Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-05-03-Speech-3-092"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000503.6.3-092"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, the question you are really asking in your communication is: what does the future hold for the European aviation industry? That is the key question approximately ten years on from the start of liberalisation within that sector. Liberalisation, as you point out in your communication, set a growth process in motion; new companies have sprung up, new routes have opened, new air fares have in fact been put in place, and so this has attracted a new kind of public to the aviation industry. The existing large and small national airline companies have become more profitable and have started to operate more efficiently without government funding. All these aspects demonstrate that liberalisation has stirred the market. We could say that passengers have generally benefited from liberalisation, but not all of them. For example, it is evident that the benefits in business class are only minor compared to those in other passenger categories.
We now wonder how solid the basis for the European aviation industry is. In your communication, you stated that fragmentation is still far more pronounced here than it is in the United States. We have more or less the same number of airline companies, but their share of the global market is 38%, whereas ours is 27%, which is a huge difference. You also stated in your communication that the profitability of our companies is considerably less than that of our American counterparts. We also question the viability of the new companies which are appearing on the market, because how long will they last and how solid are they? One cannot help but wonder how many of these will still be operating within the European market in ten years’ time. Also, how tenable and sustainable is the growth we have witnessed within this sector over the past decade? We are faced with an overcrowded airspace, or should I say a badly managed airspace?
We have congested airports to contend with and this is why, Commissioner, it is of great importance that you at long last make a proposal on the management of slot allocations for airports. I think this is a matter of life and death, especially for small companies starting out in the aviation industry. We have also asked ourselves about social development and the rights of passengers. This is why I wanted to ask you what the outcome was of the agreement recently reached on Gibraltar on this matter. Is that in any way related to aviation? These are questions which we are still left with.
Important steps still need to be taken after liberalisation. Firstly, air traffic control should, of course, be Europeanised. This topic is also covered in Mr Atkins’ report and I will be tabling an oral amendment on this matter tomorrow, to replace ‘privatisation’ by ‘liberalisation’. This was agreed upon in conjunction with the large political groups. It is clear that another aspect, namely safety, should also be Europeanised. A European Aviation Safety Authority should therefore be set up as a matter of urgency. It is obvious that the Member States need to take a step back as far as these two aspects are concerned. I will now move on to the key point in your communication, namely the fact that there is no external policy for European aviation, in other words that the rights with regard to third countries have been negotiated bilaterally. This, of course, determines the entire structure of the aviation industry in Europe. Normally speaking, after a liberalisation process, companies tend to operate in tune with the market which has been liberalised. This is actually quite rare in the world of aviation. No mergers have taken place. An attempt to that effect was made by KLM and Alitalia, but this has now been abandoned, due in actual fact to a number of problems related to nationality, if I can put it that way. A merger between Swissair and SABENA is still on the cards, but we rely there on an agreement with Switzerland which we will be discussing this week and on a forthcoming referendum in Switzerland. What is happening is that, although European companies join forces with their American counterparts, they play second fiddle to the Americans. This is why I, as rapporteur, have a few questions with regard to your proposal to establish this common transatlantic air space. I am in favour of this in principle, but I do wonder whether we are not rushing into things or whether this is not too big a step, considering there is no solid base in place for the European aviation industry. A number of very complex problems need to be solved first before we can take the second step. As rapporteur, I am personally quite suspicious of America’s nationalism when it comes to transport, including aviation. Negotiations must clearly be held with a great deal of openness and reciprocity, as it is put, and the European companies must have exactly the same rights as the Americans, otherwise negotiations are bound to break down. Only then, as things currently stand in European aviation, will we be capable of competing with the Americans within an open market.
An important question is: what do we do if we cannot pull it off with the Americans? What do we do then on our own? How viable is the European industry if it is confined to the European boundaries and to those bilateral agreements? What is more – and I have skated over this aspect in my report, but Mrs Lucas has drafted a report on the environment which deals with this at length – we need to acknowledge that there are limits. The environment too has its limits and this is an important, in fact, vital question which we may need to ask ourselves, not so much following on from my report but following on from Mrs Lucas’ report. Secondly, intermodality is highlighted in my report too. I think that the Commission too should be clear about this and should issue proposals to promote intermodality. Trains and planes could work together very well in a number of areas.
At all events, Mr President, I would like to conclude by saying that liberalisation has been hugely important. I am well aware of this, although we are not even halfway there. In order to improve the current situation, we need to receive from the Commission proposals, concrete action plans and legal texts which we can debate within the very short term. It is also clear that the Member States have a very important responsibility and that a great deal depends on them and on how much they are prepared to put into creating real European aviation and a real European aviation industry. I think, therefore, that Parliament too, in tandem with the Commission and the Council, cannot work fast enough on this score because the world will not wait for us. As such, we need to get a move on, otherwise we will be buried under an avalanche."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples