Click to play videoThe old airports in Bangalore and Hyderabad will not shut down, said Union Civil Aviation Minister Praful Patel on a day that saw Left-backed unions supporting a strike called by the Airports Authority of India.
But the Minister insisted he was responding to the state governments and not to the protestors.
He announced in Parliament that as part of its contractual obligations, the Government of India was obliged to close down existing airports once the new airports are operational. But the old airports in Hyderabad and Bangalore would not be closed down, instead they will only be open for defence and VIP aircraft.
“The existing airports at Hyderabad and Bangalore would continue to remain operational for general aviation, defence purposes, national emergencies etc. Further the interests of the AAI employees at these airports will be fully protected," he said.
Meanwhile, the “non-co-operation movement” backed by Left unions saw a lukewarm response at the airports. Essential services were maintained and passengers were not inconvenienced after all.
It was perhaps a telling statement on the dwindling impact of trade unions in India. CNN-IBN show Face the Nation debated if these unions were fighting a losing battle.
On the panel to debate the issue were CITU Secretary and CPI-M leader, Dipankar Mukherjee; Vice-Chairman, Mercury Travels, Ashwini Kakkar and Managing Editor, Consumer Voice, Shriram Khanna. The show was moderated by Senior Editor Sagarika Ghose.
While the strike failed to take off in full steam, questions are being raised as to whether it was responsible of CITU to hold public to ransom.
But CITU Secretary Dipankar Mukherjee rubbished the argument and said there was a method to the so-called madness. “Do you think 25,000 airport employees have gone on strike – despite ESMA and all sorts of intimidating measures – have gone on strike just to inconvenience the public? It is the other way round. Tomorrow these consumers might just end up paying Rs 750 instead of Rs 250 as airport charges. They must thank the airport employees as they are taking up people’s interest,” he said.
There is another side to the story as well. Since the hullabaloo is over shutting down of old airports in Bangalore and Hyderabad, a Devil’s Advocate argument could be letting the old and new function simultaneously and perhaps even compete with each other. This will only facilitate the rising traffic.
Ashwini Kakkar agreed that while this could be a valid argument, he also cited reasons why it’s not feasible. Stating the Delhi-Gurgaon Expressway situation as an example, Kakkar listed out government’s troubles with such a plan.
“The govt has already given a contractual agreement that the old airports will be shut down. It will be morally and ethically bound to live up to its commitment. On the other hand, growth in air traffic has been phenomenal – 40-45 per cent both in Hyderabad and Bangalore. So the Minister has probably seen it and has allowed the old airports to function partially,” he said.
Old vs new or old and new?
Also, once an airport is completely shut down, the government loses out on expensive equipment and as Kakkar pointed out, it gets tough to “bring it back into action.” Whereas if the old airports are kept partially functional, he said there was always a possibility of “changing the sharing formula” and bringing the old airport back to fully operational.
But customer’s plight is a precarious situation. Kakkar said the passengers will be at the receiving end of such drastic change and will lose a lot of money in the bargain.
“Even today, a customer can buy a vanilla air ticket for Rs 500 – there is a Rs 1500 tax on it. On top of that if you add Rs 800 as the UDF (airport charges) and Rs 1200 as commuting-to-airport charges, the sutomer pays Rs 4,000 extra,” he pointed out, adding, “The customer will pay Rs 3,000 more than before for a Hyderabad-Bangalore return trip.”
Therefore, in the slugfest between the Government – that’s bound by a contractual agreement – and the Left – that’s out to prove a point – it’s the commoner who suffers.
However, Shriram Khanna of Consumer Voice spoke very strongly in favour of shutting down the old airports. “You walk in to any major airport in India and compare it with any small airport elsewhere in Asia, India is put to shame. India looks like a trashcan. So if you are talking of ‘rising India’, old airports must be shut down. India needs good airports with good facilities and that will cost money,” he said.
Airports pvt ltd?
Privatisation has had its success stories too. For example, if BSNL and MTNL could get their act together with the entry of private players, why can’t the airports do the same.
Khanna said AAI should have let Government of India modernise the airport five years ago. “These employees went on strike against privatisation.”
But Mukherjee defended the CITU and insisted it was factually incorrect to say it was a “losing battle” for the trade unions. “It is a losing battle for the Parliamentary democracy,” he said, showing on screen the Standing Committee Report of the Left that was tabled on March 5.
“It’s unanimous report that recommends the old airports should not be closed,” he insisted, adding, “We are asking to be allowed to compete with these private airports.”
Mukherjee said if the new airports were so global in nature as being projected, why are the authorities scared of competition from AAI?
Khanna replied to Mukherjee’s arguments and said setting up any new facility involves money and time. “But ultimately, transport systems have to come up. After having allowed a new party to come in, you allow a new airport, you will kill the new airport because the traffic in Bangalore is not large enough for both airports to become viable. So if you want the AAI to compete, let them build the new airport in Delhi,” he said.
Mukherjee maintained he was all for competition between the two airports and the issue must not be “trivialised” as a trade union problem.
So can Delhi function in the same manner? Can AAI and GMR coexist in a competitive environment? Kakkar, however, said the need of the hour was holistic planning and not cut-throat competition. “We have made old airports out of the new airports. Holistic development was the need of the hour. We need to think of road and MRTS around the airport. Once the traffic starts flowing in, it’ll get tough to widen the roads or create more infrastructure.”
Importantly, Kakkar said the new airports in Bangalore and Hyderabad will not be drastically different from the old ones, at least initially, because of this very lack of planning. “It’s going to be a disaster,” he said.
Khanna too agreed with Kakkar on most points and said the need of the hour was to concentrate resources on development. He also said the employees were striking in consumer’s interest. “All this change will result in change of employee profiles and AAI will have to restructure itself and there’s employee resistance in doing that,” he said.
This point enraged Mukherjee even more. “Fine, we have asked for a referendum from the passengers in Hyderabad and Mumbai. The strike was not a film show and so there’s no question of whether it was a flop or not,” he said.
Kakkar concluded the heated debate with a witty observation. “Only time will tell what’s right. In the meantime, the train fares introduced by Mr Lalu Yadav will be much more attractive to the passenger at least for the next one year or so.”
Final results: SMS/Web poll
QOTD: Airport stir flop: Are trade unions fighting a losing battle?
Yes: 93 per cent
No: 7 per cent
(For updates you can share with your friends, follow IBNLive on Facebook, Twitter and Google+)
displayed with permission. Use of the CNN name and/or logo on or as part of CNN-IBN does not derogate from the intellectual property rights of Cable News Network in respect of them.