Aviation Strategy

Written evidence from the Aberdeen Airport Consultative Committee (AS 108)

Preamble

Aberdeen Airport Consultative Committee is established under UK civil aviation legislation. It is independent of the airport’s ownership and management, although the Managing Director attends and advises meetings as appropriate. The Committee has 20 members, drawn from the local authorities most closely affected by its operations, local community councils, professional and trade organisations, such as the local Chamber of Commerce and ABTA, organisations connected with aviation, including NATS and the local Airport Operators’ Committee and passenger representation. The airport is predominantly a business airport, with a throughput of more than 3 million passengers a year. In addition to scheduled services to London and most of the UK’s provincial airports, and international scheduled services to Europe’s main hubs, Aberdeen is also the world’s busiest civilian helicopter airport, servicing the off-shore energy sector.

We are pleased to offer the following observations in respect of your Committee’s invitation to interested parties to submit evidence. All that we say has been said in one way or another to the DfT, your own Committee, to the All Party Group on Aviation and to other consultations over the past few years, but we feel that the points must continually be reiterated, in the hope that government pays attention to them. We shall attempt to keep our responses brief. However, we are also willing to forward to your Committee a copy of the response we have today sent to the Secretary of State in relation to the current consultation on Aviation Framework, if you so wish.

Objectives of Government policy on aviation

International aviation connectivity is critical to the whole of UK plc, as we seek to regain some of our former competitive edge in relation to international commerce and trade. At the moment, it seems to us, our near European competitors (France and The Netherlands in respect of the Sky Team alliance and Lufthansa in relation to the Star Alliance) have stolen a march on the UK in terms of the number of destinations served, but not necessarily in terms of frequency of services to some key international destinations served by the One World alliance, led by BA.

From our own perspective, as one of the more peripheral regions of the UK, aviation connectivity is vital, not just in relation to international services, but also in relation to domestic connectivity. Aberdeen is at least 7 hours by rail from London and other major UK provincial cities, and longer by road in many cases. Business and leisure travellers therefore rely substantially on good frequent point to point air links across the UK, whether to do a day’s business away from their office, or to connect to longer haul flights that are only available from major hubs. For us, aviation will always fit into the overall transport strategy: even when HS2 reaches the central belt of Scotland, we shall not be ‘near enough’ to London to encourage a general modal switch for journeys which, by road or rail, take longer than 3.5 to 4 hours.

We therefore reiterate our long-held view that Government must find some way within general competition policy and EU regulation to ensure that sufficient slots are retained at both Heathrow and Gatwick for services from the further UK regions, now and for as far as one can see into the future. This might also require the CAA to change its current opinion, to ensure that landing fees for the aircraft that operate such routes are not priced off the airfield.

We base our case not least on the very substantial contributions that the energy, distilling and other sectors based in the north east of Scotland make to the UK exchequer, and the fear that, without connectivity, energy majors may be tempted to relocate, not elsewhere in the UK, but beyond our borders.

As far as APD is concerned, we would be more amenable to the tax if it were seen as a source of income for environmental improvement, rather than as straight income to the general exchequer. One of our concerns is that every domestic passenger making a return journey within the UK pays APD in each direction, whereas a passenger flying directly from the UK to an international destination only pays for the outbound journey. In the Chancellor’s consultation on APD last year, we suggested that a return flight within the UK should only attract one APD levy, or that APD should not be charged at all for domestic flights where there is no alternative surface transport with a journey of 4 hours or less. Neither suggestion was accepted.

Existing capacity

There is a potential conflict between ‘best use’, whereby airlines focus their efforts on the most profitable long haul routes using wide bodied jets, depending primarily on a catchment area close to their hub, and ‘best use’ that serves the interests of the whole of UK plc. All the time BA and Virgin, the UK’s two remaining long haul airlines, focus almost all their services on London’s two main airports, they will be sucking in demand from all round the UK (as well as from beyond). We believe a balance needs to be struck, as we have already indicated, between long haul point to point services and the needs of UK businesses and citizens from the further regions, who also require access to such services.

One option might be to build on existing capacity at Birmingham and Manchester airports to offer an alternative hub network. But unless BA and Virgin are prepared to develop a network of services from these airports, the attraction for interlining passengers will still be Heathrow and, to a lesser extent, Gatwick. For effective interlining, members of a single alliance or code share arrangement need to offer feeder services from other UK airports, with through ticketing. At the moment such services are not available. Is it, then, little wonder that more and more UK passengers are turning their business to such airlines as Air France/KLM and Lufthansa, through European hubs, and Emirates, through Dubai?

The future

We do not feel competent to express a view on whether there should be a new hub airport for the UK, or where it should be. We do understand the impact of aviation on residents of parts of London (although Heathrow and Gatwick airports have been operational for many more decades than many residents have lived near to them). As we hope we have emphasised, whatever the future, we urge Government to ensure the aviation needs of all the UK are taken into account, and not simply the interests of the south east of England.

29 October 2012