Soalan No. 48:

Tuan Wee Choo Keong [Wangsa Maju] minta Menteri Pengangkutan menyatkan kenapa Kerajaan enggan untuk melaksanakan dasar pernebangan secara liberal (Open Skies) dan membenarkan MAS beroperasi secara tambang murah untuk perkhidmatan rakyat Malaysia dan kenapa perlu membenarkan syarikat swasta AirAsia untuk memonopoli pewrkhjidmatan tersebut.

Tuan Wee Choo Keong [Wangsa Maju] to ask the Minister of Tansport to state why the government refused to have a liberalised national aviation policy of “Open Skies” and allow MAS to also operate a low cost service to serve Malaysians and why was there a need to allow a private company like AirAsia to monopolise such services.

Jawapan:

Dakwaan Yang Berhormat bahawa Malaysia enggan untuk melaksanakan dasar penerbangan secara ‘Open Sky” adalah idak tepat. Untuk makluman Yang Berhormat, Malaysian sememangnya menawarkan perjajian berbentuk ‘Open Skies’ kepada semua Negara-negara asinbg. Walau bagaimapun, peneroimaannya adalah tertakluk kepada kesediaan Negara-negara tersebut. Setakat ini, kita telah mengadakan perjanjian berbentuk ‘Open Skies’ dengan berberapa buah Negara seperti Amerika Syarikat, Emirah Arab Bersatu, Negara-negara Scandinavia, New Zealand, Yemen, Austria dan Taiwan. Perjanjian berbentuk ‘Open Skies’ ini membenarkan syarikat pernerbangan kedua-dua buah Negara mengadakan perkhidmatan tanpa had kepasti, frekuensi dan jenis pesawar yang ingin digunakan.

Berhubung dengan perkhidmatan udara yang disediakan oleh syarikat-syarikat penerbangan tempatan, adalah dimaklumkan bahawa kerajaan telah melaksanakan rationalisasi perkhidmatan udara domestic pada tahun 2006. Berdasarkan rasionnalisasi perkhidmatan udara ini, MAS telah ditetapkan untuk menjalan operasi domestic secara penerbangan perkhidmatan penuh (full service carrier – FSC) manakala AirAsia menyediuakan perkhidmatan domestick secara tambang murah (low cost carrier – LCC).

Selaras dengan keputusan tersebut, kedua-dua syarikat telah meneyediakan perkhidmatan berdasarkan model perniagaan masing-masing, dengan mensasarkan kepada pasaran penumpang yang berbeza. Walau bagaimanapun, wujud persaingan yang sihat di natara kedua-dua buah syarikat. Ini dapart dilihat dari segi promosi kedua-dua buah syarikat penerbangan untuk menarik penumpang-penumpang berasaskan kadar tambang dan perkhidmatan yang ditawarkan dari masa ke semasa.

Untuk makluman YB juga, pada ketika ini MAS tiada cadangan untuk mengedalikan perkhidmatannya secara LCC. Di samping itu, Kerajaan juga tidak menerima sebarang permohonan daripada mana-mana syarikat lain untuk mengadakan perkhidmatan LCC.

Namun, sekiranya terdapat permohonan daripada mana-mana pihak untuk menjalankan operasi penerbangan secara tambang murah, Kerajaan perlu mengambil kira pelbagaoi factor seperti saiz pasaran, viability operasi dan beberapa factor yang lain di dalam mempertimbangkan permohonan ini. Ini adalah bagi mengelakkan berlakunya persaingan yang tidak sihat di antara syarikat-syarikat penerbangan tempatan yang mana akhirnya akan merugikan semua pihak termasuk penguna.

Note:

It is very obvious that the Government is doing everything it can to protect AirAisa from competition. For example, in Singapore, Singapore Airline was allowed to have a low cost carrier. Why in Malaysia, MAS was not allowed to have a low cost carrier to provide air service to the people?

Why must the government be so protective of AirAsia? Competition is always healthy and the public will benefit from competition. Look at the telecommunication industry (mobile phone), the service providers had to provide all kinds of products and services to please the consumers and there were no problems. The public benefited from such competition.

The Government should immediately stop interfering in the aviation industry and stop carrying on protecting AirAsia. We should have an Open Skies policy.

