choice – between the festering cannibal rage on the ailing entities on the one hand, and denial of current earnings on investments to guarantee the entities a chance to thrive on the other. Between the former and the later, it should not be difficult to see which of the alternatives the lesser evil is.

  • ‘INEC ‘ll obey timely, legitimate Electoral Act amendment’ 

    ‘INEC ‘ll obey timely, legitimate Electoral Act amendment’ 

    The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) will obey any timely and legitimate amendment to the Electoral Act.

    National Commissioner Prof. Okechukwu Ibeanu, spoke in Abuja yesterday, against the backdrop of the proposed amendment to the Act by the National Assembly.

    Barely two weeks to INEC’s release of its order of elections, the House of Representatives passed its version of the Electoral Act amendment reordering the election plan.

    The Senate followed up with a harmonisation committee.

    Senate spokesman Aliyu Sabi Abdullahi said at the weekend that the lawmakers were determined to get the bill quickly for presidential assent, adding that the lawmakers were determined to override the president should he fail to okay the bill into law.

    While the INEC announced thet Presidential/National Assembly elections will hold on February 16 next year to be followed by the governorship/Assemblies elections on March 2, the lawmakers prefer the national assembly elections first and the presidential poll last.

    Ibeanu, who spoke on the sideline of INEC’s Electoral Institute 14th Public Lecture, told the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) that the amendment by the lawmakers was still a proposal.

    “It is still a proposal by the House of Representatives. I think it is still going to enjoy concurrence of both chambers of the National Assembly for harmonisation as well as inputs from states.

    “As a law-abiding organisation, INEC works with the Electoral Act. If there is a legitimate amendment to the Act, INEC will have no option than to obey, but that must happen first.

    “Like I said, the role of INEC is to conduct elections based on the law; if there is a legitimate amendment to the Electoral Act, INEC will obey,’’ he said.

    On timing of the amendment with regard to the elections, Ibeanu said that there was a six-month time frame for amendment of the Electoral Act.

    “Practically, there is ECOWAS protocol discouraging amendment of Electoral Act before the election in less than six months to an election and we still have more than six months.’’

    On report that the commission may approach the court over the proposed amendment, he said it was not necessary for now as the amendment process was yet to be completed.

    “What are we approaching the court for? When we see the amendment and if it is necessary, we can approach the court then.

    “Doing that now is like putting the cart before the horse,’’ he said.

  • Falana to Jonathan: accept Ezekwesili’s ‘timely challenge’

    Lagos lawyer Femi Falana (SAN) has advised the Federal Government to accept the invitation of former Education Minister Mrs Oby Ezekwesili to a public debate.

    Mrs Ezekwesili had accused the Goodluck Jonathan administration of mismanaging the $67 billion left in the Federation Account by the Olusegun Obasanjo administration, in which she served.

    She challenged the Federal Government to a debate when it denied her claim.

    Falana said the debate would afford Nigerians the opportunity to know how the nation’s funds were disbursed and if wrongly expended, who benefited.

    The rights activist claimed that a similar debate by ex-President Obasanjo and Jonathan over the Boko Haram insurgency has confirmed that the genocidal attack on the innocent people of Odi in Bayelsa State in November 1999 was a crime against humanity.

    Falana said such a debate would provide knowledge on the roles played by the dramatis personae and their imperialist collaborators.

    The senior advocate said the administration, being an offshoot of the Obasanjo, should be held liable for the nation’s woes.

    Falana said: “It is a shame that the Federal Government has rejected a golden opportunity to call off the bluff of the arrogant officials of the Olusegun Obasanjo administration, who are trying to hoodwink Nigerians to accept that the Nigerian neo-colonial economy was better managed when they were in power.

    “Instead of running from pillar to post over the allegation made by the former minister, the Jonathan administration should have explained how the account was drawn down to service an unproductive bureaucracy and fund the thriving corruption industry since 2007.

    “Having done that, it should have proceeded to ask the Olusegun Obasanjo administration to account for the N26 trillion earned from oil and non-oil sectors from 1999 to 2007.

    “Specifically, Gen Obasanjo and his ministers should be asked to explain how they generated darkness with $16 billion, wasted over N1 trillion on fixing roads, refurbished hospitals that have collapsed, granted duty waivers worth N500 billion to a few importers, sold public enterprises worth trillions of Naira at give away prices to imaginary core investors, plundered and mismanaged the banks, which have recently been bailed out with about N3 trillion.

    “Was it not in 2002 that the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) opened a secret account with J.P. Morgan Bank when Gen Olusegun Obasanjo was the Petroleum Minister and Chairman of the NNPC board? Is it not on record that the administration illegally withdrew N1.5 trillion from the NNPC account and distributed same to unnamed individuals and organisations?

    “Has the Supreme Court not recently set aside one of the companies sold by the administration without following due process? Has the Senate not asked the Jonathan administration to annul the highly corrupt privatisation exercise carried out by the regime?

    “Was it not Mrs Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala as Finance Minister, who asked Nigerians to celebrate the country’s exit from the external debt trap?

    “Did she not assure Nigerians that the payment of $12 billion to settle fraudulent external debts would free funds for poverty alleviation projects?

    “As the Finance Minister and Coordinator of the economy, has she not turned round to ask Nigerians to bear with the Jonathan administration for taking jumbo loans with dangerous conditionalities?

    “On six different occasions, the Obasanjo administration increased the prices of petroleum products to generate funds for education, health and job creation. Mrs Ezekwesili may wish to find out what happened to the hundreds of billions of Naira saved from such incessant fuel increases!

    “For goodness sake, let the Federal Government take up Mrs Ezekwesili’s timely and patriotic challenge. But the debate should not be limited to the withdrawal of $67 billion from the Federation Account.

    “It should be a debate on the reckless diversion of huge public funds and the gross mismanagement of the Nigerian economy since 1999.”