Analysis: Presidency says new national airline is viable. Government should publish the reports

The Presidency says preliminary studies have confirmed that Ghana’s proposed national airline is viable.

“Preliminary studies have affirmed the viability of the project”, the presidency said in a social media post on November 6, 2026.

However, the announcement does not disclose further details or the assumptions behind that conclusion.

The statement followed President Mahama’s meeting with Boeing officials, who are supporting efforts to establish the airline.

According to the Presidency, an agreed roadmap includes identifying strategic and technical partners, obtaining an Air Operator Certificate, selecting aircraft and deciding how the business will be financed.

These decisions will help determine how much it costs to establish and operate the airline. With several still outstanding, the preliminary studies would help explain the conditions under which the project is considered viable.

The announcement did not include those studies.

The government began the process to establish the national airline in May 2025, when Transport Minister Joseph Bukari Nikpe inaugurated a 10-member task force.

Its mandate was to develop a sustainable business model for the proposed national carrier.

A Ministry of Transport document indicates that a business model and operational framework report has been developed to guide engagement with a strategic investor.

However, the full report is not publicly available. It is also unclear whether it contains the preliminary studies cited by the Presidency or represents a separate assessment.

A proposed ownership structure explains how an airline might be organised. A viability assessment should explain whether it can attract enough passengers and revenue to cover its costs, and what happens if it cannot.

The government has already outlined one important feature of the proposed arrangement.

Mr Nikpe has indicated the government intends to remain a minority shareholder, with the private sector leading operations and management.

That could help strengthen commercial discipline. But the size of the government’s shareholding alone will not determine how much public money is at risk.

A government can hold a minority stake while guaranteeing loans, supporting aircraft leases, or agreeing to cover specific costs.

The report should therefore explain the government’s expected contribution, any obligations beyond its initial investment, and whether further public support would be limited.

If the airline runs into financial difficulty, who would provide the additional money?

That question matters, given Ghana’s previous experience.

Ghana Airways ceased operations in July 2004 after five consecutive years of losses. An IMF assessment published the following year identified weak financial oversight, costly aircraft decisions, borrowing, and free or discounted tickets for government workers as factors behind its debt buildup.

A new ownership arrangement would need to show how it intends to prevent these problems from recurring. A change in shareholders will mean little if the underlying weaknesses in financial oversight and management remain.

This includes how the board and chief executive would be appointed, who would approve borrowing and procurement, and whether management would be free to make commercial decisions about staffing, fares and routes.

Private sector leadership could provide that protection. Whether it does will depend on the agreements governing the airline and how they are enforced.

The same scrutiny should apply to the proposed strategic partner. The government must explain how the partnership would be structured, including how responsibilities, risks and returns would be shared.

A foreign partner's participation is not, by itself, a guarantee of commercial success.

An established airline could bring investment, technical expertise and access to a wider network. But the agreement would need to explain how those benefits would translate into a sustainable Ghanaian business, including training local staff and developing technical and managerial capacity.

Beyond the ownership and financing arrangements, the studies should establish what gap the airline is intended to fill.

The Presidency says the project would increase the use of Ghana’s airport facilities and support plans to make Accra a leading aviation hub in West Africa. It also projects thousands of jobs for pilots, cabin crew, engineers and aviation management specialists.

Those ambitions require a clearer business case.

Which routes would the airline serve? How much demand is expected? What would it offer that existing carriers do not? And how long would it take before the business could cover its operating costs?

Benefits may extend beyond the airline’s finances, including tourism, cargo services, and improved connections to underserved markets. But those benefits should be assessed alongside the cost of securing them.

The government should also explain whether other measures could achieve similar gains, including improving services at Accra International Airport, encouraging existing airlines to expand, or making Accra more competitive as a connecting hub through reduced fees, better infrastructure, and enhanced efficiency.

Establishing a national airline may be part of the answer. The studies should show why.

Publishing the reports would let the public assess these questions before making binding financial commitments. The government could withhold commercially sensitive details while releasing the main demand forecasts, cost estimates, financing assumptions, and safeguards for public funds.

Ghana's previous airline failures do not establish that another attempt will fail. They do, however, make it reasonable to ask what will be different this time.

The government says preliminary studies support the project. It should release those studies and the task force's report so Ghanaians can examine the business case before committing more public money and resources.