Advertisements

SOALAN/QUESTION NO. 60

Tuan Wee Choo Keong [Wangsa Maju] minta Menteri Pengakutan menyatakan selepas MAS mengambil alih perkhidmatan udara di kawasan pendalaman Sabah and Sarawak, adakah AirAsia telah membayar balik subsiedi sebanyak 60 juta RInggit kepada Kerajaan dan adakah AirAisa telah membayar semua hutnagnya kepada Malaysia Airports Holdings Bhd (MAHB).

Tuan Wee Choo Keong [Wangsa Maju] to ask the Minsiter of Transport to state after MAS took over the rural air services for Sabah/Sarawak, whether AirAisa paid back the subsidy of about RM60 million to the government and whether AirAisa has paid up all its debts to Malaysia Airport Holdongs Bhd.

JAWAPAN OLEH MENTERI/ANSWER BY MINISTER

Tuan Yang DiPertua,

Rasionalisasi perkhidmatan udara domestik yang telah dilaksanakan oleh Kerajaaan Mac 2006 memperlihatkan perkhidmatan Udara Luar Bandar (Rural Air Services – RAS) ini deiserahkan kepada syarikat AirAisa Berhad, yang kemudiannya melantik syarikat Fly Asian Xpress (FAX) untuk mengalikan perkhidmatan ini mulai 1 Ogos 2006.

Memandangkan perkhidmatan ini adalah merupakan laluan obligasi social (social obligation route) di kwasan Sabah dan Sarawak dan perkhidmatan yang tidak ekonomik, maka Kerajaan akan menanggung sepenuhnya operasi RAS ini melalui subsidi Kerajaan. Oleh yang demikian, mana-mana operator/pengendali operasi RAS ini akan disubsidi penuh oleh Kerajaan dan subsidi tersebut tidak perlu dibayar balik.

Berhubung hutang AirAsia kepada Malaysia Airport Holdings Berhad, adalah dimnaklimkan bahawa pihak AirAisa masih mempunyai hutang sebanyak RM5,443,746.00 dan ia adalah dalam proses pembayaran.

Note:

The above answers are most unsatisfactory because:

1. AirAisa fought very hard to get the RAS from MAS. If it is uneconomical why AirAsia fought so hard to get RAS from MAS!

2. Prior to operating the RAS under AirAisa subsidiary (FAX) the government immedately paid more than RM60 million to AirAisa.

3. After AirAsia operating the RAS under FAX, there were too many complaints from Sabah and Sarawak state government because of unsatisfactory services.

4. In October 2007 AirAisa (FAX), after 1 year and 2 months, and was unable to perform any longer and Ministry of Transport had to come in and ask (order) MAS to take back the RAS from AirAsia i.e. to rescue AirAsia.

5. Prior to taking over the RAS from AirAsia, MAS did an audit. Out of the 8 aircrafts one of them has been cannibalized and the other 7 were un-airworthy. It cost the government about RM35 million to rebuild the aircrafts in question. The BN government paid RM35 million to MAS for the rebuilding of the said aircrafts.

6. The Minister of Transport has not revealed how much were the total direct and indirect subsidies the Government has given to AirAisa.

7. I believe that the amount owed by AirAsia to Malaysia Airport Holdings Bhd (MAB) is more than RM5,443,746.00.

8. I also believe that AirAisa also owed MAS and Petronas many millions of Rinngit for fuel cost.

9. The question is why the Government did not instruct MAB, MAS and Petronas to demand for repayment of all the debts owed by AirAsia to the said government agency and GLC.

10. There is no need for the government to build another airport just for the use of low cost carriers in particular AirAsia. Even as it were there were not many flights arriving at and departing from LCCT. The government should not use taxpayers money to help out a private company.

11. Question should be asked who is the agent for Airbus company in Malaysia. Sources has it that the agency for Airbus company in Malaysia is connected to the son of an UMNO high ranking politician.

12. In United States, 2 low cost carriers (Sky West and Aloha) have collapsed. In Hong Kong, Oasis has collapsed recently. In India, several low cost carriers are in financial trouble. I hope that in the event that any airline is in trouble, the BN government must not involve in any bail out exercise.

13. During the 12th General Elections AirAsia chief executive officer, Datuk Tony Fernandes, took part in political campaign for BN’s Ministers. He was seen taking part in making speeches during the general election campaigns.