Strasbourg, 13/03/2007 (Agence Europe) - During the plenary session debate in Strasbourg on Tuesday, it became apparent that a large majority of MEPs wanted the Council to adopt the draft air agreement between the United States and the EU, concluded on 2 March. Although controversy remains, Parliament wants to reach an overall agreement covering cabotage, reduction of the harmful impact on the environment and access to the US market. MEPs will vote on this issue on Wednesday.
Opening the debate, Commission Vice-President in charge of Transport Jacques Barrot spoke of the potential advantages this draft agreement could bring European companies, and he welcomed the fact that the US had recognised the “European nature of our companies”. He emphasised particularly the fact that the draft agreement opened up new development possibilities for the civil aviation of 11 EU member states (the Baltic states among others) which did not have bilateral “open skies” agreements with the US. “The EU gained more than it conceded,” he stressed, before going on to the main problem posed by the project: the question of balance. He considered three issues.
On European investment in US companies, Mr Barrot acknowledged that, although European companies were not allowed, under American legislation on share acquisition by foreigners, to increase the number of shares with voting rights (limited to 25%), the EU had managed to secure the right to hold over 50% of the total capital, and to get the right to pass franchise agreements, and he stressed that once approved, these rights could not be changed unilaterally by the US. The Commissioner also highlighted the re-balancing which the EU managed to negotiate in compensation for restrictions imposed by US legislation and said that European companies would be able to reduce the number of shares with voting rights held by American investors in Community airline to 25% (down from 49.9%). On European investment in third country companies, Mr Barrot stressed that the new rules would allow investment in third country companies without this endangering traffic rights towards the US. “Without agreement, the United States will not be able to object to Community investment in non-EU European countries (like Switzerland) or in 18 African countries. No compensation for the Americans on this point,” he said. With regard to third country investment in European companies, he pointed out that the United States would not call into question flights to the US by Community companies if European countries (such as Iceland) invest in their capital. He urged member states not to miss this first stage of the opening of the trans-Atlantic air market. Referring to Article 21 of the draft agreement which requires both parties to begin negotiations on deepening the agreement by January 2008 and which allows the rights specified in the first agreement to be suspended if a new agreement is not concluded by mid 2010, the Commissioner drew attention to the importance of enhancing the opening of the market. This was further underlined by German, MEP Georg Jarzembowski who, on behalf of the EPP-ED group, noted that, although the opening up of the US market was not total, “negotiations have improved access” to this market and conditions for passengers. Mr Jarzembowski restated the call to the Council to endorse the agreement on 22 March. This call was backed up by Belgian Socialist and author of the transport committee resolution on this case (to be put to the vote on Wednesday 14 March), Saïd El Khadraoui, who said the agreement was a breakthrough towards a trans-Atlantic market. Noting that there were still some imbalances, Mr El Khadraoui spoke of the transitory nature of the present agreement, stressing the positive point that a joint committee was to be set up opening a permanent dialogue between the two parties on progress and the implementation of the agreement. Compared with his “British colleagues” who, like Christian Democrat MEP Timothy Kirkhope spoke of unfairness in the opening of markets, Mr El Khadraoui highlighted that, thanks to the agreement, Heathrow Airport could develop further, particularly after the completion of the second stage of negotiations. “We will do our best to bring this second stage to a conclusion,” he promised. Speaking fothe ALDE group, Dutch MEP Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert welcomed the great progress due to the 2 March agreement crossing the “i”s and dotting the “t”s of bilateral agreements. Describing the British objections as not very constructive, she noted that the protection of the internal market should be outdated in 2007. She welcomed the legal security offered to European operators by the agreement. She called on the Council to adopt it despite it not being perfect, mentioning among other things the absence of cabotage and to limited an enlargement of access to property. Speaking for the UEN, Polish MEP Ryszard Czarnecki welcomed the beneficial effects of the open skies project on competition.
“The growth of competitiveness will entail a rise in the number of flights and a reduction in cost”, he stressed, congratulating the Commission on having reached an “air agreement to facilitate European investment in American companies”. Eva Lichtenberger, MEP (Greens/EFA, Austria), welcomed the agreement, saying it ignored the “challenges to be raised”, mainly with regard to climate change. “The EU must be firm during the second phase of negotiations” mainly on the subject of “investment, security and the question of limits that must be fixed for emissions of CO2” and from fuels, she stressed. Taking the floor on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group, Jaromir Kohlicek, of the Czech Republic, stressed that the “United States continues to adopt a non-transparent and discriminatory attitude” and, because of this, “it would be premature to consider that there is an integrated area” between both sides (the EU and the US). Speaking of the lack of cabotage, “protective barriers” and the problem of CO2 emissions and the use of fossil fuels, Mr Kohlicek also looked at the social aspects of the agreement, calling for regulation of personnel qualifications, regulation of working hours and the certification of personnel on the ground. Speaking on behalf of the IND/DEM group, Kathy Sinnot expressed mixed feelings about the draft agreement, calling for “affordable flights, more efficient when it comes to fuel”.
Paolo Costa, the Italian Liberal and chairman of the parliamentary committee on transport, noted that the members of the committee would have preferred a “general agreement” to strengthen “control and access to the US air market”. He stressed that, in order to achieve this, two priorities were needed, namely: - the end of “internal diversification within the EU” caused by bilateral air agreements sealed between a number of member states and the United States, and the question of “security and safety”. French MEP Christine de Veyrac (EPP-ED) came into line with Commissioner Barrot, saying that the draft agreement is “good for European interests”. “The liberalisation of the transatlantic traffic will in fact boost growth of our airline companies, when they are confronted by a rise in kerosene, increasingly strict security constraints and a future contribution in the fight against climate change”, Ms de Veyrac said, speaking of more activity and hence more jobs for citizens as a result of increased links between the EU and the USA. She also subscribed to the idea of greater freedom on flight times and frequency, saying this would benefit both American and European consumers. Deploring the restrictions to the free functioning of the market on the part of the United States, she commented that the agreement provides, in exchange, for the Union to limit American stakeholding in European companies. “We must not turn our noses up; it's better to let well alone”, she said, calling on European ministers to give their support to the Commission.
On Wednesday, MEPs will vote the draft resolution on concluding the agreement on air services between the European Community and the member states, on one hand, and the United States, on the other, proposed on behalf of the transport committee by Saïd El Khardaoui. (aby)