The Nigeria Civil Aviation Authority has warned that any move to increase the share of its revenue allocated to the Nigerian Airspace Management Agency could undermine aviation safety and jeopardise Nigeria’s performance in future International Civil Aviation Organisation audits.

The Director of Public Affairs and Consumer Protection at the NCAA, Michael Achimugu, said the regulator remained opposed to any proposal that would further reduce its funding, insisting that the agency was already operating below the level recommended by ICAO.

“Meetings have been called because it became clear that the NCAA was ready to fight over the matter. The CAA’s position remains the same. You cannot fix NAMA by destroying NCAA. And nowhere in the world does NAMA take money from the regulatory agency. In any case, if you take NCAA’s money now, we are going to fail the ICAO audit,” he stated.

A proposal before the National Assembly seeks to amend the sharing formula for the statutory five per cent Ticket Sales Charge and Cargo Sales Charge collected from airline passengers and cargo operators. Under the current arrangement, the NCAA receives 56 per cent of the revenue, while NAMA gets 22 per cent, with the balance shared among the Nigerian Meteorological Agency, the Nigerian College of Aviation Technology and the Nigerian Safety Investigation Bureau.

The proposed amendment seeks to reduce the NCAA’s allocation to 40 per cent and increase NAMA’s share to 40 per cent, triggering opposition from the aviation regulator, which argues that the move could weaken safety oversight and affect Nigeria’s compliance with International Civil Aviation Organisation standards.

Achimugu said the NCAA was already underfunded, warning that any additional deduction from its revenue would have serious implications for aviation safety oversight.

“Because, as it stands presently, the NCAA is underfunded. So, taking even more from me would put safety at risk, and we will fail the safety audit. Because the last audit that we passed had a very high score.

“The area we failed the most was still the funding. They stated that the NCAA is underfunded. That was one of the areas where we had low scores. We were only able to make up for it with very high scores, excellent scores in other areas. So how do you still want to come and take more? We could even face penalties from ICAO if that is done.”

He argued that NAMA should explore alternative funding sources rather than relying on regulatory allocations. “NAMA has to find a better way. In any case, they were set up to generate revenue to take care of themselves. They were never supposed to even get anything from the NCAA from the beginning.

“It’s just that when they were set up, there used to be a unit that was underfunded before. So when they were set up as an NCAA, there was no take-off grant for them, no cash. They just told them, okay, take this percentage from the NCAA by way of a take-off grant.

“They got used to it and now want to keep taking more and more and more. We are saying, no, it should not be like this. If we do this, then you are going to put safety at risk in Nigeria.

“And this is no joke. And that’s exactly what will happen if anybody proceeds with that idea.” Achimugu also blamed budget delays for limiting the authority’s capacity to train its personnel, saying several programmes scheduled for 2026 had yet to commence because funding had not been approved.

“The training we have attended this year is like last year’s training. Because, again, one of the things that affects us is the late approval and implementation of the budget.

“Because for 2026, for instance, you cannot go for 2026 training when the budget has not even been approved. So which money did you use to attend? I don’t know if you understand. So a lot of the time we are also affected by budgetary issues.

“So, we have not attended 2026 training. We have not attended 2026 training. When the budget is approved, then we will.”

However, aviation analyst and member of the Aviation Round Table, Olumide Ohunayo, said the debate should extend beyond the revenue-sharing formula between the agencies to broader issues surrounding government remittances and rising operational costs across aviation agencies.

“My focus now is on the remittance to the federal government. When you have a regulator being among the highest revenue generators for the country, it shows that we are not placing priorities in the right order. In the sense that the ICAO document says that whatever is generated should be brought back as investment into these organisations.”

According to him, the increasing percentage of internally generated revenue remitted to the Federal Government had weakened investment in critical infrastructure and manpower development.

“Today, we are talking about infrastructure in FAAN; NCAA is talking about training, yet they are moving about 50% of their revenue into the purse of the government. It started from about 20% or 30%, then 40%, and up to 50%. I think that should be the first thing to be addressed.”

Ohunayo also criticised the expansion of directorates across aviation agencies, arguing that the move had significantly increased personnel and administrative costs.

“Secondly, almost all the agencies have created extra directorates. And when you create an extra directorate, you have increased the operational expenses, which come along with vehicles and employment. Once you have a directorate, you must go down to have a GM, AGM, all the way down. And you see, this is what I call special duties created among all the agencies. When you create special duties among all the agencies, it shows that you have enough funds that you have to play around.

“So, I want to correct those two things before we go to the debate of how to share or how to augment the present sharing formula. Both organisations are part of the safety and security architecture of the aviation industry. You must first show that you are ready to pull down your expenses to improve investment before we begin to look at the sharing formula.”

He further argued that the creation of additional directorates and support structures had not been justified. “I mean they expanded directorates and the director of special duties in some of the agencies, upgraded the legal department to a full directorate.

“So when you expand, it shows that you’ve looked at your purse and that you can truly fund all this expansion and the accompanying expenses that come with it, which include the other appointments underneath each directorate, vehicles, allowances and payments. I feel those expansions were not justified.”

While acknowledging the importance of both NCAA and NAMA to aviation safety, Ohunayo said a review of the current revenue-sharing arrangement was necessary, provided agencies also demonstrated greater financial prudence.

“But to tell you honestly, I feel both of them are providing critical services to the nation. Yes, NCAA is the apex, but there’s a need now that NSIB has left us to go to the Presidency, and NiMet is offering services to other modes of transportation. I think there’s a need to look at that sharing formula and, yes, something must be added to what NAMA is presently collecting.

“But for both of them, the political management and appointment have not shown some level of prudence. That is my problem. And the remittance being demanded by the Federal Government should also be reviewed.”

While the NCAA and its unions insist that cutting the regulator’s funding could compromise inspector training, certification and surveillance activities, supporters of the proposal argue that NAMA’s responsibility for maintaining Nigeria’s air navigation infrastructure requires significantly higher funding.

Industry analysts have also urged the Federal Government to address broader issues, including rising statutory remittances to the Treasury and the recovery of outstanding ticket sales charges owed by airlines, rather than focusing solely on redistributing existing revenue.