Brussels, 13/12/2012 (Agence Europe) - Following the vote on the airports package, MEPs were still divided - with the ground-handling services section being returned to the committee for further examination. Representatives from airports and airlines are nevertheless relieved that the European Parliament has not just simply rejected the proposal, and they hope that the MEPs will be ambitious on improving the quality of airports. The Greens still lambast the report on harmful noise, which in their opinion does not go far enough.
On Wednesday 12 December, the MEPs proceeded to vote on the airports package proposed by European Commissioner for Transport Siim Kallas, with a view to preventing the saturation that threatens European airports. They adopted the reports on slots and harmful noise, but they preferred to discuss ground-handling services again in committee (changing from two to three minimum operators in airports). In the view of Christine De Veyrac (EPP, France), this will therefore enable “examination of the text in a calmer atmosphere”. She considered however that “this text brings real answers to the problems that have been indentified by the different players concerned”. The Socialists also welcomed the rejection followed by the return to committee, which sends a strong message to the Commission. “The Parliament refuses to allow more than 60,000 European employees should be threatened with a new liberalisation and it wants to pick this text up again in depth to protect the employees”, say French S&D MEPs Gilles Pargneaux and Bernadette Vergnaud. However, their Belgian S&D colleague, Saïd El Khadraoui, would have preferred outright rejection of the report. He will nonetheless be ready to discuss the liberalisation again if the protection of social rights is firmly written into the new legislation. The Greens would also have preferred a rejection of the ground-handling services report. Jean-Jacob Bicep (Greens/EFA, France) asks the Commission to withdraw its proposal “otherwise we will have to fight the same battle again, which is pointless. The real issue is the quality of the jobs - it's from this variable that the quality of the work ensues. The employees must be better trained, better managed and not better put to competition!” Isabelle Durant (Greens/EFA, Belgium) is equally vindictive - “we will do everything to get it finally pinned down!” (our translation). Michael Cramer (Greens/EFA, Germany) stressed the fact that “bad working conditions for the ground-handlers undermine the quality of the services, with unacceptable consequences on safety and security”.
The industry is reacting cautiously. Olivier Jankovec, Director General of ACI Europe (Airports Council International) wants the coordination of operators still to fall within the remit of the airports and he is not opposed to an improvement in social conditions. The AEA (Association of European Airports), ERA (European Regions Airline Association) and IACA (International Air Carrier Association) start from the principle that the proposal currently being tabled “ensures a more competitive market with no detrimental impact to working conditions and, in addition, will benefit passengers by helping airlines deliver these essential services more cost efficiently”.
The Greens regret that the MEPs have been less criticised on another section of the package - that linked to the fight against harmful noise in the surrounding areas of airports. Durant considers that “daring to speak of a balanced approach to the management of noise while completely overlooking the recommendations of the WHO on this is to make a mockery of the citizens”. Her colleague Cramer also stresses that the position adopted by the Parliament on this still tolerates the Commission's intervention to oppose restrictions to flights in some airports - “this approach is designed to favour increasing EU airport capacity and comes at the expense of good regional practice for airport noise reduction”. (MD/transl.fl)