A change for the better

You may not be able to judge a book by its cover but you can certainly derive a first impression of a country by its airport.
LAX, for instance, is a perfect example. Big guns, snarling sniffer dogs, surly Customs officials, long queues. Welcome to the US of A. And, oh yeah, have a nice day.
While the Rarotonga international airport was functional and, thanks to the strumming and singing of Jake Numanga, and the natural friendliness of the locals, was a perfectly serviceable entry to paradise, the truth is it was starting to fray around the edges. Burgeoning security regulations also demanded near-constant updates and protocols.
To meet the changing face of travel, a major construction project was started at the airport in March 2009, resulting in a new departure terminal and a renovated arrival area.
While the departure terminal had a soft opening in April, its official opening – in the presence of several landowners and the board members of Air New Zealand – was held Monday, after which the general public was invited to take a leisurely wander through the facility.
Joe Ngamata, the Airport Authority’s Chief Executive, gave Turama an exclusive guided tour behind the scenes of the spanking-new terminal, before sitting down to discuss the reasons for the construction, how it’s being paid for, and how much of that exorbitant departure tax is actually returned to the airport.
Q: Why did the airport need a new departure terminal?
A: The old one was originally constructed in 1974. In that year, we had about 8,000 arriving passengers. Last year we had 108,000 passengers. So, basically, the drive for this development has been the demand for a bigger and better space for facilitation of passengers. Secondly, over the years, the international standards have changed a lot and we needed to change with the times.
Q: What changes were based on international standards?
A: The old terminal didn’t provide for a separation of arriving and departing passengers. That has been legislated and been in place for at least the last 2-5 years. But it came to fall when the Cook Islands started the new L.A.-flight scheme. The United States Transport Security Administration required that passengers be separated. That gave us a lot more drive to get this development started.
Q: Is the terminal now more convenient for departing passengers?
A: As an airport operator, we think it’s a whole lot more convenient, given that we’ve got a bigger room, with a whole lot more seating. Whereas before, you had the luxury of walking in the gardens while waiting for your flight to leave, where you the sun, you had the moon and you had the stars. But when it rained, you had the rain too. You have to move with the times and move with the expectations that people have about air travel and airports. You have to provide an acceptable level of comfort to the passengers.
Q: How long did it take to finish the actual construction?
A: We started in March 2009. The handover to us was in April this year, so just over a year.
Q: Did the Airport Authority have any say in the design?
A: We were involved right from the beginning. There were other designs than this and we brought the architects down and went through the concepts and eventually agreed on what would be the final result. We wanted something that would blend into the designs of the houses in the Cook Islands. We didn’t want something that would stand out as not being from here. We had designs that came up with sails and a whole lot of other things, but that’s not us.
Q: Did you get what you wanted?
A: We got what we wanted. In fact, when you look at it from the outside, it blends in with the rest of our buildings on this site.
Q: What about the look of the interior?
A: We wanted a design that wasn’t going to use much power. We were conscious of the fact that power is quite expensive here, so we wanted to use natural ventilation as much as possible.
Q: How much did this project cost?
A: When we started the project, we talked about $8.5 million. At this point, we’re still holding to $8.5 million but, having said that, we did do some work that wasn’t part of this project. We spent a little bit more. So we’re thinking that it will get as high as $9 million. But we haven’t got the final figures – there’s still some work going on in the back.
Q: How is that price tag being financed?
A: We borrowed from commercial banks to do this development. And we paid out of our own Airport Authority finances.
Q: When I was last here in 2004, the departure tax was $25. The cost is now $55, meaning it’s more than doubled in the space of less than six years. When was it raised to $55?
A: I believe it went up to $55 as of September 2009.
Q: When the departure tax was $25 in 2004, how much of that did the Airport Authority receive?
A: $19.
Q: How much of today’s $55 departure tax does the Airport Authority receive?
A: $19.
Q: The departure tax has been increased by $30 and the Airport Authority still only receives $19 of that total?
A: We haven’t had any more so far.
Q: Were you led to believe that raising the departure tax would help pay for this new terminal?
A: That was our understanding. But, having said that, we do realize that Government has some difficulties. The departure tax is collected by Government and we’re just glad we get something out of it. We’d like to get more but, with that $19 per departing passenger, we get about $2 million a year.
