3 Rights of passengers
| (30264) 11990/08 + ADDs 1-2 COM(08) 816
| Draft Regulation concerning the rights of passengers when travelling by sea and inland waterway and amending Regulation (EC) No. 2006/2004 on cooperation between national authorities responsible for the enforcement of consumer protection laws
|
| Legal base | Article 71(1) EC; co-decision; QMV
|
| Department | Transport |
| Basis of consideration | Minister's letter of 29 June 2009
|
| Previous Committee Report | HC 19-v (2008-09), chapter 4 (28 January 2009)
|
| To be discussed in Council | Not known
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Do not clear; further information requested
|
Background
3.1 In its 2001 White Paper "European transport policy for
2010: time to decide" the Commission listed one of its objectives
as establishing passenger rights in all modes of transport.[18]
Legislation has already been enacted for the aviation sector,
covering passenger rights generally and the rights of passengers
with reduced mobility in two separate Regulations.[19]
In December 2008 the Commission presented a draft Regulation,
which is still under scrutiny, intended to establish a set of
rights for passengers using bus and coach services on both domestic
and international routes.[20]
3.2 In December 2008 the Commission also presented
this draft Regulation, intended to establish a set of rights for
passengers travelling by sea and inland waterways. The aim of
this proposal is to:
- remove potential barriers to
disabled people and persons with reduced mobility when travelling
by sea and inland waterways, by addressing issues around the lack
of accessibility and the provision of assistance for their needs;
and
- ensure an enhanced level of consumer protection
for commercial maritime and inland waterway passengers who experience
delays or disruption to their journeys.
3.3 The draft Regulation has five chapters covering
general provisions, assistance for passengers with disabilities
or reduced mobility, obligations to be imposed on carriers in
the event of interrupted travel, information for passengers and
handling of complaints and enforcement. The design of vessels
to make them accessible to disabled people and persons with reduced
mobility is not within the scope of this proposal.[21]
3.4 When we considered this proposal, in January
2009, we reported that the Government:
- welcomed the benefits the proposal
was designed to offer to disabled people and persons with reduced
mobility and passengers in general;
- noting that the proposal was based on the legislation
applying to aviation and that this was contained in two separate
Regulations, considered that a similar arrangement might be more
appropriate for the maritime sector;
- noted that the proposal applied a "one size
fits all" approach to a very diverse industry and considered
that this was not proportionate; and
- had, consequently, a number of concerns with
the proposal which it would raise with other Member States and
the Commission during negotiations on the proposal.
We also reported a considerable number of the Government's
more detailed concerns, its preliminary views on the financial
implications of the proposal and its intentions on consultation
and preparing an impact assessment.
3.5 We concluded that the aim of the draft Regulation
was clearly laudable, but that it was equally clear that there
was much to be resolved before the proposal could be brought to
a conclusion. So before considering the document further we asked
to:
- hear about significant progress
in the negotiations, particularly in relation to the scope of
the proposal for the maritime sector — that is questions
related to diverse port and ship size and inland waterways;
- have an account of the outcome of the Government's
consultations on the proposals; and
- see the Government's impact assessment.
Meanwhile the document remained under scrutiny.
The Minister's letter
3.6 The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department
for Transport (Paul Clark), writes now partially in response to
our earlier report and to tell us also of the European Parliament's
first reading of the proposal. First, the Minister covers one
point emerging from the Government's consultations and the continuing
preparation of its own impact assessment. Recalling the Commission's
estimate, in its impact assessment, that 12,300-24,600 jobs could
be created in the maritime industry by this proposal, the Minister
says that:
- it is clear from consultations
with the UK's maritime industry that the proposal is unlikely
to lead to any significant increase in the number of jobs in the
UK maritime sector;
- the Commission's estimate, prepared before the
recent downturn in the world economies, was based on the premise
that enhancing access to the provision of services would result
in more people using them, which would lead to greater employment
requirements;
- although it is likely that increased access would
lead to more passenger activity on some routes in mainland Europe,
and thus create new jobs to service that activity, it is by no
means clear that many routes in the UK would see any noticeable
increase in passenger throughput;
- the busiest routes in the UK already deal with
many persons with reduced mobility and have done so effectively
and efficiently for many years;
- there might, however, be a few jobs created on
the less busy ferry routes because of increasing passenger numbers
and the need for ferry operators to provide more assistance to
passengers than at present;
- the proposed complaint handling and national
enforcement body requirements would also create the need for some
extra posts, but overall the total net increase in employment
in the UK is unlikely to be more than 100; and
- the precise number would be very difficult to
determine and would depend on a range of factors, such as the
future economic situation, the outcome of the negotiations, the
time it would take for new rules to enter into force and the reaction
of ferry operators and their customers to the new rules.
The Minister then comments that:
- the Government is committed,
in close cooperation with stakeholders, to ensuring that the proposed
Regulation is proportionate and does not create an unnecessarily
high administrative and financial burden;
- its aim is to enhance the services which UK citizens
can expect when they travel within the Community; and
- if this creates more passenger activity and a
consequent increase in the overall level of employment in the
maritime sector, the Government would, of course, welcome this.
