Select Committee on Transport Minutes of Evidence


Memorandum submitted by the Department for Transport

DECISION

  The Government announced on 10 October 2005 that it had decided not to accept the Civil Aviation Authority's recommendation for a £1 levy on all UK-originating international air passengers, to finance the homeward journeys of passengers whose airline went bankrupt while they were abroad, and refunds of the money they had lost. After weighing up the arguments for and against, the Government had concluded that, as in most other circumstances, people should be free to choose whether to pay for insurance or not. The announcement included plans to improve consumer information and to reduce the burdens on tour operators.

BACKGROUND

  1.  The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) administers the Air Travel Organisers' Licensing (ATOL) scheme, which provides protection for consumers of air-based package holidays in accordance with the Package Travel Directive (Council Directive 90/314/EEC) and the Package Travel, Package Holidays and Package Tours Regulations 1992.

  2.  In July 2004 the CAA published advice to the Government on the future of financial protection for air travellers. Its main recommendation was to increase the scope of protection from package holidays only to all UK-originating international flights, and to fund this by a levy on each passenger.

  3.  In its July 2004 report the Committee endorsed such an extension of financial protection. In September 2004 the Aviation Minister responded saying that the Government would need to carry out a thorough analysis of the proposal.

PROCESS

  4.  On 27 October 2004 the Department for Transport (DfT) announced that the Government had asked CAA to undertake further work on the issue, which was expected to be completed early in 2005. DfT officials participated in a working group of industry representatives led by CAA. Economic analysis was carried out by Ernst and Young, to a brief agreed by CAA and DfT.

  5.  CAA delivered a draft report to DfT on 12 April 2005. The General Election had been called on 5 April for 5 May, so the emerging conclusions could not be considered by Ministers immediately. Discussions continued at official level between CAA, DfT and other Government departments with an interest in the issue. The draft report was amended in the light of these discussions.

  6.  The CAA's final advice to the Government was published on 22 September 2005, the same day as a seminar which CAA held to brief members of the industry and other interested parties. The CAA recommended that all passengers on UK-originating international flights should have financial protection for both repatriation and refunds in the event that their tour operator or airline became insolvent. Protection would come from a reserve fund of around £250 million, paid for through a £1 levy per UK-originating international flight passenger, which would generate the required amount in 3-5 years.

  7.  The Government announced on 10 October 2005 that it had decided not to implement the levy. The DfT press release and the Minister's written statement to Parliament explain the Government's decision and are attached.

GOVERNMENT CONSIDERATION OF THE CAA RECOMMENDATION

  8.  Although the CAA's advice to the Government was not published till September 2005, the emerging recommendation was known earlier by stakeholders because of industry participation in the project. After the General Election Ministers received numerous representations from stakeholders, both written and in person, about the CAA's recommendation for a levy of £1. Some stakeholders wanted the Government to include provision for implementing the recommendation in its Civil Aviation Bill. At Second Reading of the Bill on 27 June 2005 the Aviation Minister said the Government found the pros and cons of the proposal finely balanced and would consider further before the Bill's remaining stages. Over the summer there were continuing discussions with the CAA and other stakeholders about the all-flights levy and about alternatives. The Government also took account of the wider policy context for assessing potential legislation and the events surrounding the failure of the Irish airline EUjet in July 2005.

WIDER POLICY CONTEXT

  9.  In launching the Better Regulation Action Plan on 24 May the Chancellor said:

      "Instead of routine regulation attempting to cover all, we adopt a risk based approach which targets only the necessary few.

      A risk based approach helps move us a million miles away from the old assumption—the assumption since the first legislation of Victorian times—that business, unregulated, will invariably act irresponsibly. The better view is that businesses want to act responsibly. Reputation with customers and investors is more important to behaviour than regulation, and transparency—backed up by the light touch—can be more effective than the heavy hand.

      So a new trust between business and government is possible, founded on the responsible company, the engaged employee, the educated consumer—and government concentrating its energies on dealing not with every trader but with the rogue trader, the bad trader who should not be allowed to undercut the good."

  10.  The Prime Minister, in a speech to the IPPR on 26 May, said:

      "There needs to be a proper and proportionate way of assessing risk and the response to it . . .

      We cannot respond to every accident by trying to guarantee ever more tiny margins of safety. We cannot eliminate risk. We have to live with it, manage it."

EUJET

  11.  The Government is sympathetic to anyone who had their holiday disrupted or who suffered anxiety or extra expense when EUjet failed. We recognise that there is a gap between the protection which was available to them this summer and the protection which the CAA's recommendation would have guaranteed. Other airlines did however offer flights home for £25, and we believe it is possible to narrow the gap through encouraging improved voluntary measures. This is a case where it would require undue intervention in the market to eliminate the risk entirely. EUjet had 12,000 passengers abroad, mainly in France and Spain. Based on 2004 data, the £1 levy would be compulsory for over 20 million air passengers departing the UK each year for three to five years (in addition to 28 million on package holidays who already pay for financial protection indirectly through tour operator bonding).

CONCLUSION

  12.  In reaching its decision the Government weighed up the CAA's advice, the views of stakeholders, the nature of the risk faced by travellers and the different means of reducing those risks.

  13.  The CAA's advice states that for most individual companies, the chance of failing is roughly between 2% and 3%. These figures are based on historical data: the average failure rate of UK and European airlines over 8-10 years from the mid 1990s. The information deficiencies which leave some passengers unprotected can however be remedied so as to reduce the impact of future failures, and an all-flights levy would introduce new market distortions. The budget traveller to Europe would have to pay a relatively higher percentage of his outlay towards a fund big enough to reimburse to the long-haul passenger should his holiday be affected by insolvency.

  14.  The Government was encouraged by the willingness expressed by airlines to ensure travellers have better information about insurance options, and by airlines' assurances that they would continue to take voluntary action on repatriation. The Aviation Minister is talking further to airlines to ensure that effective voluntary measures are in place as quickly as possible.

  15.  The Government is however keen to reduce costs and burdens on tour operators, which they see as an unfair competitive advantage for scheduled airlines. Hence we have asked the CAA to review whether the system of ATOL bonds could be replaced with a less burdensome means of meeting tour operators' obligations to package holiday-makers under the Package Travel Directive. The provision on replenishing the Air Travel Trust Fund (ATTF) in the Civil Aviation Bill gives scope for a single fund collected from tour operators instead of a two-part approach of bonds plus the ATTF.





 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2006
Prepared 4 February 2006