Dual airport strategy

When the Duterte administration took over, there was this low hanging fruit begging to be harvested. This is the NEDA-approved privatization of NAIA’s operations and maintenance. It was urgently needed because the Aquino administration showed how an incompetent government appointed manager can cause the quality of public service to greatly suffer.

Of course a private sector manager can bungle the job too. But there would be a contract defining performance objectives and penalties for failure to deliver. And a private manager will not be so stupid as to exclaim after an unfortunate power blackout that he didn’t realize maintenance of back-up power generators is that important.

But DOTr Secretary Art Tugade disregarded the approved plan to privatize NAIA operations and maintenance. He said there are too many other issues that are still unresolved that would affect privatization.

I guess he is right up to a point. The new administration didn’t know what to do with NAIA. They got mesmerized by a couple of glitzy unsolicited proposals to build brand new airports that entailed reclaiming land from Manila Bay.  One proposal entailed a lot more reclamation than the other.

Accepting one of the proposals would eventually make the current NAIA redundant. Yet, bidding out NAIA’s O and M now will require a government guarantee that it will operate as the major airport for at least 25 years to make the private investment worthwhile.

Building a brand new international airport from scratch could take more than five years, not counting time needed for reclamation and for land to settle. Based on the record of the transport department for simpler projects, 10 years is even a rather optimistic expectation.

The problems with NAIA, however, are getting more severe by the day. Congestion on both landside and airside has become unbearable.

The physical problems, coupled with the tantrums of immigration officers and customs inspectors demanding overtime pay from carriers, may prove too much to bear. Something has to be done soon or international aviation may decide to downgrade or even bypass NAIA.

Sec. Tugade has spent about a year now thinking about what his airport strategy should be. Everything starts from a basic plan that is up to now only in Sec. Tugade’s head. Things can only start moving after he makes up his mind. We are hoping that will be soon.

Business folks are an impatient lot. The Management Association of the Philippines (MAP) last week came out with a two page strategy suggestion for a dual airport scheme. Retain NAIA and improve it to meet increasing demand but also upgrade Clark so it can seamlessly take overflow from NAIA.

The MAP suggestion makes sense. I heard Sec. Tugade is inclined to adopt this dual airport scheme. Forget the unsolicited proposals requiring reclamation for the meantime because what we need is more immediate. Perhaps one of the unsolicited proposals can be taken as a side project at proponent ‘s risk that the next administration can continue and inaugurate.

As the MAP puts it, we need “immediate action and the harnessing of all available resources to promptly provide the needed infrastructure and management support for the growing number of air passengers.” Thus, MAP offered what it calls “a holistic approach to the development of an AVIATION SYSTEM for the Greater Manila Area and Luzon.”

Indeed, as the MAP pointed out, bits and pieces of that system had already been announced or broached by DOTr officials. What is required is putting the components together in an integrated program and start building.

Thus, MAP fully supports the plan of DOTr to optimize, through upgrades, the existing NAIA, while redeveloping the Clark International Airport. “A city airport, such as NAIA, has the great advantage of accessibility. Many large cities in the world recognize this, so they are improving and maintaining their old airports instead of phasing them out, as some originally planned for NAIA.

“Tokyo is expanding its Haneda to supplement Narita. Shanghai has its HongXiao in addition to Pudong. Washington, D.C. has Reagan National besides Dulles and Baltimore.”

MAP backs “the decision of DOTr to maintain and upgrade NAIA, a valuable state asset. Upgrading the existing NAIA facilities now will provide early and welcome relief to the present problem of severe passenger and aircraft traffic congestion at a time well within the term of the current administration.

“Pending completion of the upgrades, one quick way of mitigating the congestion in NAIA is to make Clark attractive as an alternate departure and arrival airport through appropriate inducements.”

MAP sees the need for a fast train between NAIA and Clark. “A fast train link between the two airports, passing through the metropolis at a travel time of one hour maximum, will enable Clark to augment NAIA’s operations while it, at the same time, serves the needs of air travelers to and from Central and Northern Luzon.”

However, MAP thinks DOTr must extend that planned North Rail train Japan is supposed to build all the way to NAIA instead of terminating at Tutuban. MAP is also calling for city check-in stations that are easily accessible and strategically located adjacent to the fast train.

The MAP proposal pointed out that in-city check-in facilities would provide travelers added convenience. “They can just drop off their baggage before they board the train. Such facilities have proven their worth in large metropolitan cities, including Singapore and Hong Kong.”

MAP also proposed that “pending the train service, we recommend the setting up of transport connection from these check-in stations to NAIA and to Clark via point-to-point (P2P) airport limousine service using modern tourist-type buses that can quickly negotiate the distance.”

MAP believes that “optimization will extend the usefulness of NAIA for another eight to 10 years.” This would buy us time to build a new airport from scratch if that’s what we want. Or exercise the strongest political will we can muster to expand NAIA through expropriation.

MAP also recommends the creation of “a centralized management of the entire aviation system under a single authority… for expeditious decision-making, better control, and efficient coordination.”

Lastly, it suggests the outsourcing of operation and maintenance (O&M) of each facility using the public private partnership (PPP) mode. Such outsourcing of O&M would enable the government to avail of private sector expertise, technology, and incentive system for efficient O&M operation and maintenance of the facilities without giving up ownership and control of strategic capital assets for aviation.

Hopefully, Sec. Tugade takes the cue from MAP to get going already. One year to think up a strategy is too much time being spent with nothing to show for it.

I understand Philippine Airlines is ready to spend for some of the needed infrastructure, including a new terminal building to extend the capacity of Terminal 2. Both PAL and Cebu Pacific are investing in new aircraft and their expanded fleets need room to grow.

It is now time for government to do its part. How long do we still have to wait for Sec. Tugade to act? I hope he is not competing with Mar Roxas and Jun Abaya for the title of the most studious Cabinet member ever.

Boo Chanco’s e-mail address is [email protected]. Follow him on Twitter @boochanco