What did Estrada and Arroyo talk about?

What was the subject of the conversation when Manila Mayor Joseph Estrada visited Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo at the Veterans Memorial Medical Center in December?

There are rumors that the two former presidents and yet another, Fidel V. Ramos, who has also visited GMA, are planning an alliance to support a candidate against P-Noy’s candidate for the 2016 presidential election. Is this true?

Not true at all, Erap told journalists at his San Juan residence last Sunday. He and GMA did not talk politics at all, he said.

So what did they talk about? Would you believe they talked about their childhood in San Juan? GMA grew up in San Juan, now the bailiwick of the Erap dynasty. She finished elementary school at St. John Academy there. She graduated from college at Assumption College in Makati.

Erap said he offered GMA the use of his resort in Tanay, Rizal, where he was confined under house arrest when he himself was on trial for plunder. He said she would enjoy it there, as he did. It has two swimming pools, a pond with plenty of ducks, geese, and flamingoes, several theme picnic areas for guests, even a Western-style bar that can be used as location for shooting cowboy movies. It has a piggery, a flock of big birds, a number of horses and a small pony, which will be just right for GMA, he said, giggling. But she was noncommittal to his offer, he said.

He also disclosed that a top official of the Department of Foreign Affairs had requested him to hold off on his planned apology to Hong Kong for the deaths of several HK tourists during the Manila hostage drama in 2010. He said he was told that P-Noy may join him in his letter of apology. Hong Kong is demanding P-Noy’s apology, not Erap’s, for the deaths. It is also demanding the payment of the equivalent of P160 million to the families of those killed, he said.

* * *

Whenever there is a public bidding for projects in the Philippines, the losing bidders will, as surely as the sun rises in the east, file a protest, and discredit the winning bidder to try to disqualify it and have a new bidding. The bidding for the Mactan-Cebu International Airport (MCIA), a Public-Private Partnership project, is no exception.

Immediately after the results of the bidding for the project was announced by the Department of Transportation and Communications, criticisms erupted against the winning bidder, the GMR-Megawide Consortium, ranging from the noninclusion in the construction of a second, parallel runway to questions on its credentials.

Soon after the second highest bidder, Filinvest-CAI, filed its protest with the DOTC, there arose a barrage of criticism from various quarters, from business columns to hot air from politicians and armchair experts.

Why the complaints from Filinvest-CAI at this late stage when it has lost in the bidding? There was plenty of time to question the qualifications of GMR-Megawide before the bidding. The bidding committee made a thorough and detailed assessment of each bidder’s credentials during the prequalification stage and found them qualified. Losers raising questions on the qualification of the winning bidder after the bid results were announced undermines the credibility and integrity of the PPP.

Besides, there is an antilobbying clause in the bidding rules that bans participants from lobbying for themselves or against another. The complaints and attacks against the winning bidder are clear violations of this rule.

But what are the facts for and against these criticisms?

In its bid, GMR-Megawide declared the following to the DOTC:

1. Within seven years, GMR (an Indian company) emerged as one of the world’s leading airport companies. It is the third largest private company in the world in terms of passenger volume handled at airports.

2. Before GMR took over the operation of the Indira Gandhi International Airport, it was in 100th place in the global service quality rankings of airports by Airports Council International. After five years, the IGIA is now ranked the world’s second best airport in the 25-40 million category.

The Hyderabad airport, also operated by GMR, has been ranked No. 1 for two consecutive years in the 5-15 million category.

3. GMR is also an environmentally-conscious company. It was awarded a Gold Leadership in Energy and Environment Design (LEED) rating by the US Green Building Council for the new T3 terminal at the New Delhi airport. It also received a Silver LEED for the Hyderabad airport.

On the other hand, it is amusing how Filinvest-CAI is trying to ride on Changi (Singapore) Airport’s brand name and reputation. A closer look at the records will show that Filinvest has partnered, not with Changi Singapore, but with Changi Saudi Arabia.

Changi Saudi Arabia has an operations and management contract for the King Fahd International Airport in Damman, which handles 3.2 million passengers annually. It is on the sixth and final year of its contract and there is no news as yet that its contract will be extended.

And interestingly, despite Changi’s airport operation experience, Damman airport was ranked 157th (out of nearly 200 airports) globally in terms of Airport Service Quality in 2012.

The operating partner of Filinvest is actually operating and managing an airport smaller than the Cebu airport in terms of volume of passengers handled annually and is, in fact, at the bottom 30 percent globally in passenger service quality.

Filinvest made a mistake in raising questions on a rival bidder’s operating experience.