|  
      
       You are currently 
        in the Archives section. Please be aware that some information and links 
        in the archived page may be outdated. 
      Click here 
        to return to the Archives' main page to see the list of archived articles. 
       
     | 
     
       A 
        R C H I V E S 
      E D I T O R I A L 
       "A 
        YEAR OF JELLING" 
        by Geoffrey Arend 
           By 
        now it is no secret that 2002 was not a very good year. 
             Worldwide airline losses were cut 30% during 
        2002 but when you add that up, the numbers still total about a seven billion 
        USD minus as compared to ten billion in red ink for 2001.  
             US Airways and United Airlines went bankrupt 
        in 2002 while National, Midway and Vanguard went out of business altogether. 
             The restaurant chain Hooters might have 
        saved Vanguard, but that deal fell through.  
             
        Hooters found another airline company willing to sell, and apparently 
        will take off soon.  
             The Hooters episode does reinforce a wonderful 
        and slightly delirious thing about this industry.  
             Now and forever, there is always somebody 
        who wants to start an airline.  
             No one should ever doubt that like the genie 
        out of a bottle, once air service is established somebody will step up 
        and continue no matter whose name was once on the side of the airplane. 
         
             The desire of the wealthy to find some mad 
        money and get into the business of flying has not changed all that much 
        since two brothers from Ohio made a killing in the bicycle business and 
        later took off at Kitty Hawk, North Carolina on man’s first ‘heavier than 
        air’ flight a century ago in 1903.  
             But what lies ahead for aviation and more 
        to the point, the world air cargo business?  
             We approach 2003 after two years of crises 
        and uncertainty, failure and suffering, the result of terrorism and recession. 
         
             Never before in the history of aviation 
        have two such deadly elements conspired against our industry.  
             We begin 2003 with the oppressive possibility 
        of war and further terrorism hanging over everyone.  
             For a moment we can imagine possibilities, 
        if things just calm down.  
             We think 2003 will need to be a jelling 
        experience for our industry, a period of calm and predictable movement 
        toward what is now referred to as a “new normal’ in the airline business. 
             Nowhere in the world is it more important 
        that the airline business get a grip and get back somewhere in the neighborhood 
        of where it belongs than the United States of America.  
             There is an old expression here in New York 
        that comes to mind about Americans.  
             “Comes a great challenge and the citizen 
        army of the United States reaches down into the mass of the people and 
        pours them into a general hopper that turns them into builders.”  
             While nothing can replace the return in 
        greater numbers of passengers to the skies, air cargo must use this time 
        to unite in an effort to chart a new course putting forward the agenda 
        of a vital and growing industry to the world at large.  
             It has never been more apparent that something 
        must be done to foster a strong air cargo industry voice in all matters, 
        including security, government’s increasing role and financial interest 
        in the airlines business and other challenges ahead.  
             We are only two years out of the 1990’s 
        a time when business got bigger as air cargo companies got fewer and sterner 
        and more steely like big machines.  
             But now with business in free-fall, just 
        after reporting the worst Christmas retail season in 40 years we discover 
        that the 1990’s did not unbend every twig or destroy every individual. 
         
             There is still plenty good about being an 
        independent, small or big part of air cargo.  
             Right now as the new year begins, there 
        is time for longing, thinking, resting and living, before 2003 gets going 
        and it’s time to fight our way back to business gain.  
             This year we need to hear from the leaders 
        of this industry in voices, loud and clear.  
             Air cargo organizations and their influential 
        leadership must come forward with opinions, plans and some new ideas. 
         
