Headwinds at the airport

Critics of the country’s main gateway or the San Miguel Corp.-led consortium now managing its operations may not agree, but there have been noticeable changes at the Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA) – and yes, they’re all for the better.

That’s the good news.
The bad news is that some disgruntled groups are again waging a war against the airport franchise of the consortium, the New NAIA Infra Corp. or NNIC, which operates NAIA.

But first, the positive changes. I’ve been noticing these for some time now and recently, when I flew back to Manila from a trip to Dumaguete and Siquijor during the Holy Week break.

Flights depart and arrive on time, or at least not as delayed as they used to be; queues at the security checks and even at the Immigration are faster. The restrooms are cleaner, too and the air conditioning system, at least based on my experience, was working. It also seems that there is less waiting time for your luggage, despite some problematic conveyor belts at Terminal 3. Even the throng of vehicles at the arrival and departure bays has eased up.

The availability of ride-hailing services at NAIA is also very much welcome. Anyone without a personal driver or a fetcher knows how difficult it is to leave the airport upon arrival because transportation options are limited.

At least the presence of ride-hailing companies, including two-wheeled services, now provides arriving passengers more options, although some transport companies still charge unreasonably high fares.

There’s also an OFW lounge launched at T3. As I said, these are all welcome changes, less than a year since the Ramon Ang-led NNIC took over the operations and management of NAIA in September last year. 
There will be more improvements in the coming months and years. Some will be painful but hopefully, in the end, these changes will lead to a better flying experience for passengers.

Disgruntled bidders?

As for the bad news, we’ve heard about the recent filing with the Supreme Court. Early this month, a group of lawyers asked the SC to nullify the NAIA concession deal, claiming it was unconstitutional.

The petition comes on the heels of Jimmy Bautista’s sudden departure from the Transportation department. It was Sec. Jimmy who led the landmark privatization of NAIA.

Industry insiders said losing bidders are behind the filing. This is not surprising, considering that NNIC bested several big groups in the bidding war for the country’s main gateway.

Some of these losing bidders may also be associated or identified – if not the players themselves – with disgruntled old suppliers and syndicates who lost their grip on the lucrative airport concessions market.

With all the changes that NNIC has introduced, including streamlining processes for more efficient passenger flow, many existing businesses (a.k.a rackets) were affected.

Some of these former players once raked in millions during the previous airport management and are frustrated that they can no longer dictate prices and demand hefty commissions from their padrinos in what used to be a government-run airport.

But wait. There’s more.

I heard that these disgruntled suppliers are working with some individuals within the airport to push for their suppliers of choice. Unfortunately, some of the suppliers they are lobbying for include problematic Chinese-owned companies.

What will they potentially supply? It could be a wide range of critical airport equipment needed for facilities upgrade – from conveyor belts to airplane boarding bridges to X-ray machines.

One such company, I heard, is a Chinese state-owned firm with a dubious track record. It was previously banned in the US for allegedly stealing designs.

There is nothing wrong with foreign brands, including Chinese brands, but problematic companies with bad records, whether Chinese-owned or not, raise questions on security and safety of passengers.

Admittedly, however, Chinese brands are nuanced because of our current – and seemingly worsening – row with China.

Some are wary that having Chinese state-owned suppliers at the airport – or in other critical infrastructure in the country – could compromise our national security.

Airport upgrades are crucial, and we must ensure that national security and public interest are prioritized.

I’ve always pushed for a modern and efficient airport, whether government-run or in the hands of the private sector.

Unfortunately, we all know that in government agencies and corporations, corruption is rampant and the way this happens is through favored bidders and suppliers.

On the other hand, privatization is not perfect because the cost of products and services comes at a price. You get what you pay for and sometimes, it’s expensive.

In the Philippines’ experience, privatization saved us from the blackouts of the 90s. Consumers had to pay more for electricity provided by privately owned gencos but then, the most expensive electricity is no electricity at all.

Ideally, the state must provide vital infrastructure services to the public – roads, bridges, power, water, airports, etc.

But in countries like ours where institutions are weak and corruption in government is rampant, privatization of services – including airport management – is sometimes the better option.

I hope though that syndicates or racketeers who are usually in cahoots with government officials do not bring their dirty ways to private-led entities, including our airport.

*      *      *

Email: [email protected]. Follow her on X @eyesgonzales. Column archives at EyesWideOpen on FB.