|
CONTRARY
to the claims that open skies is welcome in many
countries, the Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB) has
disputed that it is freely embraced as part of their
national aviation policies.
Lawyer
Carmelo Arcilla, CAB executive director, during the
aviation forum at the Asian Institute of Management
sponsored by the Philippine Chamber of Commerce and
Industry, said countries in general liberalize at
varying paces suitable to their respective needs, on a
case-to-case basis within the bilateral and multilateral
framework.
Open
skies proponents, like the Freedom to Fly Coalition,
have claimed that many countries now are reportedly
openly advocating for open skies to justify the
coalition’s attempt to pressure the Philippine
government into declaring a pocket open skies policy in
Clark, Cebu and
other places.
Arcilla
said generally, economically developed countries with
very low population base like Dubai, Bahrain and
Singapore tend to strongly advocate for open skies
because they have practically no market to open.
“On the
other hand, an open skies regime will allow their strong
carriers to access foreign markets and feed their hubs,”
he said.
He said
another category of countries that strongly advocate for
open skies are large nations with well-developed
economics and dominant carriers that stand to benefit
from an open skies regime.
“One
more category of countries that readily embrace open
skies are those with marginal economies, small markets
and insignificant international aviation industry to
chance upon the possibility of reaping dividends in an
open aviation regime,” he emphasized.
To
dispute that the countries cited by open skies advocates
are freely embracing open skies, the CAB head revealed
the following information:
§
China’s
open skies policy only applies to Hainan Island, not the
entire country. However, the grant of rights to this
destination is within the bilateral or multilateral
framework. Overall, China’s aviation liberalization
policy is incremental and selective.
§
Vietnam’s liberalized policy for selected provinces is
implemented on a bilateral and reciprocal basis.
§
Cambodia’s open skies at Siem Riep applies only to
charter flights but with no 5th freedom privileges.
§
Singapore’s open skies policy is based on strict
reciprocity and exchanges of traffic rights through
bilateral or multilateral negotiations and subject to
market demand.
§
India’s
so-called open skies policy grants unilateral privileges
only for cargo services but sets limits on foreign
carriers’ passenger services.
§
The
United Arab Emirates
now requires reciprocal rights in bilateral negotiations
that enforce capacity restrictions.
§
Hong Kong’s so-called liberal policy just recently rejected Cebu
Pacific’s application for charter flights between
Clark
and Hong Kong. This is notwithstanding the fact that the
Philippines
has granted Hong Kong carriers liberal rights between
Hong Kong and Clark.
Arcilla
said the CAB is supporting progressive liberalization as
this policy enhances competition, investments and market
opportunities without unduly and severely curtailing the
rights of national carriers to equal opportunity and
fair competition.
“The
Philippines is pursuing a national and progressive
approach to liberalization through the expansion of
traffic rights in existing air services agreements,
liberalization of charter services, creation of pocket
open skies or liberalized hubs and active participation
in regional and multilateral liberalization
initiatives,” he said. |