5 Rights of passengers
| (a)
(26386)
6622/05
COM(05) 47
(b)
(26387)
6623/05
COM(05) 46
(c)
(26392)
6624/05
COM(05) 48
|
Draft Regulation concerning the rights of persons with reduced mobility when travelling by air
Commission Communication: Strengthening passenger rights within the European Union
Draft Regulation on information for air transport passengers on the identity of the operating carrier and on communication of safety information by Member States
|
| Legal base | (a) and (c) Article 80(2) EC; co-decision; QMV
(b) —
|
| Department | Transport |
| Basis of consideration | SEM of 13 October 2005
|
| Previous Committee Report | HC 38-xii (2004-05), para 6 (23 March 2005)
|
| To be discussed in Council | (a) 5 December 2005
(b) None planned
(c) Not known
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | (a) Not cleared; further information awaited
(b) Cleared (decision previously reported)
(c) Not cleared; further information awaited
|
Background
5.1 Community action on the protection of passengers has so far
been limited to the air transport sector. In its 2001 White Paper,
"European transport policy for 2010: time to decide",[21]
the Commission proposed extension of passenger protection measures
to other modes of transport and new measures in regard to passenger
rights and their enforcement. In its Communication, document (b),
the Commission reviews the present situation in relation to passenger
rights and outlines planned activities to strengthen these rights.
It proposes specific legislative proposals on persons of reduced
mobility in air transport and the identity of air carriers —
documents (a) and (c).
5.2 The Regulation proposed by the Commission in
document (a) is intended to prevent persons with reduced mobility
(PRMs) travelling by air being refused carriage on
the grounds of reduced mobility and to guarantee the provision,
free of charge to the PRM, of the assistance needed by PRMs to
have effective opportunities for air travel. The Regulation proposed
in document (c) would require:
- Member States to publish a
list of all air carriers banned from their airspace or otherwise
subject to restrictions on safety grounds;
- that list to be made available to all other Member
States and to the Commission, which would publish a consolidated
list; and
- passengers to be informed of the carrier which
will operate their flight both when making a reservation and if
the carrier is changed after the reservation has been made.
5.3 When our predecessors considered these documents
in March 2005 they cleared the Commission Communication but kept
the two draft Regulations under scrutiny pending receipt of Regulatory
Impact Assessments on them.[22]
The Government's response
5.4 In her Supplementary Explanatory Memorandum the
Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Transport
(Ms Karen Buck) deals with document (a), the draft Regulation
concerned with the rights of PRMs. The Minister also sent us a
summary of the responses to the Government's consultations on
the proposal and a Regulatory Impact Assessment of it.
5.5 On the consultation the Minister says that this
indicated broad support for the proposal's underlying aim of ensuring
that PRMs should be provided with a reliable and seamless service,
free of charge at the point of use. But some key points of detail
were raised, including:
- whether airlines should be
able to opt out of the proposed centralised service (a question
also asked by the European Union Committee of the House of Lords);
- concern about the ability of airport users to
influence the setting of suitable service standards; and
- questions about recovery of costs of the centralised
service.
5.6 The Minister tells us that the airline service
option has been resisted strongly by the Commission and has received
little support in the European Parliament and the Council. But
a number of provisions have been added by the Council to strengthen
the position of the airlines with regard to service standards
and charges:
- service levels and charges
to be set by the airport managing body in co-operation, rather
than in consultation, with airlines and, where appropriate, groups
representing the disabled;
- charges to be reasonable, cost-related, transparent
and subject to the possibility of review by national enforcement
bodies;
- an airport managing body, while retaining overall
legal responsibility for ensuring provision of services to PRMs,
may contract with other bodies, including airlines, for their
delivery; and
- airlines explicitly able to initiate the process
of contracting for service delivery, with the airport managing
body required, before entering into such a contract, to consult
all airlines using the airport and to take into account the effect
on existing services.
5.7 The Minister says that some of the other matters
raised in the consultations have been addressed by amendments
proposed by both the European Parliament and in the Council Working
Group. Points included in a general approach adopted by the Transport
Council on 6 October 2005 are:
- expansion of the title to "rights
of disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility when travelling
by air" (to meet requests from representatives of people
with disabilities, notably deafness);
- a requirement on the managing bodies of airports
handling commercial passenger flights to organise centralised
provision of the services necessary to enable PRM to board, disembark
and transit between flights;
- a requirement on the managing bodies of airports
handling more than 150,000 commercial passengers per annum to
set quality standards for the service, in co-operation with airlines
and bodies representing disabled people;
- the arrangements described above for airports
to contract out services;
- managing bodies of airports to recover costs
of the service through a charge on airlines proportionate to the
total number of passengers each carries to and from the airport;
- a requirement that such a charge be reasonable,
cost-related, transparent and established in co-operation with
airlines;
- a requirement that information on costs and charges
be made available by airports to airlines using the airport and
to national enforcement bodies;
- a requirement that Member States set up bodies
to enforce the rights of PRMs, with the possibility of oversight
of the application of the charging regime; and
- requirements concerning notification and information
exchange to ensure smooth operation of a service to PRMs.
5.8 The Regulatory Impact Assessment shows the Commission
had earlier estimated the cost of assistance for wheelchair passengers,
which suggests a cost of a centralised system spread across all
passengers as in the range of €0.26 to €0.33 (18p to
23p) per person. This compares with a BA estimate of its present
costs of about 19p per person and one from Jet2com of about 10p.
It can be compared also with Sweden where there is already a centralised
system for assistance to wheelchair passengers which costs about
€0.11 (8p) per person. This suggests the costs to industry
would not be large and are in any case costs that are largely
already incurred by airports and airlines.
5.9 The Regulatory Impact Assessment finds that the
benefits of the proposal outweigh the costs and more generally
that the option of a centralised system, without an opt out provision
but with the safeguards now negotiated, is the one to support.
And the Minister summarises the Government's present view as that
imposing a duty on airport managing bodies to secure provision
of assistance to PRMs coupled with the safeguards proposed for
airlines strikes an acceptable balance between the needs of both
sides of the industry and that a centrally organised provision
would best facilitate the delivery of a uniform, seamless and
high quality service to all PRMs across the Community.
Conclusion
5.10 We are grateful to the Minister for the extensive
information she gives us now on developments on document (a),
the draft Regulation on persons of reduced mobility in air transport.
We clear the document.
5.11 However, we should like the Minister to tell
us what effect, if any, the Regulation would have on the ability
of the Gibraltar Government to require similar provisions at Gibraltar
Airport, if its applicability to Gibraltar were suspended pending
the outcome of negotiations between the UK and Spain as to the
status of the airport.
5.12 We still await the Regulatory Impact Assessment
on document (c), the Draft Regulation on the identity of air carriers.
So this document remains under scrutiny.
21 COM (2001) 370. Back
22
See headnote. Back
|
