The European Parliament,

–   having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions entitled 'An action plan for airport capacity, efficiency and safety in Europe' (COM(2006)0819),

–   having regard to the Commission's report on the application of Council Directive 96/67/EC of 15 October 1996 (COM(2006)0821),

–   having regard to Rule 45 of its Rules of Procedure,

–   having regard to the report of the Committee on Transport and Tourism and the opinions of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, the Committee on Regional Development and the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A6-0349/2007),

A.   whereas globalisation and rapid economic growth will result in the EU,in a growth in demand for air travel (traffic without airport constraints) averaging at least 4,3 % per annum, and most probably as much as 5,2 % per annum,

B.   whereas, by the year 2025, this will result in a growth in demand for air travel 2,5 times higher than in 2003,

C.   whereas in 2025, even with all new investment taken into account, more than 60 airports will be unable to handle the typical busy hourly demand without generating delays or having unaccommodated demand (3,7 million flights a year would then be unaccommodated),

D.   whereas, given that existing airports cannot expand as required, one of the ways to handle the large number of unaccommodated flights predicted for 2025 could be the construction of relief airports in the vicinity of their congested counterparts,

E.   whereas the shortage of airport capacity and the increase in demand for air travel will probably lead to demand for new major airports (up to 10 according to a Eurocontrol study) and medium-sized airports (up to 15 according to Eurocontrol),

F.   whereas these trends in the European air transport sector highlight the need to anticipate the steps that need to be taken at EU level for the benefit of both Union citizens and of the EU economy as a whole,

G.   whereas efficient groundhandling services also play a part in improving the use of existingairport capacity by accelerating throughput in airports,

H.   whereas the full implementation of Directive 96/67/EC on access to the ground handling market at Community airports(1), and possible amendments thereto, could, by improving efficiency in the provision of those services, also help to maximise the use of existing airport capacity,

I.   whereas traditional airlines, low-cost airlines, charter companies, freight companies and business aircraft each have different requirements in terms of airport services and slot allocation,

J.   whereas adequate transport infrastructure for the provision of services to and from airports, particularly in the form of integrated public transport systems, is an essential part of airport infrastructure,

1.  Welcomes the abovementioned Commission communication as a first step in addressing the issue of airport capacity, despite the fact that the planning of new infrastructure remains within the competence of each Member State; calls at the same time on the Commission to accord air transport the attention it deserves as a central element of goods and passenger transport in Europe; further calls on the Commission to monitor, and present precise statistics relating to, the current airport capacity situation in order to better address this issue;

2.  Notes that adequate airport capacity, including the utilisation of existing capacity, and efficient ground handling are vital to the European economy and must be ensured;

3.  Welcomes the proposals presented by the Commission in its communication and stresses the importance of air transport in ensuring territorial, economic and social cohesion in the Union, in particular with regard to remote, peripheral and island regions;

4.  Considers that the 14 measures suggested by the Commission in an annex to itscommunication represent a consistent approach for improving the use of existing capacities; nevertheless requests the Commission to set more concrete deadlines for their implementation and insists on those deadlines being respected;

Building new capacity

5.  Considers, however, that the Commission has not yet fully investigated the possibility of a global EU approach as regards the need for extra capacity, the constraints on future investments in additional capacity and the strategic axes that would not only allow the risks of a capacity crunch to be anticipated but also ensure that the EU becomes a cohesive and competitive air transport platform at global level;

6.  Suggests that a survey of actual demand for infrastructure be carried out, which would improve any future comprehensive European airport capacity plan and could become an accepted EU-wide air transport forecasting mechanism; highlights that such a mechanism could be used by airports as a planning framework for capacity improvement and that the advantage of a demand-based forecast is that it provides a realistic market picture for future developments in the air transport sector;

7.  Notes that one of the biggest barriers to the liberalisation of ground handling services and efficiency, as alluded to by many representatives of Community airports, is a lack of space, but considers that such a contention needs to be verified and, where necessary, resolved;

8.  Stresses the need to develop common definitions and common analytical tools for airport capacity assessments, as well as procedures involving all stakeholders in the assessment of the mid-and long-term airport capacity needs of the EU; notes that this collaborative approach could be accompanied by an exchange of good practice in areas such as environmental impact and cost efficiency, pre-financing of new infrastructures, land use planning/management, integration of all transport modes, as well as modelling/simulation tools with a view to speeding-up the planning and building of new capacities; emphasises that these initiatives would serve to complement the Single European Sky ATM Research programme (SESAR) and could be supplemented with new institutional tools that help to increase airport capacity;

9.  Requests the Commission to report to Parliament before 2009 on a master plan for enhanced airport capacity in Europe; stresses that such a report should lay down a cohesive approach for Member States in order to promote and coordinate any national and cross-border initiative for building new airport capacities dedicated to international traffic and make better use of existing capacities, as well for managing secondary airport capacity, without prejudice to Member State and Community competences to allocate airport capacities; stresses that hubs and regional airports, through point-to-point travel, can each in their own way and according to specific constraints of the various Member States respond to environmental problems, congestion problems and challenges facing accessibility, and that only the cohabitation of various airport models according to national specificities will enable the EU to fulfil its needs in this field; recalls in this respect that accessibility to airports is of great importance and that their successful integration in the transport network is an essential condition for co-modality.

