Inhoudsopgave van deze pagina:
Delen
DRAFT STATEMENT OF THE COUNCIL'S REASONS
I. INTRODUCTION
-
1.On 29 January 2007, the Commission transmitted to the Council the above mentioned proposal. The proposal is based on Article 80(2) of the EC Treaty.
-
2.On 29 - 30 November 2007, the TTE Council reached a general approach on the proposal.
-
3.On 15 January 2008, the European Parliament (rapporteur Mr Ulrich Stockmann (PSE DE) voted on the proposal at first reading. The EP opinion consists of 45 amendments.
-
4.On 7 April 2008, the TTE Council reached a political agreement on the proposal, accepting a number of the EP's 45 first-reading amendments (doc.8017/08). The
resultant common position is scheduled to be adopted by the Council on 23 June 2008.
II. OBJECTIVE
The objective of the proposed Directive is to set common principles for the levying of airport
charges at Community airports. It aims to re-define the relationship between airport operators
and airport users by requiring total transparency, user consultation and the application of the
principle of non-discrimination when calculating charges levied on users. Moreover, it aims to
create strong, independent authorities in the Member States to arbitrate and settle disputes in
order to achieve their speedy resolution.
III. ANALYSIS OF THE COMMON POSITION
-
1.General
At its Plenary on 15 January 2008, the European Parliament (EP) adopted 45 amendments to
the Commission proposal. The Council common position reflects changes to the Commission
proposal (see below under 2.a.) by incorporating a considerable number of amendments,
-
-either verbatim (EP amendments 8, 10, 11, 45) or
-
-in spirit, by means of similar wording (EP amendments 1, 2, 3, 15, 23, 28, 29).
However, a substantial number of amendments are not reflected in the common position,
because the Council considered that either
-
1.they were redundant, as they were already covered by other instruments adopted after the EP adopted its opinion; or
-
2.they were taken into account elsewhere in the text because the Commission's initial proposal had been redrafted in the common position.
-
2.Specific issues
-
a.Main modifications to Commission proposal
Taking as a basis the Commission's proposal, the Council introduced several
modifications, which could be summarised as follows:
-
-Scope of the proposed Directive, Article 1 The Commission initially proposed to include all airports with an annual traffic of
more than 1 million passengers. The Council agreed to increase this threshold to 5
million and to add the largest airport in each Member State. This scope is,
moreover, in line with the EP opinion.
-
-Modulation of charges for environmental and other purposes of public interest, Article 3
The Council agreed on the inclusion of this possibility in the article on non-
discrimination. This addition reflects the wish of Member States to have the
possibility to promote the use of more environmentally-friendly aircraft.
-
-Cost-relatedness, Recital 8
This recital reflects a balanced compromise between the wish of Member States
that airport charges are strictly related to the level of the cost of providing airport
services (in line with ICAO policy recommendations on airport charges) and an
appropriate degree of flexibility for those Member States considering that this
could have implications for the functioning of airport networks as some Member
States need flexibility to use the commercial revenues within the airport network.
-
-Airport network and airport system, Article 2(5) and 4 The Council agreed that it was necessary to introduce in the text of the draft
Directive a definition of airport networks. Moreover, it considered appropriate to
include a text ensuring that airports serving the same city or conurbation can share
a common charging system.
-
-Economic oversight measures, Article 5 (5) The Council considered appropriate the addition of a provision on economic
oversight measures, under which Member States, which use economic oversight
systems, are not obliged to apply the Directive's prescribed dispute settlements
procedure. This is on the grounds that economic oversight offers a degree of
protection at least equivalent to that set out in the Directive.
-
-Deadline for transposition of the Directive, Article 12 The Council extended the period required for the transposition of the Directive
into national law to 36 months in order to allow all Members States sufficient time
to take the necessary measures for its implementation.
-
b.Amendments of the European Parliament
The Council moreover considered a number of amendments, even though it did not
include them in its common position. These issues could be summarised as follows:
-
-Security charges Relevant amendments 4, 13, 37-41
The common position did not include the amendments on security financing
considering that the EP's concerns on this matter are already addressed by the
entry into force of the new Regulation on civil aviation security
(Regulation 300/2008). These concerns will be also addressed in a future
Commission policy initiative.
-
-Pre-financing Relevant amendments 31, 32
The common position acknowledges the importance of new infrastructure projects
and ensures the possibility of the financing thereof, while protecting the interests
of airport users. This principle is already mentioned in ICAO texts, but the
Council considered that it is mainly founded on a single till structure and on full
cost-relatedness. As these principles are not enshrined in the proposed Directive,
the Council considered it more appropriate not to include them in its common
position. The Commission has not accepted these amendments.
-
-Single or dual till system Relevant amendments 6, 22
The Council considered necessary to foresee the establishment of a common
framework regulating the essential features of airport charges and the way they
are set, but also considered that Member States should be free to allow single or
dual till or a combination of the two systems and not be obliged to adopt
legislation making compulsory one of these systems. For these reasons, the
common position did not include any express provision on this issue.
-
-Coverage of all airports in a network Relevant amendments 9, 14
The common position did not accept these amendments for reasons of coherence
with the whole approach on networks, namely non-discrimination of networks
between Member States, elimination of unnecessary bureaucracy at small airports
and lack of practical need, since the Council considers that the risk of cross-
subsidisation is unfounded.
-
-Other amendments
The common position did not include a number of amendments for three reasons:
-
-The Council considered that they were not coherent with the philosophy and the approach followed by the draft Directive;
-
-The Council considered that their drafting was not sufficiently clear and could entail legal uncertainty, as they could be interpreted in more than one
way
-
-The Council considered that they would be impractical to implement by Member States, in particular concerning amendments setting deadlines,
which Member States consider either too short or too long.
The amendments in question are the following:
-
-principles of competition and state aid (part of 7, 16, 24, 25, 26) - non-discrimination (34, 35, 36)
-
-conditions for the intervention of the independent supervisory body and delegation of authority (19, 21, 42, 43)
-
-level of service and service quality (5, 27, 33)
-
-reference to factors determining level of charges (12) - consultations (17)
-
-timing for presentation of changes to charging system (18) - admissibility of complaints (20) - transparency (30)
-
-deadline for decision of independent supervisory body (44).
IV. CONCLUSION
The Council holds that the common position is balanced and respects the aims and objectives
behind the Commission's proposal. It also takes into account the results of the European
Parliament's first reading.
The Council notes the informal negotiations that have already taken place between the
Council and the European Parliament and trusts that the compromise texts identified will
allow for quick adoption of the Directive in the near future.
_________________
