6 Civil aviation
| (a)
(26821)
12039/05
COM(05) 406
(b)
(26822)
12044/05
COM(05) 408
(c)
(26823)
12045/05
COM(05) 409
(d)
(26844)
12276/05
COM(05) 407
(e)
(26888)
12752/05
COM(05) 451
|
Commission Communication: Strengthening aviation relations with Chile
Commission Communication: Developing a Community civil aviation policy towards Australia
Commission Communication: Developing a Community civil aviation policy towards the Republic of India
Commission Communication: Developing a Community civil aviation policy towards New Zealand
Commission Communication: Developing a Community civil aviation area with Ukraine
|
| Legal base | — |
| Document originated | (a)-(c) 5 September 2005
(d) 12 September 2005
(e) 27 September 2005
|
| Deposited in Parliament | (a)-(c) 14 September 2005
(d) 21 September 2005
(e) 7 October 2005
|
| Department | Transport |
| Basis of consideration | (a) EM of 28 September 2005
(b) EM of 3 October 2005
(c) EM of 13 October 2005
(d) EM of 17 October 2005
(e) EM of 20 October 2005
|
| Previous Committee Report | None
|
| To be discussed in Council | Not known
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Not cleared. Further information requested
|
Background
6.1 International aviation relations between Member States and
third countries have traditionally been governed by bilateral
air services agreements. However, these have been found by the
European Court of Justice to be discriminatory in effectively
denying market access to carriers owned and controlled by nationals
of another Member State, contrary to Article 43 of the Treaty.
The main response to this from the Commission has been to develop
an overall policy for civil aviation relations with third countries.
The latest stage in this was described in its paper "Developing
the agenda for the Community's external aviation policy",
which we considered in July 2005.[23]
Another consequence has been that the Commission has negotiated
"Horizontal Agreements" with a number of third countries,
including Australia, Chile, New Zealand and Ukraine, so as to
alter such air services agreements with Member States as they
may have in order to remove discriminatory provisions.
The documents
6.2 In these documents the Commission asks to be mandated by the
Council to negotiate civil aviation agreements, in place of existing
bilateral agreements, between the Community and Australia, Chile,
India, New Zealand and Ukraine. The aim would be comprehensive
agreements on so-called Open Aviation Areas "combining market
opening with a parallel process of regulatory co-operation and/or
convergence notably in priority areas such as aviation safety,
security, environmental protection, research and technology and
application of competition rules ensuring a level playing field
and fair and equal conditions for competition".
6.3 In document (a) the Commission says that Chile,
which has requested negotiations on an air services agreement,
is one of a small number of countries with a highly liberal, market-oriented
air services policy and a modern regulatory framework. It has
pioneered a policy based on free market entry, freedom of pricing,
genuine open skies and minimum governmental intervention, whilst
maintaining regulatory standards on a par with those of the Community.
The Commission says an Open Aviation Area agreement would increase
opportunities for Community airlines in Chile, provide new opportunities
for shippers and the tourist industry, help encourage market liberalisation
in other Latin American countries, and strengthen economic and
political ties between the Community and Chile.
6.4 In document (b) the Commission says that in recent
years Australia, which also has requested negotiations on an air
services agreement, has made major changes to its aviation policy
in order to promote travel, trade and tourism. With a market-orientated
economic and transport policy and high regulatory standards, Australia
is good candidate for an agreement. The Commission believes that
such an agreement offers significant new opportunities for strengthening
air transport in a competitive and level playing field and would
give the European airline industry more open market access to
and from Australia and allow it to compete with air carriers from
the Middle and Far East. There would be benefits for European
passengers and shippers. And an agreement would further strengthen
already excellent commercial and political relations between the
Community and Australia.
6.5 In document (c) the Commission notes that the
Indian air traffic market is currently among the fastest growing
in the world — with an increase of 25% in 2004. Because
of its extraordinary growth rates and gradual market opening (from
a situation which has been characterised by a restrictive approach
with limited access and strong state control) India offers great
potential for growth for European airlines. India has expressed
a willingness to consider a comprehensive agreement with the Community,
but the Commission recognises that such an agreement, based on
full market opening and regulatory convergence or co-operation
may take some time to achieve, and that a staged approach is likely
to be needed. As there has not been a Horizontal Agreement with
India one of the issues to dealt with would be the discriminatory
provisions of Member States' bilateral agreements.
6.6 In document (d) the Commission says New Zealand,
which also has requested negotiations on an air services agreement,
has in recent years introduced major changes to its aviation policy
in order to promote travel, trade and tourism. With its market-orientated
economic and transport policy and high regulatory standards, New
Zealand is a good candidate for an agreement.
6.7 In document (e) the Commission says Ukraine,
in its drive towards integration in Europe, has shown interest
in closer co-operation with the Community in civil aviation, has
demonstrated a willingness to reform the framework for international
air transport and has begun to implement a more market-oriented
economic and transport policy and to open its market to Member
States. Furthermore an agreement would strengthen relations generally
with an important neighbour of the Community.
The Government's view
6.8 The Parliamentary Under Secretary of State, Department
for Transport (Ms Karen Buck) tells us the Government supports
the principle of securing fully liberal air transport agreements
between the Community and these five countries. They should be
based on a reciprocal opening of market access and an assured
high level of regulatory convergence. Potentially there could
be significant benefits in agreements along the lines described
by the Commission.
6.9 The Minister says however, before giving the
Commission mandates to proceed the Government would wish to have
assurances that:
- agreements along these lines
are in each case a realistic possibility; and
- meanwhile the ability of Member States to maintain
and develop their bilateral arrangements would not be frozen for
a lengthy period.
6.10 The Minister also says on the matter of subsidiarity
that the Commission claims that single agreements at Community
level will benefit a range of interests within the Community.
Conclusion
6.11 These proposals are consequent on the European
Court of Justice so-called "open skies" judgements of
November 2002 and the Commission's developing response. When we
looked at the general policy in July 2005 we asked, along with
a less directly related question on the European Aviation Safety
Agency, to hear the outcome of the Government's consultations
with interested parties and other Member States before considering
the matter further.[24]
6.12 Before we consider further the more specific
proposals in these documents we should like the Government's response
to our earlier request.
6.13 Moreover, we note the rather cursory consideration
of subsidiarity in these documents. Before we consider them further
we should like also a clear statement of the Government's own
view of the subsidiarity issue.
6.14 Meanwhile we do not clear these documents.
23 See (26436) 7214/05 (26438) 7369/05: HC 34-i (2005-06),
para 15 (4 July 2005). Back
24
Ibid. Back
| 