10.  Calls on the Member States and the regional and local authorities to ensure that airports, regardless of the nature of their governing bodies, are included in regional spatial development plans or taken into account in regional development strategies; points out that the extension and construction of major infrastructure, such as airports, must be subject to a territorial impact assessment;

11.  Supports the Commission in its ambition to increase the internal logistical efficiency of airports but suggests that this should be limited to the tracking of baggage and cargo only;

12.  Believes that, in order to increase capacity, pre-financing infrastructure development is a valid option for airports; highlights that this financing scheme benefits both the airlines and the airports by lowering overall financing costs of infrastructure, thus ensuring a smoother profile of prices for airlines and reducing the risk for airports as airlines begin to defray the costs of airport investments earlier;

13.  Stresses the economic importance of airports for job creation, particularly at regional level; points out that European airport operators, airlines, maintenance firms and caterers are in a position to create a significant number of jobs, thereby contributing to the attainment of the Lisbon Strategy objectives;

14.  Calls on the Member States and regional and local authorities to take account of environmental factors when deciding where to locate airports, including noise, emissions, road traffic density in the vicinity of the airport, the proximity of fuel tanks, etc., and of meteorological factors;

Promoting environmentally-friendly growth

15.  Notes that the improved performance of aviation engines has reduced their CO2 emissions by 70 % per km in the last 40 years and that further reductions in emissions will continue in the future; stresses that the objective of the industry is to cut emissions by a further 50% by 2020;

16.  Points out, nevertheless, that, despite this progress, the growth in air traffic, which has increased substantially in recent years, has resulted in a sharp increase in the total volume of greenhouse gas emissions produced by this sector (+100% compared to 1990, according to estimates by the European Environment Agency), and that airport congestion is contributing significantly to this;

17.  Recalls that the growth of air transport will have to be accompanied by technical and regulatory schemes limiting the external costs of this mode; welcomes, to this effect, the Commission initiative to incorporate aviation into the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS); points out that the effectiveness of measures designed to reduce the environmental impact of air transport also depends on the policies pursued by countries at global level and, with this in view, stresses the need to establish joint programmes with third countries;

18.  Considers, however, that the issue of greenhouse gas emissions should, wherever possible, be addressed with more vigour at both European and international levels with a view to improving the competitiveness of a more sustainable EU air transport sector which is already threatened by the rapid development of major hubs in neighbouring non-EU regions of Europe; calls on the Commission and the Member States to use all available means to reach an agreement on this issue at international level;

19.  Particularly insists on the need to develop regulatory and financial schemes in order to encourage the retrofitting and renewal of fleets and promote the environmental performance of engines, a corollary of which would be to render them quieter, more energy-efficient and less polluting;

Ensuring the correct implementation and adaptation of the regulatory framework

20.  Considers that the increase in air traffic will require a fuller implementation of the legal framework applicable to air transport;

21.  Requests the Commission to ensure the full implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 95/93on common rules for the allocation of slots at Community airports(2) and to provide more guidance and clarification as regards the text; particularly insists on the need to ensure better coordination of, and matching between, the allocation of slots by Air Traffic Flow Management (ATFM) and the allocation of airport slots, more effective slot coordination committees and greater coordination of departures and arrivals, and additionally insists on the need to harmonise definitions, tolerances and the way airport and ATFM slots are awarded;

22.  Recalls the need to introduce market-based mechanisms in the slot allocation process with a view to achieving the best possible use of scarce airport capacity; points out, however, that, according to Regulation (EEC) No 95/93 as amended in 2004, the Commission had to submit a report to Parliament and to the Council on the operation of this regulation by April 2007 at the latest, and that the introduction of a market-based mechanism should only be considered on the basis of such a report;

23.  Notes, however, that recourse to market-based mechanisms, such as slot allocation in order to make better use of existing airport capacity, would not address infrastructure shortages, as such a mechanism would not create a single additional slot; believes, furthermore, that coherence between airport slots and ATFM slots has very limited benefits and will not solve the capacity problem;

24.  Calls on the Council, in order to enhance cooperation between civil aviation authorities of neighbouring Member States, to propose a time-frame and deadlines in order to ensure a significant step forward before 2008 in the building of functional airspace blocks (FABs);

25.  Emphasises the need for a precise time-frame for the implementation of the FABs and notes the positive steps taken in this regard by some Member States, particularly in Northern and Central Europe, for example the Northern Upper Area Control (NUAC) programme and the new FAB Europe Central projects;

26.  Urges the Commission, if no significant progress has been made by Member States on this issue by 2008, to take a top-down approach in order to guarantee substantial improvements;

27.  Stresses the importance of the Galileo project in optimising the use of existing and future air transport management capacity, and notes that the right lessons need to be learnt, in the interest of the implementation of the SESAR project, from the current financial difficulties with Galileo;

28.  Is concerned that the rate of innovation and uptake of new technologies may be much slower than the rate of growth in air travel; stresses, furthermore, that new internationally agreed noise stringency standards and a new approach to limit the number of people affected by noise, will be needed;

Enhancing cooperation on capacity between airport regions

29.  Is of the opinion that an increase in airport capacity will not be possible without effective collaboration between airport authorities and the relevant regional and local administrations, provided that any such collaboration does not contravene the Community competition rules;

30.  Welcomes any airport region initiative that would lead to a Europe-wide dialogue on the issues relating to the development of additional airport capacity, particularly on capacity coordination or integration, on the environmental consequences for neighbouring populations, on land-use planning and on growth and employment;

31.  Calls on the Commission to urge the Member States to strengthen their town-planning and building regulations so that noise and other pollution caused by airports to their surrounding areas can be prevented;

32.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States to facilitate the exchange of best practice in relation to the public management of those airport regions and to financially support pilot projects and research programmes connected with the issue of the impact that airports have on surrounding territories and their residents;

33.  Wishes to see 'regional development' airports in isolated, remote or ultra-peripheral regions continue to benefit from state aid proportionate to the tasks they perform in the general interest;

34.  Believes that airline companies should provide adequate guarantees and assume responsibility when it comes to the redemption of airport facilities that they require airport managers to provide, so as not to place the latter in difficulty in the event of unexpected withdrawal prior to full redemption;

Ground handling services

35.  Takes note of the abovementioned Commission report on the application of Council Directive 96/67/EC;

36.  Welcomes the positive impact that the Directive, as reported by the Commission, has had, but notes that the positive assessment is based on the findings of the 2002 study which did not cover the whole of the enlarged Union; whereas it has been noted that the implementation of the Directive is a matter of particular concern in the Member States that joined the EU after this date; further notes that difficulties and uncertainties concerning its implementation remain, in particular as regards the criteria to be met by service providers that engage in competitive calls for tender; invites the Commission to issue detailed guidance or, where appropriate, put forward new proposals in order to clarify the rules pertaining to calls for tender;

37.  Invites the Commission to carry out a new impact analysis on the implementation of the Directive, its final benefits and/or disadvantages for users, employees and passengers, before making any proposal that would lead to further liberalisation;

38.  Considers that, on the basis of this new impact assessment, the Commission could, if necessary, provide additional guidance on the interpretation of certain provisions that could leave airports with too wide a margin of interpretation, and which have the potential to lead to undesirable consequences on the ability of ground handlers to enter the market;

39.  Considers, on the other hand, that some provisions need rapid clarification, such as those relating to the protection of workers in the event of a transfer of undertakings, and access fees; urges the Commission, therefore, to provide guidance on the interpretation of those provisions as soon as possible;

40.  Recommends that any new attempt to amend the Directive should first concentrate on the quality of ground handling services and on the quality of employment in the ground handling services sector; particularly invites the Commission to:

41.  Points out that, as regards the selection of ground handlers supplying restricted services, the opinion of airline users is sometimes not thoroughly considered by airports, and recalls that there have been cases where ground handlers providing restricted services have been chosen against the quasi-unanimous opinion of the Airport Users' committee;

42.  Insists on the need for more transparency and for stricter user-oriented provisions concerning the choice of ground handlers for restricted services; insists, in particular, that the possibility of establishing additional rules concerning the Airport Users' Committee be considered, consisting, for example, of the obligation to give reasons as to why the choice made by the airport does not follow the opinion of the Committee; notes that such a decision could also, in this case, be passed on to an authority independent of the airport's managing body; lastly, suggests that the Commission consider, in any future proposal for the amendment of Directive 96/67/EC, whether airlines already operating ground handling services in the airport through third-party handlers should be excluded from voting in the selection of any new entrant;

43.  Notes that, since the adoption of Directive 96/67/EC, competition has noticeably intensified and that the prices for ground handling services have decreased in almost all "old" EU Member States;

44.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.

(1) OJ L 272, 25.10.1996, p.36 (2) OJ L 14, 22.01.1993, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by European Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) No 793/2004 (OJ L 138, 30.04.2004, p. 50).