By ordinary conversations, the word “reciprocity” simply means mutuality of benefits, in exchange for something with equivalent value, or a trade off in equal terms. But for the airline industry, the term “reciprocity” spells the survival of their beleaguered situation following the issuance of Executive Order (EO) 29 by President Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino III.
EO 29 implements what this administration calls as “pocket” open skies policy, or an “open skies” policy for all the country’s airports, except in Manila. Of course, Manila being referred to, are the terminals named after the President’s slain father, ex-Sen. Benigno “Ninoy” Aquino Jr., the Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA).
If you ask the travel and tours industries, they have different opinions for and against EO 29. How much more among those in our small airline industry being directly affected by EO 29?
Cebu Pacific president and chief executive officer Lance Y. Gokongwei candidly admitted this to us at the Tuesday Club breakfast gathering at the EDSA Shangri-La where he spoke publicly for the first time to express their concern over EO 29. As he sees it, the young Gokongwei noted the local airline industry also have differing views over EO 29.
In prepared remarks read before us, Gokongwei reiterated their full support to the aviation liberalization, including the “open skies” agreements with other countries as envisioned under EO 29. Breaking their silence on this issue, Gokongwei explained in detail the position of their family-owned airline company why they believe there is a need for the government to take “reciprocity” into consideration.
As far as their airline company is concerned, Cebu Pacific was a major beneficiary of domestic aviation deregulation through such “open skies” agreements. Since this “pocket“ open skies was already put into law through an executive fiat, Gokongwei pointed out, all of them in the airline, travel, and tours industries can and will have to live with it, whether all of them support or agree with it or not.
However, all is not a done deal yet because there is still a remedy available to correct this “lack of reciprocity” provision in EO 29. That is, if it could still be included in the implementing rules and regulations (IRR) of EO 29. Hence, this remedy can be done without having to amend EO 29.
Gokongwei clarified they do not argue against EO 29 offering to foreign carriers unlimited Fifth Freedom Rights, or the right to carry passengers from one’s own country to a second country, and from that country to a third country. However, without this “reciprocity” provision, there is no compulsion for the governments of these foreign carriers to also allow the same opportunity to Philippine carriers like Cebu Pacific, the Philippine Airlines (PAL), AirPhil Express, Zest Air, to name some.
The “lack of reciprocity” would be corrected, he said, if the Philippine government headed by President Aquino would push at least three initiatives. These, he cited, include the Philippines signing an “open skies” agreement with Japan similar to what it signed with Singapore, Malaysia and South Korea; the Philippines joining the ASEAN “open skies” regime which will make the region open to each country’s carriers on an equal footing; and reciprocal “open skies” agreement with regions like the Middle East and Europe where Philippine carriers do not fly to, today.
I just failed to ask Gokongwei if he was able to raise this matter with President Aquino who took the Cebu Pacific when he flew for a state visit to Indonesia last month. P-Noy reportedly missed seeing in action the “dancing” flight attendants of Cebu Pacific who suddenly became too shy to show their talents on that presidential flight.
Virtually taking up this cause for the local aviation industry, Gokongwei conceded on the more pressing need for the Philippine government to also at the same time upgrade and further improve our country’s premier port of entry. In fact, he looks forward to government initiatives to move out NAIA to as far as Clark Field in Pampanga.
We have three international passenger terminals in Manila alone, namely, NAIA-1, NAIA-2 or better called as the Centennial Airport, and NAIA-3. Actually, they are all located in Pasay City. Under the present setup, domestic and international of all PAL flights are in Centennial Airport. Cebu Pacific and AirPhil Express are in NAIA-3. All other foreign carriers are in NAIA-1.
Gokongwei intimated his dream for Cebu Pacific to have someday their own airport facility. In fact, he disclosed they are scouting for possible site of such an airport for exclusive use by their airline company.
Currently, Cebu Pacific shares the use of NAIA-3 that up to now remains partially operational due to structural problems and still tied to unresolved legal disputes in various local and international courts. A little birdie chirped that Executive Secretary Paquito “Jojo” Ochoa is currently involved in negotiations with official representatives from Fraport A.G., the principal contractor of NAIA-3, to resolve this long-standing commercial dispute and pave the way for the full commercial operations of NAIA-3.
Fraport and its local partner Piatco have separately sued the Philippine government before international arbitration courts in Singapore and in Washington. This was after their contract with the Philippine government on NAIA-3 was nullified by the previous administration of former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and subsequently upheld by a Supreme Court decision.
The Executive Secretary reportedly expressed the government’s willingness to sit down together with all parties concerned, namely, Piatco, Fraport and Takenaka, the Japanese firm that constructed NAIA-3. If all goes well with these negotiations, it would augur well for the entire country.
With the estimated 3.3 million tourist arrivals in the Philippines in the first nine months in office of President Aquino, there is certainly a need to make sure our country’s airport terminal could be able to handle volumes of passengers, especially during peak travel season.
While taking parallel efforts to address concerns over “lack of reciprocity,” the government must address the urgency of the basic infrastructure requirements for safety and comfort of tourists and travelers that start at the airport.