THE Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) has reiterated its opposition to the planned divestment of the Sangster International Airport, arguing that the government would have been better off borrowing the US$200-million a Canadian-led consortium plans to spend to upgrade the facility and doing the job itself.

The government could then hire a private sector firm to run the airport on its behalf, the Opposition has said.

At the same time, the JLP’s tourism spokesman, Ed Bartlett, lashed out at a new levy to be paid by outgoing passengers which will be used for airport development, saying that it represented an increase in the departure tax and that it would turn away visitors from Jamaica.

But last night, Airports Authority of Jamaica (AAJ) chairman, Dennis Morrison rejected the JLP’s proposal as statist, and argued that the emerging trend was for governments to retreat from those areas that are better managed by the private sector.

“I can’t understand why the JLP has this ideological fixation with the government owning things,” Morrison said.

The AAJ expects to sign by mid-year a 30-year concession agreement with the consortium, led by Vancouver Airports Services, for the operation of Sangster.

Under the deal, the consortium, which includes the Spanish construction firm, Dragados, as well as the Israeli builders, Ashtrom, will spend an estimated $200 million to upgrade the airport.

The phase of the project, to start soon after the initialling of the agreement, will include the installation of jet bridges, and the refurbishing of the customs and immigration halls. This will be followed by a general expansion of the terminal building.

This portion of the development will cost about US$110 million and is to be followed by the construction of a second terminal building, costing US$90 million.

The AAJ has said that the government will be required to neither raise nor guarantee any loans for the project, a position repeated last night by Morrison.

But at the weekend, Bartlett questioned the administration’s approach.

“We feel that if the government had borrowed the money and undertaken the development of the airport, that would have been a better deal,” he told the Observer.

Bartlett argued that the government could recoup the investment by being able to keep all the earnings from the levy and any other income generated by the airport.

In the past, JLP leader Edward Seaga has spoken against divestment of airports, saying that the government was passing Jamaican assets into foreign hands and that Jamaicans going into and out of their country “would have to walk through foreign soil”.

Morrison last night argued that a country operating under the market system should not be holding on to facilities that can be run by the private sector.

“An airport is a commercial operation that should not be paid for by users,” Morrison said. “Tax dollars should contribute to providing services such as water, roads and those things.”

Morrison also sought to calm Bartlett’s fears about the proposed levy on departing passengers, saying that it would not result in Jamaica pricing itself out of the tourism market.

“It is not an increase in the travel tax,” Morrison said. “It is an airport improvement fee. It is quite normal. Something that is done internationally.”

Bartlett had said that the levy would be US$10, but Morrison said last night that the figure was still being worked out as it had to be based on long-term projections of development and operating costs.

Last Friday, Transport Minister Robert Pickersgill told a Montego Bay Chamber of Commerce luncheon of the intention to introduce the levy.

He did not name a figure, but said that half of the additional fee would be rolled back after 12 years, while the other half would be in place “in perpetuity”.

“If (visitors) are convinced that the money they pay in that regard is well spent, in that it adds to the comfort of the terminal, you’ll find that they won’t make a big fuss about it,” he said. “Of course, they make their comparisons and of course we have to take that into consideration but there are some things that now have to be done at the airport for the comfort of those facilities. We’re not going to price ourselves out of the market, we can’t afford that,” Pickersgill said.