Once again, our air transport system seemed in complete disarray after Typhoon Basyang struck. Scores of flights were cancelled, diverted or delayed. Thousands of passengers were trapped in airports.
Power outages compounded the much-publicized breakdown of electronic navigational equipment at the NAIA. All in all, flying has ceased to be routine lately. It has become a perilous adventure of sorts.
The recent breakdowns are only the tip of the iceberg. Our aviation industry is bugged by systemic and institutional problems for which we need a comprehensive strategic response. Unless we show some capacity to upgrade the quality and safety of our airline industry, it will become a major stumbling block to our progress.
The problems go beyond just replacing the Doppler VHF Omni-directional Rangefinder (DVOR) that conked out June 19. The replacement of that vital piece of equipment is now underway. Although there are other redundant pieces of technology that may be used in the meantime, the absence of that particular landing aid will make our equipment less redundant than what modern standards of airport safety require.
Our problems go back further.
In January 2008, the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) downgraded our aviation industry to Category 2 status. That basically makes our industry second-rate.
In its November 2007 International Aviation Safety Audit (IASA), the FAA observed that “the Philippines was no longer overseeing the safety of its airlines in accordance with the international standards and practices.” Among the long-standing concerns of the IASA is that the old Air Transportation Office (ATO) is a deficient institutional instrument in assuring the highest standards of aviation safety are observed.
The Philippines asked the FAA to reconsider its downgrade. After another safety audit, the FAA decided to retain its standing rating for the Philippine air industry.
On November 2009, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) issued a Significant Safety Concern (SSC) on the Philippines. The ICAO is the international organization tasked with ensuring observance of aviation safety standards and practices.
To further compound our problems with the credibility of our aviation industry, the European Union put Philippine aviation on its watchlist shortly after the ICAO action. All these negative ratings will be lifted only after we have substantially and comprehensively upgraded the quality of our aviation.
In response to FAA recommendations, the Philippine Congress on March 25, 2008 passed RA 9497. The new law replaces the old ATO with the Civil Aviation Authority of the Philippines (CAAP).
The old ATO was a bureaucratic line agency chronically plagued with regulatory capture and corruption. It was, by its nature, unable to respond to the challenges of regulating our aviation sector in a timely and appropriate manner. In the face of the burgeoning growth of our aviation industry, the ATO has proven to be a decrepit regulatory instrument.
The new CAAP, by contrast, is a government-owned and –controlled corporation rather than a mere line agency. It is designed to perform independently, evolve a modern corporate organization and raise the resources required to meet the highest standards of safety and efficiency.
When all the implementing rules and regulations were finally crafted, the CAAP came into existence. Former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo tapped former MIAA general-manager Al Cusi to head the new corporate entity. The choice was based on strong recommendations from stakeholders as well as the executive search committee organized for the purpose.
Al Cusi was just enjoying his life as a private citizen when tapped to return to the service. He was, in fact, deep into laying the groundwork for a congressional bid in his home district when summoned to head the CAAP. He gave the matter long thought before accepting the challenge to build this new institution.
On assuming the post, he immediately flew to Brussels to deal with the EU downgrade of the Philippine aviation industry. In between all the emergencies we experienced the past few months, he began building a modern corporate organization, tackling the long-standing problems of corruption, introducing a new corporate culture to displace that of the former line agency and resolving internal squabbles in the organization thrust to his responsibility.
The EU did recognize the gains made with the organization of the CAAP with Cusi at the helm. But Brussels eventually decided to take the path of prudence and await revision of the FAA downgrade before withdrawing its own advisory on the quality of Philippine aviation.
In a matter of weeks, Cusi whipped his new institution into fighting shape. The organization was streamlined and talent was recruited into the service. Safety standards were strictly enforced, leading to the revocation of the franchise of one air cargo company.
Cusi set as his immediate tasks the rapid evolution of a modern corporate structure for the CAAP, addressing the safety concerns of the FAA and the ICAO, raising the standards for systems and procedures in the organization and replacing the aging and poorly maintained navigational equipment in our airports.
Known in the industry as an action man, Cusi quickly scored points. He has requested a new safety audit from both the FAA and the ICAO for later this year. He hopes to have accomplished enough in raising standards to have the downgrade lifted by the time the new audit team arrives in a matter of weeks.
For the sake of our economy and our own safety as passengers, we hope he succeeds.