Brussels, 22/01/2013 (Agence Europe) - On Monday 21 January, the transport committee (TRAN) of the European Parliament reopened the file on ground handling after the plenary had rejected it in December 2012. The only possible way to find a resolution would be to close the gap with the employment committee which deals with the thorny social aspects. Nonetheless, the groups still seem highly divided when it comes to continuing work on this matter. A new plenary vote on the ground handling chapter is expected to be held in April.
On 12 December last, MEPs had rejected the ground handling section of the airport package (composed of three elements aimed at improving airport capacity and quality), and referred the dossier back to committee. MEPs did not agree on heightened liberalisation in this sector as recommended by the Commission (with a third service provider in major European airports). MEPs resumed work in the TRAN committee on Monday 21 January.
The rapporteur on this dossier, Artur Zasada (EPP, Poland), is expected to present further compromise amendments by 2 February. He urged his colleagues not to give up, but to improve the ground handling services, saying: “Is it worth the trouble of working on this document? Yes, there is proof that, in a crisis situation, airports that are liberalised or not have the same problems and the passengers have to bear the cost of all those problems”.
In order to break the deadlock, Zasada recommends two approaches. On one hand, he advocates negotiation with the employment committee as the latter is responsible for social elements. The personnel transfer guarantee in the event of suppliers being changed is the sensitive point, especially for the S&D Groups. Trade unions are piling on the pressure so that all categories of services (11) may benefit from the guarantee, compared with just the four categories proposed by the Commission. The rapporteurs and shadow rapporteurs of the two committees should therefore get around the discussion table to seek to reach compromises.
Another proposal from the rapporteur is that of leaving the choice up to national governments to authorise, or not, three ground handling suppliers in their airports. Further liberalisation of ground handling services would be left up to the individual member state's decision, he said.
Christian Democrats, Socialists and Liberals ought to be satisfied with the proposals put forward by rapporteur Zasada and continue to work according to these terms. Speaking on behalf of the Socialists, Saïd El Khadraoui (Belgium) admitted that further liberalisation would not help to improve the quality of services. Nonetheless, faced with the status quo in the currently poor legislation, he said that he was, “prepared to examine the question and see what we can improve”. He mentioned the quality of training, collective agreements for workers, taking on staff and fixed term contract limitations. Mathieu Grosch (Belgium) spoke on behalf of the EPP on the principle that it was necessary “to seize the opportunity of amending something and not sending the dossier back to the Commission. The situation must be improved for passengers and employees, without necessarily resorting to extreme solutions… If we don't manage this, the EPP will also withdraw from the debate and we will have exhausted all the different possibilities offered us in the first phase and we will have to carry out the discussion again later”.
However, the Greens, the Conservatives and the GUE are sticking to their positions and want the Commission to withdraw the proposal. Peter Van Dalen (ECR, the Netherlands) explained that “the idea of sending the whole package to the member states seems to me like an empty shell!” Eva Lichtenberger (Greens/EFA, Austria) called on the Commission to “put forward a new and simpler proposal. We'd do better than with this extremely complex construction” (our translation throughout). (MD/transl.fl)