PIA needs to do more

IT comes as good news that the European Union has lifted the ban it had imposed some time ago on our national carrier PIA’s flights. The news is not good enough, though, to call for celebration. The fact of the matter is that the EU had blacklisted the airline not because of any issues extraneous to the airline’s affairs, but on account of safety concerns. The main issues involved maintenance levels and age of some aircraft, especially Boeing 747s and Airbus 310s. These planes did not meet airworthiness standards, and hence posed safety risks to passengers as well as airports where they landed - something for which there can no acceptable excuse. Thanks to the EU intervention, PIA authorities have now done the needful vis-à-vis safety questions. The EU Transport Commissioner, Jacques Barrot, issued a statement in Brussels on Wednesday saying when airlines take “rapid and sound corrective action” to comply with safety standards, they can be quickly withdrawn from the list of banned airlines. It is a matter of satisfaction that the EU has removed our national carrier from its blacklisted airlines, thereby restoring its international reputation; and, more importantly, passenger confidence. Still, it is sad that the PIA management took the necessary corrective action only when faced with punitive measures, not of its own accord. It is hardly surprising if the same pattern of behaviour has been on display with regard to domestic flights. A particularly appalling example is that of Fokker aircraft. It may be recalled that in May 2005 the then parliamentary secretary for defence had expressed concern about the aircraft’s dependability on the floor of the National Assembly. Pointing out that most of those planes had logged over 200,000 hours of flights as against the recommended 90,000 hours, he had called for the grounding of the Fokker fleet. But no one took heed, until a year later in July 2006 a Fokker crashed near Multan, killing all 45 passengers and crew aboard.
Notably, that was the second Fokker crash in three years’ time, the earlier one having taken place in February 2003 killing the chief of the air staff, his wife and 15 senior air force officials. Yet even after the Multan crash the authorities refused to ground the aged aircraft, and agreed to make amends only in the face of unsubsiding public outcry. The point of it all is that the PIA management must not become complacent with the removal of the EU ban. It must take stock of the reasons behind the deterioration that has beset the airline’s maintenance standards over the years so as to find satisfactory solutions for the problem. There seems to be truth in the reports that say a large number of aeronautical engineers and technicians have left PIA to take up more lucrative jobs in the Gulf region. It would surely be unrealistic for such people to expect the same kind of remunerations in Pakistan, but what the airline is willing to pay them should be commensurate with better standards of service within PIA itself. What is at stake is not only the commercial interest of the airline but the well-being of its captive market of Pakistani passengers, both inside and outside the country: The former because they hardly have any choices and the latter because the sight of the national carrier evokes patriotic sentiments in them. One can only hope PIA will exhibit the same kind of “rapid and corrective action” with regard to the planes flying on domestic routes that it has displayed in its efforts to comply with international safety standards in order to escape from the EU blacklist.
 

Run of bad luck

NAPOLEON is said to have asked of a well-qualified officer seeking promotion to general: “Yes, but is he lucky?” Had he been around at the time, it is doubtful that Britain’s embattled Prime Minister Gordon Brown would ever have attained the rank of staff officer in Napoleon’s army. In the past six weeks, Brown has presided over the first run on a British bank in more than a century, the loss of detailed computer records of 25 million people and now, for the second time in two years, his Labour party is under police investigation for illegal political funding. Ever since he abandoned heavily leaked plans for a snap November election, Brown’s government has staggered from one unlucky moment to another. Now opinion polls show the opposition Conservatives well ahead while confidence in the government plummets. Brown’s fortunes are unlikely to improve. And this time he will be the maker of his own misfortune. The economic downturn is already hitting UK tax yields and the government has been forced to borrow more and more in order to fund expensive — but largely ineffective — ”improvements” to health and schools. In his 10 years as the chancellor of the exchequer, Brown fostered the image of a dour and prudent politician who believed in good financial housekeeping. However, while he kept taxes low on incomes, he produced a range of “stealth taxes” which have steadily raised the total tax burden, taking the UK back toward the top of the European tax league. This is going to be laid at Brown’s door when the economic pips begin to squeak and the Labour government has either to borrow even more or raise taxes again.
Brown’s lack of good fortune is in strong contrast with his predecessor Tony Blair. Blair got away with everything including taking his country to war in Iraq on a tissue of lies and the “sale” of peerages and other honors to big Labour party financial supporters. Part of Blair’s ability lay in his charisma and the eminently plausible tone in which he explained himself. Even when you knew he was lying, it was sometimes hard to disbelieve him. Brown has nothing of these talents. An awkward jaw movement while he speaks distracts from what he says; his manner is ponderous and his charisma zero. Add to this a far less adroit political spin machine than Blair built for himself and you have a political leader whose only defense is his record, and suddenly Gordon Brown’s record does not look very good at all. The chances that the latest political funding scandal will bring the Brown government down look remote though big political heads may roll. It does mean, however, that the man who gained the office he so long desired and from which he was blocked by Blair, has to find some way to restore his political fortunes. If Labour’s unpopularity continues, the knives will be out for Brown in the hope that a new leader can win a fourth term in power in 2010. Brown is discovering that just as nothing succeeds like success, so nothing fails like failure.

—Arab News