Honor the facility first

Depending on who or which political party is in power, there is always some politician who comes up with the idea of renaming NAIA or renaming it back to the Manila International Airport. I used to think that the best solution would be naming it back to the MIA, but many natives of Parañaque and Pasay have been restless over the fact that most of NAIA/MIA actually sits on the territories of Pasay City and the City of Parañaque. Others even go as far as questioning the need to waste time and effort on names, when the general direction of Philippine aviation seems to be headed north of Metro Manila, specifically the San Miguel Corporation or SMC Bulacan Airport and Clark International Airport in Pampanga.

Instead of wasting spit and trying to draw the eyes of Malacañang on such petty undertakings, members of Congress should spend more time working on the urgent short-term requirements of our principal international airport before something unpleasant embarrasses us in the international stage of tourism, aviation or safety and security. Before we talk about honoring somebody by attaching their name to a building, let us make sure that the facility is “honor worthy.” Unfortunately, the MIA or NAIA has not been honored by several administrations and much less Congress by way of understanding its role, what it stands for, its operational burdens and the global standards that it must meet to be considered truly “international.”

Yes, there have been a handful of champions from Congress who have sponsored bills and budgets but that is as far as it has gone: deliberating over money, squabbling over spending priorities but mostly ignorant of what airports are all about. A former Cabinet member who guested on our show AGENDA said on air that when he represented a private group of investors for the redevelopment of the NAIA they could not get anywhere because no one from the government panel was a real expert or authority on airport development and the one who came to the table had not even been to Changi Airport! We’ve had a string of good general managers at the NAIA/MIAA but most of them came from private sector airline operations or retired Air Force officials and had often been told what to do by a mere political appointee who knows nothing about airport operations and requirements.

Most of us see the NAIA/MIAA as a government office or agency but what I recently discovered is they are in fact a GOCC or government-owned or controlled corporation, which means that they have some measure of independence, but they also have to generate or earn much of their financial needs because GOCCs are mandated to be self-reliant and income generating public corporations. During the past 18 months of COVID pandemic, airline operations practically bottomed out, many airport concessionaires and tenants had to temporarily shut down or drastically cut back on operations and negotiated with the airport authorities to waive fees or rent or be left with empty booths and offices. The NAIA/MIAA as of today is just recovering from serious loss of income and needs financial assistance from Congress.

With income severely cut to less than 50 percent, burdened with operational overheads and an army of employees to maintain, it is amazing that the NAIA/MIAA did not actually declare bankruptcy. They did, however, experience a continuance of problems and technical difficulties. To this day, the airport is unable to open up more slots and flights from and into NAIA/MIAA because of what experts call outdated, “ought to be” phased out equipment and “poor quality” air space management because our air traffic controllers have not been given the needed equipment, training and global level compensation. According to pilots and aviation junkies, the ideal space between landing aircraft should be every two minutes. Gatwick Airport in London, which only has one runway, manages 60 landings in an hour. Our airport has 1.5 runways but can only manage 40 landings an hour because we do it based on distance between aircraft, which is set at eight kilometers and every two minutes. This lack of slots creates an artificial duopoly in local aviation and is partly the reason why plane fares are higher than they should be.

Another problem lies in the operation of “general aviation” and “flying fish carriers” or small planes bringing in marine products from the south. If all planes were big jets and only big jets, the two-minute landings would be possible because the aircraft have the same aerodynamic features, unlike small private jets and “tutubi” planes that would be sucked up in the after-draft or vortex of a commercial plane landing before them. Several administrations have all said that they would move the general aviation to Clark and Sangley but they were nothing more than babblers and blabber mouths who could not prioritize commercial aviation over the elitist comforts of senators, Cabinet secretaries and flying fish carriers.

Address the unspoken problem at the NAIA/MIAA, which is maintenance and management of X-ray or screening machines and air-conditioning units that have perennially been broken, making it so obvious that for the last decade there are people or syndicates inside the international airport that are intentionally destroying the security equipment in order to force the authorities to buy new ones. The same goes for other sensitive or needed machinery related to baggage handling or air-conditioning. Perhaps the DOTr should look into entering maintenance and management contracts with established suppliers because this never-ending destruction or breakdown of equipment puts the public and the country’s reputation at risk.

In addition, Congress should really address the need for a single authority figure above all agencies operating within the airport. There are too many “powers” in and out of the facility and that is part of the problem. Finally, spend on NAIA/MIAA what they earn or collect, especially terminal fees, and stop giving exemptions that cost more to administer or manage.