Groups slam bid to renegotiate Piatco contract

The reported decision by the Malacañang panel reviewing the Terminal 3 contract to negotiate with the Philippine International Air Terminals Co., Inc. (Piatco) for a revision of the deal has drawn strong criticisms from several sectors.

Labor unions, non-governmental organizations and tourism groups said the panel headed by Socioeconomic Planning Secretary Dante Canlas has taken the easy way out in resolving the controversy on the Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA) Terminal 3 project.

Published reports said the panel will not recommend a government takeover of a foreign firm’s (Fraport AG) stake in the project. Instead, it will negotiate with Piatco to revise the contract’s onerous provisions.

But the reports said a member of the panel, Presidential Adviser for Strategic Concerns Gloria Tan Climaco, has disagreed with the recommendations of the committee and will issue her own report. She had recommended to the government to accept Fraport’s offer to sell its stake in Piatco following differences on financial matters with its Filipino partners, the Cheng group.

Ed Oredina, secretary general of the Scrap the Piatco Deal Coalition (Scrap), said the panel’s decision to negotiate with Piatco is a way of covering up the illegal aspects of the contract. He said some panel members should not have been there in the first place since they are biased or their offices were involved in the approval of the anomalous contract.

"It (panel decision) looks to us as a desperate last-ditch effort to save the Piatco contract from being declared null and void and to protect their agencies," he said.

Scrap, composed of 20 labor unions, NGOs and community groups, has filed a case with the Supreme Court seeking to declare the Piatco contract null and void because of constitutional and legal infirmities. The Piatco contract will also result in the termination of more than 10,000 workers at the NAIA 1 and 2.

Oredina said the Canlas panel, in agreeing to negotiate, did not address the threshold issues such as the legality of the Amended and Restated Concession Agreement (ARCA) and its three supplements, and whether the cost benefit analyses were in favor of the government.

"The Malacañang panel should convincingly address these issues before deciding on any course of action. We believe that had the panel honestly discussed and evaluated the issues, negotiation with Piatco would be its last recourse," Oredina stressed.

He said the panel should disclose its conclusions reached on the project’s cost benefit analyses and marginal cost optimization of government enterprises or regulated monopolies.

"The government should not negotiate, specially if the legal and financial standards for negotiation have not been established," he added.