3 ALLOCATION OF AIRPORT SLOTS
(24485)
8757/03
COM(03) 207
| Draft Regulation amending Council Regulation (EEC) No. 95/93 on common
rules for the allocation of slots at Community airports.
|
| Legal base | Article 80(2) EC; co-decision; qualified majority voting
|
| Document originated | 30 April 2003
|
| Deposited in Parliament |
8 May 2003 |
| Department | Transport
|
| Basis of consideration |
EM of 2 June 2003 |
| Previous Committee Report |
None; but see (22519) 10288/01 and (23997) 14205/02: HC 63-v (2002-03), paragraph 2 (18 December 2002)
|
| To be discussed in Council
| Not known |
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Not cleared; relevant to the debate recommended on the main draft Regulation on allocation of airport slots
|
Background
3.1 The allocation of landing and taking-off slots at
Community airports is regulated by Council Regulation No. 95/93,[6]
the purpose of which is to ensure an efficient distribution of
slots in a transparent and open manner. In November 2002 the Commission
presented an amended draft Regulation to amend Regulation No.
95/93, which we have recommended for debate in European Standing
Committee A.[7]
The document
3.2 Under Regulation No. 95/93 an air carrier which uses
a slot in one season has first claim on it in the next corresponding
season, under "grandfather rights". This is subject
to use of the slot for at least 80% of the time — a so-called
"use-it-or-lose-it" rule. But, in the circumstances
resulting from the hostilities in Iraq and the outbreak of Severe
Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) in East Asia, the European Commission
thinks there should be increased temporary flexibility in the
application of the "use-it-or-lose-it" rule. The draft
Regulation would allow airlines to retain slots allocated to them
for Summer 2003 during Summer 2004, even if they have not been
able to use the slots for 80% of the time. It would achieve this
by amending the main amending draft Regulation referred to above.
3.3 The justification made for the suspension
of the "use-it or lose-it" rule for the summer 2003
season is that it would:
- not force airlines to use slots
inefficiently, for example by flying empty or smaller planes,
to retain grandfather status for their slots;
- provide airport slot co-ordinators with legal
certainty about the suspension of the rule, so freeing them from
the possibility of legal action; and
- bring the EU in line with many other authorities,
including the United States, Japan and Australia, which have already
agreed a waiver for their similar slot usage requirements for
the 2003 (Northern Hemisphere) summer season.
The Government's view
3.4 The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of
State, Department of Transport (Mr David Jamieson) tells us:
"The European Commission has linked the
proposal to suspend the 'use-it or lose-it' rule with the amended
November 2002 proposal, which includes more wide-ranging amendments
to Regulation 95/93. This means that the suspension could only
take effect once the November 2002 proposal was voted through
Council (see EM 14205/02[8]).
Whatever is decided on the suspension of the rule must be done
quickly and that will not happen if the current amendment remains
linked to the November 2002 proposal. The more wide-ranging proposal
from the Commission raises more difficult and complex questions
and consequently swift progress on the proposal to suspend the
'use-it or lose-it' rule necessitates its consideration as a stand-alone
proposal. The Presidency, the European Parliament and Member States
have asked the Commission to reconsider its approach, and de-link
the two issues. We expect the European Commission will re-issue
a proposal de-linking the two issues shortly.
"Not all airlines support suspension. Some airport
operators also object. They assert that the incumbent airlines
are effectively seeking to prevent market access by another operator
to slots which they themselves do not want to use. They argue
that suspension would be a restraint to trade and an anti-competitive
measure.
"In normal times, the Government would welcome
an increased turnover of slots at congested airports and the greater
opportunities that this would offer to airlines wishing to provide
services in competition with incumbents. The Government considers
that a properly functioning 'use-it-or-lose-it' rule is an integral
part of an efficient slot allocation system.
"However, in the absence of a suspension of
the 'use-it or lose-it' rule, the airlines would use slots inefficiently,
for example by flying empty or smaller planes in order to retain
grandfather status for their slots.
"The Government considers that it is important
to provide airport slot co-ordinators with legal certainty. Otherwise,
ACL[9] could be subjected
to the possibility of extended legal action from airlines. Airlines
also need legal certainty in order to be able to plan their operating
schedule to best commercial advantage. This will also benefit
consumer interests. Uncertainty regarding the application of this
rule would serve nobody's interests.
"The Government does not propose to oppose the
suspension of the 'use-it-or-lose-it' rule."
3.5 On the basis of consultations with those
concerned the Minister adds:
"Stakeholders all object to the linking
of the amendment on suspension to the November 2002 proposal.
There is a diversity of views about the substance of the proposal.
The larger scheduled airlines and the charter airlines, the Association
of European Airlines, the International Air Travel Association
and the International Association of Charter Airlines are in favour
of the suspension. Low-frill carriers and the Airport Operators'
Association object to the suspension."
Conclusion
3.6 The Minister asserts that consumer
interests would be served by removing legal uncertainty for airlines
planning their operating schedules. But he makes no comment on
the consequences for consumer interests of the alleged trade restraint
and anti-competitive aspects of the proposed measure. We should
like to hear further from the Minister on this. Meanwhile we do
not clear the document.
3.7 We note
that it is possible that this proposal will be separated from
the main draft amending Regulation, and would therefore proceed
more quickly. However, if that does not happen, we would regard
the current document as relevant to the debate we have recommended
in European Standing Committee A on the main draft amending Regulation.
6 OJ No. L 14, 22.1.93, p.1. Back
7
See headnote. Back
8
That is the Explanatory Memorandum for the revised amending draft
Regulation - see headnote. Back
9
Airport Coordination Limited, the independent airport slotallocation
coordinator for the UK. Back
| 
