By Muazu Elazeh

At a time when the North East states are grappling with insecurity, poor infrastructure, unemployment and an economy struggling to realise its enormous potential, the governors have identified another priority: establishing an airline.

Governor Babagana Zulum of Borno State told Nigerians that the governors of Adamawa, Bauchi, Borno, Gombe, Taraba and Yobe had agreed to establish the North East Airline and had secured N10 billion in counterpart funding for the proposed regional shuttle service.

The governors believe the airline will promote regional connectivity, economic integration, easier travel, tourism and investment, and improve access to the region. A beautiful and commendable idea. A lot can be achieved with better air connectivity across the North East.

But there is a world of difference between promoting air connectivity and owning an airline, particularly for governments with a poor record of running businesses. Should floating an airline really be a priority for a region weighed down by insecurity, internal displacement, poverty, poor road conditions and alarming infrastructure deficits?

The North East governors’ decision evokes memories of the ill-fated Nigeria Air project, itself a reminder of the problems associated with government involvement in the airline business and, more broadly, with state-owned enterprises.

While it comes amid a growing trend among state governments, including Akwa Ibom and Enugu, to venture into airline operations, the proposed North East Airline would mark the first time governors from an entire region have come together to establish an airline.

An airline must carry paying passengers, operate commercially viable routes and maintain strict financial and professional discipline to survive. This is where management is critical. Would the airline be run by aviation professionals or by political appointees? Can the governors resist using it for political patronage? What happens when a state demands a route that is not commercially viable? Will the airline operate it because it is economically sensible or because a governor wants it?

What about fuel, maintenance, insurance, foreign exchange, personnel and route profitability? These are core issues in the airline business and have contributed to the difficulties airlines across the continent face.

Given the government’s intolerable record in business, should the North East governors not redirect scarce public resources elsewhere? I hope I am wrong, but I fear the familiar pattern: political interference, poor management, accumulated liabilities and eventual collapse.

Governor Zulum told us that a princely N10 billion has been set aside for the project. What he has not told us is whether a feasibility study was conducted. If so, what did it reveal? Did it establish the proposed airline’s commercial viability? What happens when the governors who conceived it leave office?

This is particularly pertinent because all the governors, except Agbu Kefas of Taraba State, are serving their second and final terms. What happens when a new set of governors takes office? Will they view the airline as a regional economic asset that must be protected and professionally managed, or as another project inherited from their predecessors?

What happens when the six governors disagree on funding, routes, appointments or management? What if one state contributes more yet believes another is benefiting disproportionately? These questions are fundamental to the project’s success or failure and should be addressed if the governors must proceed with the idea.

Fundamentally, the decision by North East governors to launch an airline raises a broader question about the logic of state governments investing billions of naira in airline operations while basic infrastructure, healthcare, education and other essential services are starved of much-needed funds.

Air passenger growth in Nigeria has traditionally been tied to the expansion of the middle class. But that class is currently under enormous pressure from the rising cost of living, with obvious implications for air travel.

To survive, an airline needs passengers, commercially viable routes, efficient management, disciplined spending and the capacity to withstand the shocks that routinely hit the aviation industry.

The more fundamental question, therefore, is not whether the North East needs better air connectivity. It does. I believe the priority should be to create the conditions for aviation to flourish, rather than necessarily to become airline operators.

Rather than floating an airline, why can’t the governors focus on making the region attractive to existing and prospective private carriers? They can improve airport infrastructure and passenger facilities, strengthen security, improve road links between airports and major cities, offer route development incentives, and create an environment conducive to commercially viable routes.

Why not use the N10 billion as a catalyst to transform aviation infrastructure across the region, rather than as seed capital for an airline that may require billions more in taxpayers’ money to survive?

The region needs better airports, better roads linking airports to major cities, improved security, and an environment that attracts investors and gives private airlines the confidence to operate profitable routes. It also needs tourism and economic activities that will generate the passenger traffic required to sustain aviation. These are areas where state governments have a legitimate and indispensable role.

Unfortunately, we appear to be witnessing another instance in which governments treat airline ownership as a prestige project, committing scarce resources to it rather than addressing the conditions that enable aviation to thrive.

Like most Nigerians, I believe the North East needs an aviation revolution. The question is not whether the North East needs one. It certainly does. The concern is how that revolution should be achieved. What I disagree with is the notion that the six state governments must become airline operators for the revolution to happen.

There is no indication that the proposed airline will be professionally managed, financially sustainable, or insulated from political interference. The danger is that it could become another government-owned enterprise, sustained by periodic injections of taxpayers’ money.

Owning an airline is certainly not a priority for a region that lacks a fully self-sustaining, commercially viable airport, largely due to low passenger traffic. Even Yola and Maiduguri airports, the two most active and functional airports in the region, are not commercially viable.

My advice to the governors is to focus on roads, insecurity, education, healthcare, electricity, water, internally displaced persons, agricultural development and industrialisation. They should create the conditions for aviation to flourish and allow competent private operators to operate effectively.

——Elazeh is the GMD of LEADERSHIP Newspapers and can be reached on @babanyesme