MANILA, Philippines — Two Mondays ago, I wrote about how the Department of Tourism was given a new shot-in-thearm with the appointment of advertising guru Mon Jimenez as its new Secretary.

I’ve received a lot of e-mails from concerned citizens expressing both relief and optimism that, at long last, a truly qualified marketing man is now at the helm of one of our most important revenue-generating institutions.

Many have intimated their concerns over the state of our main international gateway, NAIA Terminal 1 (NAIA-1), and the kind of first impression it gives our visitors. Concerns range from the ridiculously long queues at the ingress security gates, check-in and immigration counters, to the decrepit state of the facility itself.

Interestingly, most of those who’ve vented their concerns did so, not so much because of personal inconvenience, but from a genuine concern about the unsavory image it gives our country.

I, too, regret that NAIA-1 does not put our best foot forward nor does it represent the beauty that our country has to offer; but I’m gladdened, at least, that our people now have a growing sense of awareness on the impressions we project to our visitors. This “tourism frame of mind” was not apparent a decade ago, but is clearly prevalent today.

NAIA 1 is an old and undersizedfacility, and for that, it gets a lot of flack from both our people and tourists alike. But before we judge it too harshly, let’s consider some facts.

About NAIA-1

The 67,000 square meter NAIA-1 began service in 1982 and was built to accommodate 4.5 million passengers a year. It surpassed its true capacity in 1991 and was supposed to be succeeded by the NAIA Terminal 3 (NAIA-3), a 189,000 square meter facility, constructed via the Build-Operate and Transfer (BOT) scheme with PIATCO and Germany’s Fraport group as its project proponents.

NAIA-3 is capable of servicing 13 million passengers a year and was intended to come online in 2002. But as usual, allegedly onerous conditions and political machinations of both the Erap and GMA governments caused the courts to abrogate PIATCO’s BOT contract. This put the entire NAIA-3 project in limbo until its partial opening for domestic service in 2008.

Through all this, the country has had to make do with NAIA-1, despite passenger traffic ballooning to 27.1 million a year. That’s six times its true capacity! Today despite the obvious limitations in space and financial resources, the folks at the Manila International Airport Authority (MIAA), headed by its General Manager, retired Maj. Gen. Jose Angel Honrado, deserves some credit for making it work, even if just at a functional level. It is, by no means, an easy feat.

NAIA-1 has continued to serve the nation for 29 years and should not be the subject of scorn for what it fails to deliver. If anything, we should be thankful that it continues to be of service in spite of the stress we subject it to. The real culprit here is the people who corrupted the NAIA-3 deal. They have, in effect, sabotaged NAIA-1’s natural successor.

Not Just the Terminals

The problems of the Manila International Airport transcend not just the natural capacities of its terminals, but the capacity of the runways as well. Manila has two runways: runway 13-31, the track of tarmac suitable for small- to medium-sized aircrafts; and runway 06-24, the larger track capable of accommodating aircrafts as large as the Boeing 777 or 747-400. These two runways service domestic, international and privately operated aircrafts.

With the volume of flights takingoff and landing on a daily basis, Manila’s two runways are operating at maximum capacity especially on the 7 a.m. to 2 p.m. time slots. This is the preferred departure and arrival schedule of most airlines. The cue for runway use is the reason why flights are often delayed prior to take-off, or made to circle around the city before given clearance to land.

PAL has always been given preferential treatment in timeslotting, as in most other aspects of airport operations. PAL exacerbates the si tuat ion by purpor tedl y demanding that its code-sharing partners (with Middle Eastern airlines) also be given take-off and landing time slots during peak hours.

This is why NAIA-1 is bursting at the seams in the late mornings and early afternoons.

As for our three terminals, the volume of flights coming in and out of Manila has gone to such a degree that even if NAIA-3 were to be fully operational, it still would not be enough to accommodate the traffic.

Whether we like it or not, NAIA-1 would have to continue sharing the load along with NAIA-2 (exclusively used by PAL) and NAIA-3.