             The free ride is over.  
             The Air Forwarders Association and Cargo 
        Network Services, TIACA and others in our view have so far displayed an 
        appalling case of collective laryngitis.  
             As 2003 dawns and air cargo and the airline 
        business are in a time of maximum peril, it’s like everybody has lost 
        their voice at the same time.  
             Rather than combining activities at some 
        posh golf resort or spending an inordinate amount of time asking us to 
        sponsor a coffee break at a conferences, we need our industry leaders 
        to tell us they are at work, building cooperation and understanding amongst 
        the various factions of air cargo so that a unified front can be formed 
        to lobby for air cargo, insuring that among other things, air cargo is 
        not hamstrung by government regulations. 
             The high-profile industry “experts” have 
        been no better. These writers of yearly cargo reports and earners of fat 
        consulting fees have without exception retreated into a collective cave 
        somewhere during what adds up to air cargo’s darkest hour.  
             Where are these consultants with their always-ready 
        five year and ten year prognostications and speeches at trade shows and 
        pay for view functions?  
             Plenty of small to medium companies in air 
        cargo are thinking, the hell with a five-year growth curve.  
             What will it take to survive the next year 
        is what they want to hear about.  
             In all of the horror stories of the past 
        two years there are not enough people willing to stick their heads up 
        in anything more than an observational mode to take on the critical issues 
        facing the industry.  
             It is absolutely outrageous that U.S. government 
        edict of not allowing parcel post aboard passenger flights.  
             The ban on Parcel Post must be lifted or 
        at least be modified once and for all.  
             U.S. carriers are losing at least a half 
        billion dollars annually because of government restrictions as to what 
        may be carried in the bellies of passenger flights.  
             So far the only solutions that have bubbled 
        up and been made public specific to future cargo security is employing 
        bomb sniffing dogs or forcing airlines to go from bread and butter pallets 
        to reinforced containers to carry belly cargo. 
             Both solutions raise serious questions and 
        doubt to say the least.  
             Around the world, cargo people to a person 
        must wonder at what is going on in America.  
             But the fascination is also tinged with 
        concern that eventually U.S. Government and specifically the Transportation 
        Security Agency (TSA) will rear its head with ugly knee-jerk mandates 
        for international flags.  
             There is something we can do to help the 
        air cargo industry at the grass roots level.  
             Clubs and organizations here in America 
        and worldwide should gather themselves into a mighty voice, each of themselves 
        and let government know that it is beyond time for air cargo to be given 
        the benefit of its expertise in the form of a voice, as the new “secure” 
        airline business is established.  
             Elsewhere while everybody with an airplane 
        and a dream is trying to figure out how to get hooked up with Mainland 
        China, perhaps the most compelling recent events in Asia aside from the 
        surprising and horrible terror bombing in Bali and the anemic sinking 
        fortunes of Singapore is the “new normal” albeit “unofficial” relations 
        between Taiwan and China.  
             Make no mistake, unless Mainland China does 
        something overt, military or just plain stupid, the drawing together of 
        China and Taiwan gathers even greater momentum in 2003, as business continues 
        to seemingly know no borders.  
             Those Lunar New Year flights between Shanghai 
        and Taipei are just the beginning.  
             In late December, Beijing and Taiwan sat 
        across from each other at a table at the Warwick Hotel in Geneva with 
        seven other members of the World Trade Organization (WTO).  
             The discussion was about steel but the buzz 
        was about China and Taiwan. For the first time in memory, both had somebody 
        on the other side at the same table that spoke the same language. 
             Anybody who thinks the Chinese don’t know 
        how to be great capitalists and will not eventually work out their differences 
        is not paying attention.  
             Recent China Airlines (CAL) order with Boeing 
        that needed U.S. President Bush intervention to get done, is an indication 
        in the most strident terms that Taiwan increasingly sees its future business 
        interests not with America, but with Mainland China.  
             But give Hong Kong some attention and some 
        credit for a stellar effort as well, if you are in marketing anywhere, 
        including a gateway or an airline.  
             There can be little doubt that the future 
        of China lies beyond the former Crown Colony.  
             Right now as Shanghai prepares to sink billions 
        into a huge combined airport/seaport free trade zone, and tens of thousands 
        of Taiwanese business men are gleeful about flying home in a couple of 
        weeks minus the change plane delay/ bottleneck, Hong Kong has managed 
        to host what must be a record number of trade shows, brought forward a 
        new open skies agreement with the USA and forged a cooperation and development 
        deal with the other major gateways in China.  
             SAR cannot look kindly upon any arrangement 
        that would open Beijing/Taipei direct flights.  
             But publicly the airport authority unveiled 
        charts and statistics that pointed to less than gloom and doom for the 
        gateway if and when those flights become permanent.  
             Hong Kong will eventually find a new purpose 
        and level in the 21st Century much as New York did when international 
        airlines expanded services to other gateways all over America after deregulation 
        in 1978.  
             In the meantime Hong Kong’s Chek Lap Kok 
        is top dog airport in China.  
             The airport authority in Hong Kong as mentioned, 
        has done a masterful marketing effort of a quality and duration that someday 
        should be studied by anyone who wants to do that job right.  
             Getting TIACA to show up last year for their 
        bi-annual confab was one thing. TIACA has become notorious for following 
        the money rather than showing in the airport or city that matters.  
             As example, TIACA passed on LAX for Washington, 
        D.C. in 2000. Last year it took the money and gave SAR the nod over Shanghai. 
         
             But when 9/11 ripped the guts out of sponsors 
        for the TIACA Hong Kong fest, the airport authority came up big, getting 
        both sponsors and saving ‘face’ for the TIACA 2000 show.
      
      | 
    
      
         
          |  
               
                 If 
              I may, I’ll start with an ancient quote, from an ancient Roman, 
              which was prompted by your recent 
              editorial regarding “Jabba the Hut”: 
             
              “No sooner 
                did we form into teams than we were re-organised. I was to learn 
                later in life that we tend to meet every new situation by re-organising; 
                and what a wonderful method it is for giving the illusion of progress, 
                whilst only producing confusion, inefficiency, and demoralisation.” 
               Petronus 
                A.D.66 
                 