3.7 More generally on Council consideration of the
proposal the Minister tells us that:
- Working Group deliberation
began in January 2009, under the Czech Presidency (but with Sweden
chairing the discussions);
- although there have been eight meetings so far,
progress has been slow;
- there is as yet no consensus on the scope of
the Regulation, its territorial applicability, the compensation
arrangements for delay and or cancellation and how the Regulation
should be supervised and enforced;
- a discussion at the March 2009 Transport Council
on the scope and territorial applicability of the proposal did
not generate a consensus, but Ministers did accept that there
was a need for the proposal; and
- further discussion is to take place under the
Swedish Presidency and it is expected that a common position should
be possible by the end of the year.
3.8 On the European Parliament's first reading the
Minister tells us that:
- it supported the need for new
rights for all maritime passengers and stressed the importance
that persons with reduced mobility should be treated more favourably;
- whilst welcoming the proposal, it adopted 75
amendments which it considered necessary to refine the text and
to minimise some of the burdens to be imposed by the proposal;
and
- the Government welcomes many of these amendments,
although there are several which it would not support.
3.9 The Minister then gives the Government's views
on the key European Parliament amendments, saying of:
- an amendment to authorise Member
States to exclude urban and suburban transport services from the
scope of the Regulation, that although the European Parliament
has acknowledged the desirability of minimising the scope for
local transport, its amendment would provide Member States with
a major opt out and lacks clarity. At the March 2009 Transport
Council Ministers agreed that there was a need to minimise the
scope, but there was no consensus on how this should be achieved.
The Government is continuing to press in the negotiations for
the scope to reflect a satisfactory balance between industry and
their customers and it is hopeful that this will be achieved;
- an amendment to delete the definition of RO-PAX
(ferries which are principally used and designed to carry cargo),
that it is not clear why the European Parliament is seeking this
deletion. It may simply be an attempt to tidy up the text, in
which case the Government could support the amendment. It, and
a number of other Member States, is keen to see the exclusion
of such vessels from the scope and it is continuing to press for
this;
- amendments to include force majeure as
a defence which an operator can cite in order to avoid the obligation
of paying compensation to a customer, that the ferry industry
considers these amendments essential, in order to limit their
potential to pay compensation for delays over which they have
no control, such as the recent dispute involving French trawler
men which stopped traffic at Dover for several days. The Government
recognises that if ferry operators are to be liable to pay compensation
for delays, then the specific operational factors affecting shipping
need to be taken into account, and that compensation should only
be paid when the operator is at fault. It therefore supports the
European Parliament's objective on this, but whether there is
a need to include a reference to force majeure will depend
on the progress of the negotiations on the compensatory aspects
of the proposal;
- an amendment to provide the carrier with the
ability to decline to take onto his vessel a person with reduced
mobility on the grounds of safety, operational feasibility, or
the dignity of the traveller. The Government welcomes this important
clarification which is one of the key concerns of the operators
of small passenger craft;
- amendments to amend "assistance animal"
to "assistance dog". The Government welcomes these amendments
since it is appropriate that only trained dogs should be included
in the Regulation. This is also the view of the disability lobby
groups consulted by the Government;
- an amendment about provisions for training of
new employees providing that only new employees who have direct
contact with passengers should receive disability-related training.
The Government welcomes the acknowledgement of the need to minimise
the impact on industry of the disability-related training requirements.
The amendment goes some way to reducing the overall burden, but
there is a need to ensure that the training needs for existing
staff are treated in a similar way; and
- an amendment to limit the cost to the carrier
of accommodation that must be offered to a passenger delayed overnight
to a maximum of twice the price of the ticket paid. The amendment
would minimise the burden on ferry operators, and so is welcome
to the Government, although it is yet to be persuaded that there
is any need for an operator to pay for overnight accommodation
to a delayed passenger.
Conclusion
3.10 We are grateful for the Minister's account
of where matters stand with the Government's and the Council's
consideration of this proposal and also of the European Parliament's
first reading. However, we note that there is as yet not much
significant progress in the negotiations. So before considering
the document again we should like to have a further account of
the discussions, once the shape of the possible common position
becomes more certain. Additionally we would want to have a fuller
account of the outcome of the Government's consultations on the
draft Regulation and to see its impact assessment. Meanwhile the
document remains under scrutiny.
18 (22660) 11932/01: see HC 152-xv (2001-02), chapter
2 (30 January 2002) and Stg Co Debs, European Standing
Committee A, 13 March 2002, cols. 3-28. Back
19
Regulation (EC) No 261/2004, on "establishing common rules
on compensation and assistance to passengers in the even of denied
boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights" and
Regulation (EC) No 1107/2006, on "concerning the rights of
disabled persons and persons with reduced mobility when travelling
by air". Back
20
(30255) 16933/08 + ADDs 1-2: see HC 19-v (2008-09), chapter 4
(28 January 2009). Back
21
This is covered by Directive 2003/24/EC, which amends Council
Directive 98/18/EC on safety rules and standards for passenger
ships engaged on domestic voyages, and includes specific requirements
for disabled people and persons with reduced mobility, in particular
access to the ship, signs, message relay systems, alarms and additional
requirements, designed to ensure mobility on board ship. Accessibility
to new ships for international services has been regulated by
the International Maritime Organisation's Recommendation on the
Design and Operation of Passenger Ships to Respond to Elderly
and Disabled Persons' Needs, IMO MSC /Circ.735. Back
|
