|
If you have access to the Internet you have probably
received an e-mail that contains pictures of what are claimed to be
the flight attendants’ quarters of various airlines.
The e-mail starts with the plush
accommodations—complete with airbeds—that several foreign
airlines supposedly reserve for their cabin crews. It ends with the
picture of an Asian-looking flight attendant dozing off on a crappy
jump seat; the picture is captioned “Philippine Airline” (sic).
It is one of those e-mails that a
disturbing number of Filipinos seem to enjoy circulating as they
engage in their favorite pastime—putting their own country down.
Indications are, however, that
the e-mail is nothing but a hoax. For one thing, the “Philippine
Airline” stewardess looks more like a malnourished stewardess of
one of China’s regional airlines—a number of which are truly
crappy, going by their horrible safety records—than a PAL flight
attendant.
But even if the e-mail were
authentic, it does not tell the whole story.
If foreign airlines are indeed
able to make available deluxe accommodations to their flight crews,
it is only because their bottom line regularly gets a big boost in
the form of hefty subsidies from their own governments.
In contrast, our flag carrier and
our other carriers get no such support from the Philippine
government.
In our part of the world, many
airlines are either partly or wholly owned by the state. For some
Asian countries, keeping their airlines at par with the world’s
best is a matter of national pride—and they don’t mind spending
billions of taxpayer dollars just to be able to do so.
For instance, the charming
Singapore Girl who promises to satisfy the fantasies of air
travelers is actually a civil servant because Singapore Airlines is
owned entirely by the city-state’s government.
Other Asian airlines such as Thai
Airways International, Malaysian Airlines, Korean Air and Asiana
regularly get infusions of state funds. Practically all of the
countries in the Middle East also subsidize their airlines.
In other parts of the
world—from North America to Europe to Australasia—governments
continue to support their flag carriers notwithstanding admonitions
from their own officials and economists that governments have—to
borrow the free-traders’ mantra—no business going into business.
State subsidies to airlines are
bad because they give unfair competition to those of countries like
the Philippines that do not give financial support to their
carriers.
What is worse in our case is that
the government is giving undeserved advantage—in the guise of an
“open skies” policy—to foreign airlines that are heavily
subsidized by their own governments.
Despite the lack of government
support, our carriers have managed to keep their heads above water.
But the question is, for how much longer?
Philippine Airlines, for
instance, was able to post profits without subsidies from the
government. It registered record net earnings of $140.3 million for
fiscal 2006-07—PAL’s third profitable year in a row.
The milestone has emboldened the
private flag carrier—the only one of its kind in Southeast
Asia—to apply for an exit from receivership from the Securities
and Exchange Commission by the end of the year.
PAL, therefore, had good reason
to take the moral high ground as it joined the global call for the
abolition of all forms of government subsidies to flag
carriers—especially those in Southeast Asia and the Middle
East—as a precondition to the liberalization of the aviation
industry.
PAL executives, led by
vice-president for marketing support Felix Cruz, said at a recent
press forum that subsidies and all other forms of state support
“can seriously distort competition.”
They added that PAL is ready to
compete but underscored the need for “equal opportunity” for the
“open skies” regime, which certain government officials have
long been pressing for.
PAL joins other airlines, such as
Australia’s flag carrier Qantas, which has called for a ban on
unfair subsidies enjoyed by Emirates, Qatar Airways, Singapore
Airlines and other carriers.
|
