The Federation of Tourism Associations of Nigeria (FTAN) has raised serious concerns over the implementation of the Nigerian Tourism Development Authority (NTDA) Act 2022 and the National Institute for Hospitality and Tourism (NIHOTOUR) Act 2022, warning that both laws, in their current form, risk stifling private sector growth, creating duplication of roles, and sparking fresh conflicts within the industry.
Presenting a position paper at a stakeholders’ meeting convened by the Minister of Arts, Culture, Tourism and Creative Economy, FTAN President, Dr. Badaki Aliyu, said the federation—representing 23 private sector tourism associations—welcomed the Federal Government’s effort to strengthen the tourism framework through legislation but insisted that the Acts contain “critical ambiguities and conflicting provisions that must be urgently corrected.”
Key Issues with the NTDA Act 2022
FTAN highlighted seven areas of concern with the NTDA Act, including:
- Conflict of interest: The Act empowers NTDA to operate commercially as a tour operator, consultancy, and convention bureau—directly competing with private businesses.
- Regulatory overlap: Section 6(c) gives NTDA training powers that duplicate NIHOTOUR’s mandate, while consumer protection provisions clash with the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC).
- Multiple taxation: A proposed 1% hotel room tax could reignite disputes between state and federal governments, despite a 2013 Supreme Court ruling limiting federal encroachment on state functions.
- Ambiguity in the Tourism Development Fund: FTAN noted the fund’s purpose, sources, and distribution remain unclear.
The federation recommended that NTDA should focus on policy, destination marketing, product development, and investment facilitation while leaving training and regulation of practice to the private sector and NIHOTOUR. FTAN also called for stronger private sector representation on NTDA’s board and clarity in the fund’s administration.
Concerns Over the NIHOTOUR Act 2022
On NIHOTOUR, FTAN expressed alarm at provisions that make the institute both an academic training body and a regulatory authority, calling it “an aberration never heard of in civilized societies.”
Key issues flagged include:
- NIHOTOUR’s powers to re-certify professionals already trained by universities and polytechnics accredited by the NUC and NBTE.
- Provisions that establish punitive measures and even a tribunal to prosecute defaulters, which FTAN described as unconstitutional.
- Conflicts with other agencies such as SON, NTDA, and professional bodies.
FTAN recommended that NIHOTOUR should remain strictly a workforce development institution, focused on vocational training and skills acquisition, not regulation. It further urged that standard-setting and certification should be handled in collaboration with professional bodies rather than imposed by an academic institute.
Broader Recommendations
In its concluding remarks, FTAN warned that both Acts were passed without mandatory public hearings, undermining inclusiveness in the lawmaking process. To ensure harmony and growth, the federation urged the Minister to:
- Establish a Joint Visioning Board between government and private sector stakeholders.
- Encourage Public-Private Partnerships in research, infrastructure, and data development.
- Constitute the boards of NTDA and NIHOTOUR immediately, with strong private sector representation.
- Align all Acts to empower rather than stifle private businesses.
- Institutionalize regular structured engagements between MDAs and FTAN to resolve conflicts.
“Tourism in Nigeria remains government-led but private sector-driven,” Dr. Aliyu stated. “For our industry to achieve its potential in GDP contribution, job creation, and national branding, we must have a clear, coherent institutional framework where public agencies complement, not compete with, private operators.”
FTAN reaffirmed its readiness to partner with government at all levels to build a vibrant, globally competitive Nigerian tourism industry, while insisting that urgent legislative reviews were necessary to avert policy clashes and regulatory bottlenecks.
