Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-06-10-Speech-1-125"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020610.7.1-125"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, there is more and more going on in the skies above Europe, and, fortunately, also in European policy in the field of air transport. The consequences for the air transport sector of 11 September appear to have been almost overcome, and annual growth rates of up to 5% are again being assumed, which means that air travel will increase twofold by 2015. Whilst we are responding in political terms to this challenge by creating a single European sky, we still need greater capacity at our overstretched airports. There is also a need for more airport infrastructure, but none of us can seriously imagine that we might manage to double the number of runways by 2015, and so we have to generate additional capacity. It is vital that this be done by as efficient as possible a system of allocating takeoff and landing rights on overloaded airports. The old Regulation on slots dates back to 1993 and can no longer cope with present-day challenges; its lack of precision meant that it was not uniformly applied by the Member States. It failed to guarantee fair and transparent allocation of slots, put new applicants at a disadvantage and gave rise to problems such as illicit trading in slots. The Commission proposal on new rules for the allocation of slots is a necessary intermediate step. A final regulation must result from discussions over the next few years.
Even though the intermediate step we are taking today appears to many to mainly bring with it technical improvements to details of the old Regulation, it does at the same time have political implications that are necessary from the point of view of regulatory policy and will seem to some people to have a very broad scope. At this point, I would like to thank the members of the committee for their fine cooperation and their concentration on the issues. Despite some differences of opinion, we have succeeded in keeping the balance of the regulatory package as a whole before our eyes. Our improvements to the Commission proposal are intended to make the Commission text more precise, to establish standard European criteria for granting the status of coordinated airports, to further enhance the coordinator's authority and independence, to retain flexibility and security in terms of planning for established air carriers and to promote the new applicants' flexibility and opportunities for gaining access to the market.
I want to say something about the individual points. Firstly, at the heart of the Regulation lies a new definition of the slots as a right of usage, and thus the property neither of airlines, nor of airports, but rather a public good. The committee has additionally stipulated that the whole of the airport infrastructure required for a flight falls within the definition of a right of usage. We have for the first time pointed out the connection between airway slots and airport slots, which will make it easier to synchronise the two in the future.
My second point is uncontentious but not, for that reason, insignificant. We have further strengthened the position of the coordinator, freeing him from any obligations to pay compensation, which I believe to be indispensable to his independence. We have defined his competences more clearly over against the coordination committee; he has the right to withhold slots if airlines fail to comply with their duty to provide information, and he is entitled to compare his data with other coordinators and schedules facilitators in order to bring to light any inconsistencies in schedules.
Thirdly, we should discuss the established airlines' legitimate interests. Contrary to the Commission proposal, we are in favour of them continuing to have the option of re-timing in order to progressively optimise their schedules. We have widened the exceptions to the ‘use-it-or-lose-it’
rule in order to be able to take the impact of events like those of 11 September, for example, and we have set aside the Commission's proposal that ‘grandfather rights’ should be linked to the size of aircraft, believing as we do that the companies need greater flexibility, which is desirable both for economic and environmental reasons. The alternative would no doubt have been counterproductive.
I turn, fourthly, to the legitimate interests of the new carriers. The Commission's definition of new applicants was, admittedly, not agreeable to many of the established airlines, but we consider it right in principle, as there is a fundamental contradiction between the concentration process which can be observed in air transport and the competition for routes that liberalisation is actually seeking to bring about. We have tightened up the definition of new applicants in order further to strengthen them and make it easier for them to transfer and exchange slots.
Fifthly, where there are clear rules, there must also be the possibility of sanctions. We have laid it down that slots can be withdrawn after one warning if they are being misused. Member States can also impose fines.
Please allow me to end with a glance into the future. Many members of the committee wanted to have new fundamental rules as soon as possible, and that I can understand, as the intermediate step we are taking today does not yet satisfy the need for renewal. However, the effects of this Regulation need first to be evaluated, as the air transport market is both a highly sensitive area and one of great importance to the economy, making a rush job inappropriate. We also still have time – which we need – to seek the consent of the main actors in the air transport market. The study on models for the allocation of slots, produced at the Commission's behest, has speeded up, but certainly not yet completed, this process of reaching a consensus.
Our attempt at finding air transport a place in the logic of optimising transport overall could not, unfortunately, be enshrined in the Regulation on slots. I think that is a pity, but we should not lose sight of this facet of future legislation. I hope that the report will get as big a majority in plenary tomorrow as it did in the committee."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples