Index 
 Previous 
 Next 
 Full text 
Procedure : 2005/2085(INI)
Document stages in plenary
Select a document :

Texts tabled :

A6-0375/2005

Debates :

PV 17/01/2006 - 6
CRE 17/01/2006 - 6

Votes :

PV 17/01/2006 - 7.8
CRE 17/01/2006 - 7.8
Explanations of votes

Texts adopted :

P6_TA(2006)0007

Verbatim report of proceedings
Tuesday, 17 January 2006 - Strasbourg OJ edition

6. Developing the agenda for the Community’s external aviation policy – EU-Russia and EU-China relations in the field of air transport
Minutes
MPphoto
 
 

  President . – The next item is the joint debate on

- the report by Mr El Khadraoui (A6-0403/2005), on behalf of the Committee on Transport and Tourism, on developing the agenda for the Community’s external aviation policy (2005/2084(INI)); and

- the report by Mr Zīle (A6-0375/2005), on behalf of the Committee on Transport and Tourism, on relations with the Russian Federation and China in the field of air transport (2005/2085(INI)).

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Saïd El Khadraoui (PSE), rapporteur. (NL) Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I should first of all like to thank the shadow rapporteurs of the other groups for their good cooperation. Although we did not see eye to eye in every respect, I do think we managed to agree on the essence, and we will in that way help bring about a European strategy on a subject that is only set to increase in importance in the next few years.

As you know, this discussion was sparked by the famous 2002 open skies judgment by the Court of Justice, from which it was evident that the European Community has exclusive competence in international airline services, more specifically automated booking systems, intra-Community ticket prices and the distribution of slots or landing rights. All existing bilateral aviation agreements between the Member States and third countries must be brought into line with the judgment, with the consequence that no fewer than 2 000 aviation agreements across the entire Union are up for review.

There are two ways of going about this. Either the Member States take it upon themselves to hold bilateral negotiations with third countries in order to bring their bilateral agreements into line with Community law (58 agreements were harmonised in this way), or negotiations are held at Community level under the so-called horizontal mandate. So far, 22 countries have already accepted horizontal agreements with the Community, as a result of which 327 bilateral agreements have been adapted. This brings the total to 385 agreements, which means that there is still a long way to go before all 2 000 agreements are amended.

I therefore make a case in my report for bringing all bilateral agreements into line with the open skies judgments as soon as possible in order to avoid legal uncertainty. I personally prefer Community agreements, since one set of negotiations is enough to replace all existing bilateral agreements with a particular country in one fell swoop. After all, the European Community can throw far more weight into the balance during negotiations than can, for example, a Member State on its own, but this does require common, cohesive vision.

I would stress that we should conclude agreements with our key partners and up-and-coming countries, such as China, the United States and Russia, as soon as possible, whilst not forgetting our immediate neighbours. That is important for economic reasons, as well as political reasons in terms of aviation, such as safety and security, and that is why I have tabled an amendment on this very topic in readiness for today’s vote.

When Community agreements are concluded, it is crucial that the European Community should consider three major factors. Firstly, the agreements must be balanced, and equivalent access to each other’s markets is important. This means that aspects such as landing rights, rights to cabotage, equal establishment and ownership rights, as well as state aid must be taken into account. I tabled an amendment before today’s sitting to ensure that the issue of state aid will be added to the list. That is not unimportant in view of the tougher security measures that were imposed on all airline companies in the United States following 11 September, with the US Government providing funding for US airline companies but not for the others, which amounts to distortion of competition.

Secondly, my report underlines the fact that the opening up of markets should always be preceded by convergence of regulations, and the need for the degree of liberalisation to be coupled to fair and competitive conditions. The European Union is either working on, or already has, rules on social matters surrounding safety, security, the environment, state aid and competition. It is unacceptable that these high standards should be eroded by the advent of market operators bound by less stringent rules. Certainly in open skies agreements, where it would be possible for airline companies of the European Union and third countries to have unrestricted access to each other’s markets, it is essential that there is a level playing field between the legislation of both parties. Otherwise, we could end up with distortion of competition and there is also the risk of relocation, as a result of which European airline companies would move to states with less clear-cut rules. That is why I have tabled an amendment to include the convergence of regulations surrounding security, state support and competition in my report, so that regulatory convergence will take place in those areas too. If it proves impossible to reach an open skies agreement, the Commission would then be asked to develop fair and transparent mechanisms for dividing up traffic rights among the Member States.

Thirdly and lastly, the Commission should also consult and inform all parties involved in the aviation industry and the European Parliament during the negotiations about the many fresh aviation agreements which will be concluded between Europe and the rest of the world in the next few years.

These three important factors are also reflected in Mr Zīle’s report with regard to Russia and China. Here too, the principle of reciprocity must apply. The high levies which Russia demands for flying over Siberia must be abolished. Asia, after all, is gaining in importance, and the shortest route to fly to it is still via the Russian Federation. Mr Zīle, therefore, also deserves all our support.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Roberts Zīle (UEN), rapporteur. (LV) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, first of all I would like to thank all the shadow rapporteurs and those who put forward motions on the European Commission’s report; as a result of this, in my view, we in the Committee on Transport and Tourism managed to achieve a good result. I think that we all had a common goal to give those from the European Commission that are conducting talks both with Russia and with China something to work with and, of course, also to send a political signal to the Council for the giving of a mandate. In these terms too, in my view, we managed to formulate a very clear position on the most essential issues.

With regard to relations with China, taking into account the rapidly growing Chinese aviation market in ten years’ time, for example, China will be the largest market in Asia for cargo flights we had several principles in our work. Firstly, there needs to be swift progress in creating a comprehensive aviation agreement between the European Union and China. Secondly, the agreement would have to be based, of course, on a horizontal agreement. As Mr El Khadraoui, my colleague, just mentioned, we would very much like to see very rapid development on this foundation in relations with China. Thirdly, at the same time as preparing a comprehensive agreement we would like to see an extension of the mandate, so that it would also cover requirements for the safety infrastructure of airports and for the quality of China’s air traffic control. Fourthly, the report placed particular emphasis on the need to achieve a result without delay in the field of air cargo transportation that would allow European companies to compete sooner in the potentially largest Asian air cargo market.

With regard to Russia, the most important aspect is that the Transport Committee regarded as totally unacceptable the practice whereby each year Russia, in contravention of the Chicago Convention, of which Russia itself is a signatory, collects from European Union airlines more than EUR 250 million for overflights of Siberia. Most of this money is invested in the Russian airline Aeroflot, which thus makes over USD 100 million profit per annum and is enabled to retain approximately 38% of the air transportation market between the European Union and Russia.

I am pleased that my colleagues on the Transport Committee considered that the European Commission ought to be far tougher in talks with Russia, both within the framework of the World Trade Organisation and on projects for aviation modernisation. In our view, it is unacceptable for these payments to continue as they are and in a very non-transparent form until 2013. In addition, for many European airlines these payments create discriminatory obstacles when it comes to acquiring parts of the previously mentioned Chinese market. The expression in the draft motion for a resolution is even stronger no other forms of payment to replace the Siberian overflight charges are acceptable to the European Parliament. We in the Transport Committee also considered that in talks between the European Union and Russia all European Union airlines must be given equal non-discriminatory legal status in order to enable them to acquire permanent take-off and landing rights at Russian airports.

Finally, may I say that we in the committee would like to see more information both about negotiations and about their status, which would thus give the European Parliament the opportunity better to defend the interests of Europeans both airlines and passengers in the sphere of other countries’ aviation markets.

 
  
  

IN THE CHAIR: MR FRIEDRICH
Vice-President

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Jacques Barrot, Vice-President of the Commission. (FR) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I sincerely wish to thank Mr El Khadraoui and Mr Zīle for their work and for the spirit of cooperation that has governed our work. I also wish to thank the members of the Committee on Transport and Tourism for having put a great deal of effort into this important debate. I would point out, Mr President, that this debate is timely, given that I have to prepare new aviation agreements during 2006. It was very helpful to have Parliament enlighten me on the Community’s external policy in the field of air transport. These two reports genuinely constitute an important contribution to the interinstitutional dialogue on Community action in this field.

Throughout the past 20 years, the Community has seen its responsibilities increase in the aviation sector. The Member States have brought down the barriers of their national markets in order to have only one market now – the Community market – which is henceforth based on a full set of common rules, including in fields such as security, safety or air traffic management. This Community governed by the rule of law is the foundation of a market that has become increasingly important as the years have gone by. There are now 600 million passengers and 60 million tonnes of goods transported each year.

To go from a bilateral system between states to one of agreements negotiated at Community level provides new and significant prospects, thanks to the opportunities afforded by the large European market and to the opportunities for developing cooperation in the Community. This transition from a bilateral system to a Community system also constitutes a legal requirement in terms of ensuring that our regulatory acquis is recognised and respected in the aviation sector.

Mr El Khadraoui’s report addresses a series of key problems for our policy. Firstly, the importance of taking steps to align the bilateral agreements, which, ever since the Court judgments, have been the subject of legal uncertainty. Mr El Khadraoui, we are engaged in this task alongside the Member States in a spirit of close cooperation and using all the levers provided by the EU’s external policy.

Secondly, you highlighted the need – and I thank you for doing so – always to respect the following dual objective: the opening up of markets and regulatory convergence. This priority accorded to regulatory convergence enables us to develop our international activities and the international activities of our industry in an environment of healthy and fair competition. We must simultaneously pursue both of these objectives. The efficiency and credibility of the Community in the negotiations depends on our doing so.

Finally, this regulatory cooperation has to rely as far as possible on technical cooperation in order to guarantee a high level of convergence in such vital areas as security and safety, not forgetting, of course, in the problematic environmental and social areas that form part of our European social model.

With Parliament’s support, we are going to continue to call for new negotiating mandates. The integration of Ukraine into the European area, an agreement with Australia and Chile and the start of negotiations with China and India will be the priorities for 2006.

China and Russia are the subjects of two communications by the Commission, on which Mr Zīle’s report is based. I will begin with Russia and with the issue of Siberian overflights. I should like to thank you for your support on this issue and for your very legitimate demands. We are determined to put a stop to these charges, which clearly contravene all international rules, and, before contemplating a comprehensive aviation agreement with Russia, we need to resolve this specific issue by also taking into account Russia’s willingness to join the WTO. I have been increasing the tempo of the negotiations with the Russian Government over the past few months. The issue was brought up during the EU-Russia Summit in October following a letter sent by Mr Barroso to Mr Putin. I have had two meetings with the Russian Transport Minister, Mr Igor Levitin, during which I laid a great deal of emphasis on the urgent need for a solution. We are resolute in our position: we are calling on the Russian Government to establish a transparent and non-discriminatory system and gradually to reduce the charges before they stop altogether in 2013, which was the date agreed in 2004 between the Russian Government and the Commission. Finally, we are calling for the restrictions on the number of Siberian overflights by European airlines to be abolished. Through lack of sufficient reactions on the part of the Russian Government at this stage, we need to bring up this issue at all levels. A solution needs to be found to this issue before Russia enters the WTO.

As regards the booming Chinese market, there are obvious advantages to a Community approach, as Mr Zīle demonstrated. The prospect of an agreement with China is crucial for European operators in the long term. Yet, our approach with regard to China needs to be gradual and methodical in order to strengthen our cooperation, while developing a level of regulatory convergence that is acceptable to our industry. The first phase of negotiations must unquestionably be devoted to improving the regulatory framework and the conditions relating to commercial operation. Our airlines are suffering from unjustifiable restrictions that must be lifted immediately. These aspects related to ‘doing business’ will be our priority.

In any event, Mr President, I should very much like to thank the European Parliament for its contribution to the success of these important negotiations, which will enable the European Union to increase the opportunities for its air transport industry, which I believe is an industry that deserves credit for creating jobs in Europe and for showing us a particularly dynamic side to Europe and a Europe in which the development of transport goes hand in hand with a high level of security and with high-quality transport. I should once again like to thank Mr El Khadraoui and Mr Zīle, and I should also like to thank your committee.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Zsolt László Becsey, on behalf of the PPE-DE Group. (HU) Mr President, I express my appreciation to the rapporteur, Mr El Khadraoui, for his extremely thorough work. The Committee on Transport and Tourism accepted his report as an appropriate compromise. Therefore, on behalf of myself and the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats, I would like to express the opinion that the report basically corresponds with the position of Parliament.

In laying down the general principles, we have correctly emphasised that when, in accordance with the ruling of the Court, an issue falls within the competence of the Community, any type of discrimination between partners within the Community must be pragmatically excluded, on the one hand, and ‘open sky’ agreements should be concluded, to the extent that it is possible, on the other hand. Existing bilateral agreements can now be harmonised using this dual approach.

At the same time, it still remains to be decided how we are going to divide between Member States the number of flights that will now be negotiated with foreign partners, in cases when the number of flights is limited. The Commission will soon have to submit a concrete paper on this sensitive issue to Parliament.

In addition to this, I believe that another important principle is found in the approach of the Commission and Parliament, which emphasises the necessity of increased technical harmonisation with external partners. This is how we can primarily help maintain flight safety, the cornerstone of our foreign policy, and this is how we can indirectly facilitate the implementation of environmental and competition priorities.

However, I do not agree with ideas of extending European or mainly Member State social rights to agreements concluded with third countries, and to aircraft flying under the flags of other nations. Let them comply with the provisions of the internationally applicable labour law and safety and competition standards. Anything more than this even within the European Union would only increase the unnecessary publicity campaign against new Member States, under the pretext of the non-existent social dumping.

I also reject the taxation of air transport for reasons of environmental protection, since on the one hand there is no compulsory international regulation in this respect, and on the other hand, this competitive sector must finance itself, including airports, from its own revenues. The best environmental protection is to ensure the development of technical safety, not to impose new tax burdens. We have only accepted the inclusion of air transport in the Emission Trading Scheme as part of the compromise, but direct taxation is out of the question.

As a Member coming from a new Member State, it is particularly important to me that neighbouring regions, the Balkans and large market partners such as China, the USA and Russia enjoy priority. Finally, I would like to say that in order to ensure transparency of negotiations, Parliament should be continuously involved in the negotiation rounds.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Bogusław Liberadzki, on behalf of the PSE Group (PL) Mr President, I should like to start by saying that Mr Zīle and Mr El Khadraoui have both tabled excellent reports, for which I should like to thank them. The fact that we are considering these reports together is also good news, since it will give an idea of our policy on civil aviation in general, and in particular with regard to China and Russia. The latter are key countries in economic, political and population terms, and also countries where aviation is developing at a very fast pace.

The report tabled by Mr El Khadraoui provides us with a basis for a common EU aviation policy towards the rest of the world. This will place the EU in a stronger position, and my group very much welcomes this approach. Mr Zīle stressed in his report that the Committee on Transport and Tourism did not have access to the negotiating mandate beforehand, and I can assure the Commissioner that the Commission will be asked to be more open towards Parliament as far as negotiating mandates are concerned.

We believe that the position on Russia outlined in Parliament’s report is ‘friendly but firm’, and I am delighted that the Commissioner too has expressed his support for such an approach. We agree entirely with the demands made regarding service quality standards, environmental protection, technical equipment for airports and air traffic control, including safety issues. We are fundamentally opposed to charges for flights over Siberia, and we believe that this issue should be resolved along with the other matters that will be negotiated with Russia.

We would stress that the principle of mutuality needs to be observed, inter alia in relations with both Russia and China. This holds particularly true when it comes to debates on the rules ensuring a common level playing field for competition in the field of aviation for the EU Member States, and also for Russian and Chinese operators.

I am therefore very much in favour of these two reports being adopted, and the rapporteurs deserve our thanks for their work. I am also delighted that the positions of the Commission, the Commissioner and Parliament coincide in a great many respects.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Eva Lichtenberger, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. (DE) That air transport is one of the major sectors that has an impact on growth is not a matter of dispute, and it is something of which we have all been made aware during the debate on these two reports.

Particularly intensive consideration has been given to two issues, namely flight safety and, of course, the protection of the environment. Where flight safety is concerned, there is an urgent need for reciprocal rights of inspection, not least within the SAFA (Safety Assessment of Foreign Aircraft Programme), along with something that is an important step into the future, and one that we in this House have already discussed, that being the training of inspection staff and the exchange of information with third countries.

It has to be said, though, that air transport has played just as significant a part in frustrating the achievement of the Kyoto target. If no action is taken, air transport will claim for itself all the room for manoeuvre in emissions accorded by the Kyoto Protocol in which the other sectors have made reductions. What that means is that industry has reduced emissions; private households have reduced emissions, and air transport will use them up unless we take action. That is why the debate on possible courses of action – whether these be fiscal in nature or involve emissions trading – must remain open-ended. That is a question to which we will have to address ourselves if we want to take Kyoto seriously.

At the same time, we have to raise – not least at the international level – the issues of noise pollution and regionally-adapted bans on night flights, and make social dumping impossible. Within the ‘open sky’, though – where important actions have already been taken – Europe needs to speak with confidence and a single voice if balance is to be maintained and no one nation or group of nations is to enjoy advantages in global competition that are denied to others.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Vladimír Remek, on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group (CS) Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, aviation in general has been a life-long interest of mine, if not to say passion, and it is 40 years since I started flying myself. I always have been and still am proud of the fact that this field of human endeavour – and I refer in particular to air travel – can serve as an example of effective and broad-based international cooperation, in which such things as ideological differences are overlooked. Amongst other things, this ensures that air travel is in fact the safest form of transportation.

For these reasons in particular, I will on the whole be happy to vote in favour of today’s reports. Their aim is to step up international cooperation, which will help make aviation better, safer and more efficient. I cannot, however, lend my full backing to one of the reports on account of the recommendation made in it to block Russia’s accession to the WTO, inter alia because charges for flying over Siberia have not been abolished. Let there be no mistake; I am not an advocate of the charges as such, since they do not represent a logical solution. As I see it, however, it is intolerable that what amounts to a threat should be used against a sovereign state and that one obstacle should effectively be removed in order to make way for another that in my opinion is much more serious. I am in favour of tough and transparent negotiations, but they should be negotiations nonetheless.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Mieczysław Edmund Janowski, on behalf of the UEN Group (PL) Mr President, I should like to pay tribute to the two rapporteurs for their work and also to congratulate them.

It is good news that the EU’s proposal for a Community aviation policy takes into account economic, technical, legal, social and environmental concerns, without neglecting safety requirements. The importance of these latter becomes particularly apparent in the event of accidents, poor weather conditions or strikes, or whenever there is an escalation of the terrorist threat. I would add that passengers must not be treated as a necessary evil whenever such situations arise, which unfortunately is what happens at present.

I should like to touch briefly upon a number of key issues. In view of the ‘open skies’ policy, I believe it would be useful to increase the number of airports in those EU Member States that serve as hubs for international flights. This would make it a great deal easier to transport both passengers and goods. Wherever appropriate, EU funds should be used to modernise airports, and I am delighted that an announcement has been made to this effect. Secondly, a similar level of services should be offered to EU citizens when checking in at any airport and the same should apply to the service culture and to flights to locations outside the EU. Thirdly, there should be a guarantee that appropriate conditions will be in place for disabled air passengers both within and outside the EU, and indeed we held a debate on this matter only a few weeks ago. Fourthly, the Community as a whole should be involved in negotiating such issues as charges for flights over Russian territory, and in fact these charges should be abolished without delay. Fifthly, I would suggest that all planes used by EU airlines, regardless of where they have been manufactured, should employ similar technological solutions in terms of passenger safety.

I should like to conclude by saying that carriers should be encouraged to step up their cooperation with each other. This cooperation should cover price and schedule flexibility, since the goal should be for passengers to feel as though they are the focus of the carrier’s activities, and not a troublesome piece of freight, as is sometimes the case.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Luis de Grandes Pascual (PPE-DE). – (ES) Mr President, Commissioner for Transport, ladies and gentlemen, I am speaking as rapporteur for the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats on the report on the European Union’s relations with Russia and China in the field of air transport. I would like once again to tell you about the conclusions we originally reached in the Committee on Transport and Tourism.

I would like firstly to congratulate the rapporteurs, both Mr El Khadraoui and Mr Zīle. I believe, Mr Zīle, that your work has been entirely positive, since it has allowed all of the parliamentary groups to appreciate the scope of this proposal and the need to create a genuine common air space in order to consolidate our position in the world. The European Union must create closer ties with its partners, which include Russia and China.

Ladies and gentlemen, Russia is a priority for the European Union, not just as a neighbouring country, but also for a series of reasons relating specifically to it, both from economic and political points of view. With 75% of external passenger traffic destined for the European Community, the European Union must be able to present our Russian partners with a proposal aimed at a future global agreement in the aviation sector, which, we believe, must be implemented in phases and once the problem of the payment of rights to fly over Siberia has been resolved.

This last issue, ladies and gentlemen, is a genuine obstacle to the beginning of negotiations and we believe that the European Union must maintain a very firm and demanding position towards our Russian partners. In this regard, we are pleased with the words expressed here this morning by Commissioner Barrot.

With regard to China, we are also in favour of reaching a global agreement, since China offers immense market opportunities to the European Union. Over the coming years, the Chinese giant is expected to show a sustained growth in the commercial aviation sector of between approximately 9% and 15%. Furthermore, China is carrying out a process of reform and liberalisation in its aviation sector, facilitating foreign investments and implementing a significant airport construction programme.

Nevertheless, in order to begin negotiations successfully with our Chinese partners, China must firstly reach a horizontal agreement with the European Union and resolve the problem of overflying Siberia, which European airlines are obliged to do in order to reach China.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Jörg Leichtfried (PSE). – (DE) Mr President, Vice-President, ladies and gentlemen, I would like, first of all, to seize the opportunity to sincerely congratulate the rapporteurs on the work they have done. Reform of international air transport must also, I think, make it possible to establish a common aviation area with uniform standards.

Considerations such as the efficiency and safety of flights are not just a contribution to the EU’s neighbourhood policy, but are also very emphatically in our own interests. It is, therefore, of enormous importance in the interests of our own safety that uniform air safety standards be incorporated in any new air traffic agreements with third countries, for this is the only way in which future air disasters can be prevented and a uniformly high safety standard guaranteed.

We have to consider, though, the possibility of support being made available to those states that are unable to meet these technical standards. What matters is not just compliance with common rules in the field of aviation safety, but also, and above all, with those relating to social and environmental policy.

There are few, if any, references to such rules in the bilateral agreements currently in force. Under no circumstances must the opening up of the aviation area be accomplished to the detriment of workers who may, in third countries, be employed under less stringent social security regulations. Were that to be the case, it would mean not least a considerable risk to safety if these workers were to perform their duties under intolerable conditions. If all those who become active in the market do so subject to the same rules, then there is no likelihood, in future, of safety in the air losing out as a result of social dumping.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Georg Jarzembowski (PPE-DE). – (DE) Mr President, Vice-President, ladies and gentlemen, I can, of course, do no other than agree with those members of my own group who have already spoken, whilst extending my thanks to both rapporteurs.

There is one point I would particularly like to highlight. It is a very good thing that there should be such agreement on this issue within this House and with the Commission, and I am very happy about that. I would like to point out, though, that not all the Member States take the same positive view as we do of this idea of a single aviation policy to the benefit of our airlines, those who work for them and those who travel with them, and there are airlines that are often happier to be represented in their dealings with third countries by their national governments rather than by the Commission. That is why we must take care that the Commission’s negotiations with such third countries as, for example, the USA, provide the Member States with evidence that a single European aviation policy is preferable to 25 different policies on aviation with reference to third countries. This is a dimension of which we must never lose sight. We are convinced that it is right and in the interests of the industry, workers in it and of airline passengers, to pursue a single policy with regard to third countries. Several governments, though, remain to be persuaded that this is indeed the case.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Inés Ayala Sender (PSE). – (ES) Mr President, I would like to begin by congratulating the two rapporteurs, Mr Zīle and Mr El Khadraoui. I would like to congratulate the latter on his excellent work, which is particularly significant as a milestone on the road towards the creation of single skies between the European Union and third countries, and which will now enable us to reflect upon what has been achieved and the challenges that remain, and which require certain conditions of social and environmental equality.

Furthermore, I would like to congratulate the Commissioner, who, with admirable diligence, is successfully fulfilling the Community mandate and who, by gradually overcoming obsolete and increasingly inefficient bilateralism, is enabling us to take forward the initiative that often increases our credibility in the negotiations aimed at creating European single skies. In this regard, his particular reference to the move from national airlines to European airlines is extremely hopeful.

I would, however, like to stress certain aspects that are of concern to us; mainly the delay in the agreement with the United States. We know that this is a well-known delaying tactic in negotiations: while hoping to acquire greater benefits, in the end they must join in with everybody else. The Kyoto Protocol has demonstrated this. We would therefore urge you to be firmer in this regard.

Furthermore, I would like to stress the need to overcome bilateralism in the negotiation with Russia and, of course, its unacceptable policy of surcharging, which is entirely contrary to international legislation. These are lessons that we will clearly have to apply to the negotiation underway with China.

We would also like the strengthened European Air Safety Agency to have an agreed and unequivocal means of coordinating with Eurocontrol, in order to overcome the apparent conflict between the two bodies, which could turn out to be contradictory.

Finally, I would like to say that, in the case of the application that is taking place within the agreements or the requirement for environmental rules and legislation on social rights, we would like this negotiation to move increasingly towards international rules that are closer to the stricter European rules, in other words, they should be harmonised upwards. In this regard, I would like the Commissioner to tell us about the current situation of the conversion of the JAR OPS to EU OPS, that is to say, all the rules on flying times and rest times following the agreement reached in the Council, which we also believe to be important within the framework of the negotiation of the Union’s foreign policy in the aviation field.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Manolis Mavrommatis (PPE-DE).(EL) Mr President, the own-initiative report by Mr Zīle gives a complete picture of relations between the European Union and the People's Republic of China and Russia in the field of air transport. However, the important thing is the differences which exist as far as flights over the territory of the two countries are concerned.

As the rapporteur rightly points out, on the one hand we have the process of developing, modernising and liberalising Chinese civil aviation, which is well under way; on the other hand, however, in the case of Russia, problems persist, mainly as regards the point that, contrary to competition law, all efforts to manage and control air traffic are being used in an effort to subsidise Russian airlines.

In both cases, the interventions by Commissioner Barrot are considered to be catalytic, although so far, in the second case, the issues pending still remain.

In the case of the People's Republic of China, I welcome its progress, especially its adaptation to the rules of good cooperation with the European Union, the main features of which are the opening up of air corridors by its government to European companies, in order to serve fully passengers and the movement of freight by increasing flights.

As a member of the delegation for relations between the European Union and the People's Republic of China, I welcome the Commissioner's general stand, especially the action by Commissioner Barrot towards the completion of agreements on flights, although I would point out that, for Parliament, it would be logical for it to have access to the terms of the negotiating mandate which the Commission is seeking from the Council in relation to China.

Finally, I agree with the rapporteur that an overall agreement with Russia should not be concluded unless a resolution is found to the problem of flights over Siberia which makes provision for the abolition of overflight charges. I hope that we shall reach the most harmonious of agreements, because both sides, Russia and the European Union, need each other within the framework of the general interests of our peoples.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Ulrich Stockmann (PSE). – (DE) Mr President, I have three comments to make. The first is that, while we welcome the Commission’s move towards the progressive extension of Community agreements with third countries, the far-reaching effects on the transport sector as a whole, on the environment and on competition and the internal market prompt me to urge you to again consider whether foreign policy as it relates to air transport ought not really to be dealt with via the codecision procedure.

Secondly, what we expect of the Commission is not only that it should set out its strategic approach, but also that it should draw up a list of countries with which an agreement is a priority and seek to conclude one with them. The Commissioner briefly sketched out what this might be like earlier on.

Thirdly, all agreements must be guided by the principle that the first priority is the mutual opening up of markets on an equal basis, it should be borne in mind in the current negotiations with Russia and China that, if the problem with Russia relating to the overflight charges is not sorted out first, an agreement with China would go against the requirement for reciprocity, for the overflight conditions Russia imposes on China are not the same as those imposed on the European airlines, and that is something we cannot accept.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Piia-Noora Kauppi (PPE-DE). – Mr President, I too should like to join with all those colleagues who have remarked on the excellent work of the rapporteurs, Mr El Khadraoui and Mr Zīle.

I support the view of the rapporteur concerning the necessity of developing a common external aviation policy for the EU. However, in addition to the EU aviation policy, we must be able to develop bilateral aviation agreements with third countries, as many of our partners have difficulties in committing to those common Union agreements. Nevertheless, I underline that those bilateral agreements should be in addition to and complement – not replace – the common aviation policy. Most importantly, the normal functioning of air traffic should be assured without useless confrontation while we are negotiating.

As the rapporteur has stated, we have noted the difficulties in negotiating a comprehensive agreement with Russia. The charges imposed for flights over its territory are clearly against international law and are not acceptable. Sad but true, it seems that Russia will always somehow utilise its airspace for strategic purposes. I do not believe that we will get rid of those charges even though Russia would no longer collect overflight charges. Every year we in the European Union pay around EUR 250 million in such charges. Unfortunately, a major part of that sum ends up in the accounts of Russian airline Aeroflot. That is also bad for the competition situation in Europe.

For Finland these charges are significant, as the only realistic option to fly to Asia is over Siberia. We should ensure that a level playing field exists for all EU operators. Today that is not the case, as those charges are often arbitrary and differ from one airline to another.