The only logical solution is to transfer or split international flights between Manila and Clark.

Unfortunately, this may not happen anytime soon. The contract to build and operate a new international terminal in Clark has not even entered the bidding stage. Moreover, an airport in Clark can never be viable until a mass transit system connecting Manila to Clark is in place. As we all know, the Northrail deal under GMA went kaput and is now back to restructuring stage.

Making the Best/The Good News

I have to hand it to MIAA GM Honrado and his team for their fighting spirit.

Sources report that an extensive menu of improvements are now in the offing to put NAIA-1 back in fighting form while we wait for Clark to come online.

An extensive physical renovation will be undertaken, costing P100 million, with no less than renowned interior designers Budji Layug and Royal Pinada spearheading the design effort. The renovation will cover the aesthetic aspect of the terminal, particularly the check-in, pre-departure and arrival areas, as well as the construction of a multi-storey parking terminal.

We understand that some structures within the terminal itself will be demolished to free up common area space. The renovation works will be fully funded by MIAA itself and should be completed by 2012.

What NAIA-1 lacks in space, it will compensate for by having a more efficient passenger flow and a strong “wow factor” design-wise. It is planned to be a showcase to cement Filipinos’ reputation as the design trendsetters of Asia. We understand that at least six departments of government were given direct orders by the President to actualize the project, ASAP.

As for the choked-up runways, GM Honrado has plans to build more rapid exits along the runways to allow aircrafts to immediately taxi out to the gates instead of making a wide detour on the next island break. He also intends to enforce a more sensible schedule of timeslotting to decongest peak hours.

Simultaneously, he is working double time to sort out the structural and technical issues at NAIA-3 to make its parking annex and computerized baggage sorting mechanism fully operational.

Certain facets of airport operations like immigration, customs and travel collection do not fall under the jurisdiction of the MIAA, but that of the Bureau of Immigration and Deportation (BID), Bureau of Customs (BOC) and Department of Tourism (DOT), respectively.

Yet when they cause inconvenience to the passengers by not having enough personnel on deck, MIAA can only “request” that these agencies deploy more personnel. This is why we fully support the move to have MIAA gain operational authority over BID and BOC personnel when performing duties within the confines of NAIA terminals.

Since MIAA GM Honrado and his team of experts are now at the height of planning NAIA-1’s improvements, I would like to suggest some modifications to the Airport fee system, as well as indoor advertising policies within the airport.

For many countries, the airport fee is often included in the purchase of the ticket, which is why there is no need to queue up to pay the fee prior to going through immigration. This used to be the case in NAIA until its collecting agency, PAL, allegedly established a record of not paying MIAA on time. Thus, MIAA was compelled to collect the fees themselves.

Collecting airport fees adds yet another hurdle to the cumbersome check-in process. We recommend that it revert to the old system whereby the same is built into the cost of the ticket. Alternatively, machines similar to an ATM, strategically located all over the check-in lobby, can be used as a convenient means to pay airport fees. This is the system used at the Vancouver International Airport.

As for indoor advertising, while we are aware that MIAA earns revenues from bulk-selling advert ising space wi thin i t s facilities, it should employ stricter regulations on its content.

Today, we see ugly, tasteless ads in our airports selling everything from cheap condos to facelifts. First of all, we think indoor billboards should be placed sparingly and not in every nook and cranny of the airport. Second, we think that the content of the ad should be 70 percent tourism-oriented (or corporate social responsibility oriented) and 30 percent focused on brand and product.

The Light

Career executives of MIAA tell me that they have never witnessed such determination to improve the state of our airports as they see with the current management.

And to add credence to its efforts, the DOTC, DOF, DTI and the office of the President are all working in tandem to get the improvement programs done at the soonest possible time. The plans they have in the offing sound good to me, and if only for this, I now see light at the end of the NAIA-1 tunnel.

Andrew is an economist, political analyst and businessman. He is a 20-year veteran in the hospitality and tour i sm indus t r y. For comments and reactions, e-mail andrew_rs6@yahoo.com.