             
                 As 
              you will be fully aware, the European aviation security regime has 
              been based on a policy document produced by the European Civil Aviation 
              Conference (ECAC Doc. 30) which was expanded in content from the 
              ICAO Annex 17, and was the aviation security policy document for 
              the 38 member states of ECAC (greater Europe), much of it being 
              implemented via JAA requirements on airlines.  
                   Following the tragedy of Lockerbie 
              in 1988, a number of the ECAC member states amended their own national 
              aviation security programmes, and incorporated into them the provisions 
              of the “regulated” air cargo agent.  
                   These programmes contained legally 
              enforceable requirements on the regulated air cargo agents for both 
              international PAX and all-cargo air uplift. Although these regulated 
              programme requirements were seen initially as a great financial 
              and operational imposition on the industry, the need for them was 
              fully understandable. The passage of time has not seen any great 
              expansion in the number of European countries that followed this 
              lead, and it was really only a matter of time before another aviation 
              security disaster took the matter further.  
                   In fairness to the European Union, 
              the concept of “One Stop Security” was raised by DG TREN in spring 
              of 2001 with the issue of a white paper. ECAC was already committed 
              to the harmonised implementation of its aviation security policy 
              in consultation with other international organisations (ICAO and 
              the EU), and the policy advocated the one stop security concept 
              for its 38 member states. 
                   The tragedy of 911 cannot be understated, 
              nor the impact for the aviation industry worldwide be underestimated. 
              The immediate cessation of flights, and the follow up imposition 
              of draconian transatlantic cargo and passenger security measures 
              required urgent operational and administrative amendment which the 
              industry is still living with today. 
                   The European Union pushed forward 
              its “one Stop Security” aviation measures, but instead of starting 
              from scratch, immediately consulted with the body of European expertise 
              in these matters -ECAC. Aviation security was effectively taken 
              forward as a joint enterprise EU/ECAC.  
                   Although there were many lively discussions 
              within the European legislature, with final conciliation on 6th 
              November, the Rapporteur for the regulation within the European 
              Parliament (Jacqueline Foster M.E.P.) was able to issue a report 
              on 19th November, 2002, stating that the Parliament and Commission 
              had reached a jointly approved text for establishing common rules 
              in the field of aviation security. The European Parliament resoundingly 
              accepted the proposal on 5th December, 2002. The document now goes 
              before the European Council of Ministers, and is expected to be 
              adopted in mid-December. The legislation will become EU enforceable 
              regulation approximately 20 days after that adoption date.  
                   There are a number of issues yet to 
              be resolved, not the least of which will be cross border issues, 
              and lead time allowance by EU member states for many of the requirements 
              of the regulation - each member state has to adopt the EU regulation 
              into its own NASP within 3 months. The effects on the cargo industry 
              will be varied, but there is no doubt that considerable costs and 
              operational changes will be the order of the day. The EU is addressing 
              the ongoing, and implementation of, aviation security issues with 
              a management committee which will comprise the member states and 
              stake-holder organisations. There will be, hopefully a full and 
              frank exchange of views within this body, as to the mechanisms of 
              implementation, and future issues.  
                   The matter of financing of the EU 
              regulatory requirements has been left to the discretion of the relevant 
              member state, and this of course leads immediately to the application 
              of an un-level playing field. Many of the EU member states still 
              have nationalised aviation industries, operators and airports. The 
              likelihood of the privatised sectors being funded or aided by national 
              governments in the application of the requirements is seen as highly 
              unlikely. 
                   The all-cargo express air operators, 
              via the European Express Association, have long had a good working 
              relationship with ECAC, and the relationship has been further advanced 
              with the inclusion of the association as a stakeholder, within the 
              EU management committee. It is to the credit of all parties involved, 
              that the EU (with the ECAC expertise) has produced a regulation 
              that we, as industry, know is workable, although I am sure that 
              some operators will see it as an unnecessary and over-reactive burden. 
               
                   The EU did not decide to re-invent 
              the wheel, but effectively placed a regulatory power onto an already, 
              albeit only policy, document that the member states, and industry, 
              were used to.  
                   Of the 15 EU member states, the majority 
              will be applying regulatory cargo measures for the first time following 
              the adoption of the EU regulation into their own NASPs. A further 
              10 countries are in various stages of application to join the EU, 
              and these countries will have to comply with EU Regulation in this 
              matter prior to their accession. As a body representing the express 
              cargo/integrator community, the European Express Association faces 
              a challenging time to ensure the ongoing harmonisation of the measures 
              required in each of the member and applicant states. 
                   Legislating against the possibility 
              of unpredictable and unforeseeable acts of terrorism is a delicate 
              balancing act to be applied by the relevant national regulatory 
              authority. As one of the infamous Murphy’s Laws states:  
                   “If you perceive that there are four 
              possible ways in which a procedure can go wrong, and circumvent 
              these, then a fifth way, unprepared for, will promptly develop.” 
                   The tipping of the security measures 
              scales one way or the other can have disastrous consequences either 
              for the aviation community and its customers, or the cargo industry 
              in terms of servicing the requirements of international trade. Let 
              us, as a cargo industry, help our regulatory authorities achieve 
              that balance, and by the active and informed expertise of both parties, 
              produce an effective and workable solution to the problems posed 
              by terrorists to the aviation industry. 
            John Goldsworthy 
              Chairman EEA Security Committee 
              Security Manager TNT Express 
              Tel:+44.1604.643.651 
              john.goldsworthy@tnt.co.uk  
            
           | 
         
       
      
     |