As Russia seems to prefer bilateral cooperation, it is with happiness that I note that a more open attitude prevails in China. I would hope that the Council would agree to start negotiations with China and give the Commission a proper mandate for achieving a common aviation agreement.

Finally, by ensuring sustainable economic and regulatory conditions for air traffic to Asia, we also revitalise the European aviation industry and ensure the possibility of offering efficient flight connections and routes, including in the more sparsely populated and geographically distant areas of Europe, such as the northern part of Finland.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Jacques Barrot, Vice-President of the Commission. (FR) Mr President, I wish to thank the Members who were keen to react to the excellent reports by Mr El Khadraoui and Mr Zīle. On this occasion, I am very willing to confirm my intention to inform Parliament on a very regular basis about the strategic guidelines of our policy of international negotiations. Once again, I wish to thank our two rapporteurs for their excellent work. There is a great deal of scope for developing the aviation sector, and this is an integral part of our transport policy.

I am obviously delighted with your very broad support for regulatory convergence, which, as an objective, goes hand in hand with markets being opened up. With certain partners not doing enough to guarantee a fair and efficient commercial environment, regulatory convergence is a priority. Markets can only be opened up gradually when a more careful approach is required. At times, we even need to adopt a firm stance. This is already the case, and it will increasingly become so where Russia and the issue of Siberian overflights are concerned, as Mrs Kauppi highlighted a short while ago. There is also the fact that these overflights are the subject of arbitrary charges. I am therefore delighted with your clear and unequivocal support on this point.

I intend to pay a great deal of attention to safety and security issues, which sometimes urgently crop up in this sector. Aside from competition, we must be vigilant in ensuring that the social and environmental standards are fully complied with. In this regard, I wish to say to Parliament that the fact that we have a European strategy and that we can sign horizontal agreements is advantageous, because that enables us to influence international civil aviation law. A united Europe is far more able to bring about the development of certain standards and to steer them towards a higher quality, as much for the environment as for the social dimension. With this in mind, allow me to take the liberty of telling you, Mrs Kauppi, that the ‘operating standards’ text is currently at the stage of being finalised with a view to a common position being adopted by the Council. The lawyer-linguists need to translate this text, and the intention is then to send it back to Parliament for a second reading towards March or April.

Finally, I should like to say that the progress of the ‘open skies’ negotiations with the United States should give the necessary impetus to the Community approach, which follows on from the Court of Justice judgment. In this regard, it is premature to give a precise assessment of the situation: we are awaiting a clearer insight into the US Transport Ministry’s new interpretation of the control rules for US airlines. It is true, however, that we have made a great deal of progress, particularly with regard to regulatory convergence, on which we have practically reached an agreement, and I hope that these negotiations will give a determined and decisive boost to the Community approach. This approach is clearly far preferable to bilateral agreements, which will never be as effective for our European industry.

This is a fine illustration of the fact that, in certain areas, the Union would do well to speak with one voice. You will understand, Mr President, that I wish to thank Parliament in particular for strongly supporting the Commission in this strategy to promote a specifically European style of negotiation, which I believe must also be beneficial to each of the Member States, as well as to our entire European industry.

I thank our rapporteurs and Parliament for having taken an interest in this aspect of external relations and of our international negotiations. This aspect will become more important, given the increasingly significant role the aviation industry is required to play in the world.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  President. The debate is closed.

The vote will take place at 12 noon.

(The sitting was suspended at 11.45 a.m. and resumed at 12 noon.)

 
  
  

IN THE CHAIR: MR ONESTA
Vice-President

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Gary Titley (PSE). – Mr President, I would be grateful if you could pass on to President Borrell our thanks for his very kind words yesterday in memory of our colleague, Phillip Whitehead. I know I speak not only for the whole of my delegation but also for the whole European Parliament, because Phillip’s fair-minded and judicious approach to politics won him friends throughout this Chamber.

My delegation has placed at the entrance to the Chamber a book of condolence, in which we hope colleagues throughout Parliament will feel free to put their memories of Phillip. We will be presenting this book of condolence to his family at his memorial service, which will take place at Derby Cathedral on 29 January. My office will provide details to any Members who wish to attend.

(Applause)

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  President. – Thank you, Mr Titley. I think that our colleagues and friends will have made a note of all these unfortunately very sad arrangements.

 
Legal notice - Privacy policy