NATIONAL7Spotlight Weekly)]

Transparency Shielded

Choosing not to make the quoted price of its aircraft-supplier public, the national airline has once again shied away from becoming transparent

BY NAVIN SINGH KHADKA

An RNAC counter : Under the table dealing

Earlier last week Tarini Dutta Chataut, Minister for Culture, Tourism and Civil Aviation, had a catchy statement to offer at a formal program in the Royal Nepal Airlines Corporation's (RNAC) headquarters. "The official policy is to make all RNAC activities transparent," he had said. "Since the government is working on the basis of transparency with the commitment to fight corruption, the same official policy will be applicable in the case of RNAC."

Sounds convincing, all right. But consider what did the national flag carrier do one day after its line minister declared the official policy: It faxed a press release to all media organization stating that it had accepted the tender bid of Babcock and Brown to lease the Irish Company's Boeing 767 300 ER for one and a half year. "According to the evaluation report submitted by a sub-committee, among all the six tender applicants, Babcock and Brown had quoted the lowest price. Therefore the board of directors of the corporation decided to lease its aircraft."

The national airline, in its press statement, explained everything about the selection of the tender bid including how was the evaluation sub-committee formed, what made the national flag carrier go for leasing the aircraft, among others. But, one vital information was missing in the press release. And what was that? The price quoted by Babcock and Brown to lease out its Boeing. Not a single word was mentioned about the per flight hour lease price of the aircraft forget about other monetary details like what would RNAC have to pay for the extra flights (more than the minimum number of fights agreed with the supplier).

Also missing from the information was the price offered by Babcock and Brown's closest rival -- believed to be an Australian company -- in the tender bid. Having covered-up the facts, RNAC itself has catapulted a question to the fore: Is that how it maintains transparency? In a tender bid, what matters most is the price. And that is something the national airline chose to hide.

"This is dubious," said an aviation expert. "If everything is fine why should they not let the public know about the price through the media?"

Sources with the national flag carrier claim that Babcock and Brown, in its tender bid, has quoted around 3500 US Dollars per flight hour for its Boeing 767.

Interestingly, the aircraft leasing practice of RNAC has always triggered controversies. Most of these lease deals were clinched by different RNAC bosses at different times on personal basis, and not by calling tender bids, fueling doubts that they may have pocketed hefty commission from the suppliers. The national flag carrier has spent a whopping 50 million US Dollars in air craft leasing in the last five years.

The latest attempt to lease an aircraft is to replace the leased aircraft of China South West Airlines which will be flying back in June completing its lease period. RNAC has been leasing an aircraft time and again citing its weak fleet -- only two Boeing 757s of its own -- grossly inadequate to press in its international routes. The state run airline has been flying to around one dozen international destinations.

It is the same feeble fleet that has been a "good" excuse for the national flag carrier to go for a third aircraft by leasing. And it is exactly the same oft-repeated aircraft-leasing episode that has been dragging the national flag carrier into controversies. With that as an established fact, why does RNAC not start becoming transparent?

Why not even after its line minister publicly declared to make its all the activities transparent? Perhaps, because RNAC's fate has been to be content with its managers' words -- that have always spoken louder than their actions.