Q: Where does the remaining $36 of the departure tax go?
A: I don’t know. It goes to Government. What they do with it, it’s totally up to Government.
Q: Does this mean, in five years, when the $8.5 million construction costs are paid off, we can expect the departure tax to be lowered?
A: The Airport Authority doesn’t control the departure tax. If it was under our act, we could possibly bring it down to $30 and run with it for awhile.
Q: You’ve been operating the new-look airport for two months now. How has it worked out so far?
A: It’s been an eye-opener in some areas. Areas that we didn’t think would be issues. The terminal was developed to maximise on natural energy, so you didn’t need to power and air-con this building. In March, we noticed that it was quite warm. Part of the problem is that there was a period for about two weeks where we didn’t have any wind, and we had temperatures as high as 32C. Because there was no wind, there was no movement of air, so the temperature inside was the same as outside. We had complaints from people, who said, this is warm. But it was the same temperature as outside. We’re looking at that now as an issue, what can we do about it. We’re looking at options to make it more comfortable.
Q: The arrival area has been renovated as part of this project. How has that worked out?
A: When we had the terminal designed, originally we didn’t have the shops in it. We realized somewhere during the process that a terminal is a business and it needs to be sustainable, and so we added the shops into it. When we added the shops, the design allowed for the Custom benches in front of the shops. We trialled that when we opened but there were big problems because we had people queuing up onto the apron. About 3-4 weeks ago, we changed the setup in the arrivals to allow for a maximum holding area for passengers. From the comments I’ve received from people, it’s been working well.
Q: What other comments have you heard about the terminals from the public and your staff?
A: Mostly positive from staff working within the airport. I appreciate more the negative comments because those are the problems I need to address. And they’ve come out. If they see things that aren’t working well, they let me know. Part of it was the small area we have for holding arrivals. And we’ve sorted that out. For the departures side of the operation, it’s been more the signage we’ve had in the security area. There are a few other things that we haven’t quite finished yet – the IT system that enables Air New Zealand and Pacific Blue to access information from their offices. There’s still a bit more work to be done in that area. We’re using old systems, but the new ones shouldn’t be too far away – probably a month at most.
Q: Are you ready for how busy it’s going to be when the direct flights from Sydney start arriving next month?
A: For the terminal to handle that is not an issue for us. If you get a 777 jet by itself, it should be alright. But if you get two of them together, then, yeah, you’re going to have to have some staggering of processing people as they come through.
Q: You mentioned international regulations requiring the separation of arriving and departing passengers. Were there any other safety regulations you had to adhere to in constructing this new terminal?
A: As far as security standards, if you want to see what happens at international airports, you come on a Saturday night for an L.A. flight. We have to hand-search everyone. Although we have the equipment here, that’s not acceptable. You come through the equipment, you’ve still got to go through a body search. We’re doing that now, especially for the L.A. flight. We expect we may have to do that for the Sydney flight. I do know the Australian and American requirements are a bit more stringent, especially because of the risk levels in their countries. That is the reality of international airports and globalization as a whole. Some of these risks, as we see it, are not present here but you cannot be the weak link in the chain. You’ve got to do exactly the same as the others.
Q: Can you give us an example?
A: We look at coconuts and say, well, there’s nothing wrong with this coconut but if you put it through our system here, they’ll take it off you. Why? Because you’re not allowed to have liquids on a plane. We try to argue that common sense will tell you that this coconut is not really a risk but it’s done universally and you’ve got to follow it.
Q: Overall, are you pleased with how the new terminal has turned out?
A: You’re never happy with these things. As I see it, we’ve created a magnificent facility, but there is always room to improve it. You’re always looking ahead at what else you can do. I think, for us, the challenge that faces us – and the rest of the Cook Islands – is energy and how you harness it. We’re considering solar energy to power our facility. It may not be able to provide all the power needs of the airport but it could cut down on the emissions.
Q: So the airport is an ongoing project?
A: That is the nature of the travel industry. There are always changes. We have to keep up with the changes. Money permitting, we will do what we can with what we have now.
By John Ireland

Herald Issue 463 10 June
- World famous activist assisting residents
- Budget will decide if residents prosecute Government over landfill
- Forestry project sucking Mangaia dry
- Budget 2010 – fiasco or disaster?