EBAA, ERA Study Concludes EU Impact Assessment On Slots Was
Based On Inaccurate Analyses
An authoritative independent study, released Tuesday, shows that
the European Commission's proposed amendments to slot allocation
regulation in the EU are based on incomplete and inaccurate
analyses. The study, conducted for the European Regions Airline
Association (ERA) and the European Business Aviation Association
(EBAA) by internationally renowned consultants Mott MacDonald,
confirms that any gains from changes in slot allocation rules are
likely to benefit non-EU economies, would lead to job losses
throughout Europe and be detrimental to Europe's air service
connectivity, its economic and social well-being; particularly
within the peripheral often disadvantaged regions of Europe.
The study identifies significant weaknesses in the impact
assessment undertaken for the European Commission, on which its
proposals are based, which include key areas that are inadequately
analysed or include miscalculated or inaccurate economic and social
benefit data. For example, the EC's impact assessment acknowledges
that regional air services would be adversely affected by the new
slot proposals but fails to assess their impact on regional
airports and economies in Europe's peripheral areas. Our study
concludes that the EC's proposals would lead to job losses in
peripheral areas which would exceed any job gains at Europe's core
airports.
The European Commission is constrained in direct action that it
can take to increase capacity at individual airports. However, by
concentrating solely on amendments to the existing slot allocation
regulation it has forfeited an opportunity to create additional
airport capacity by facilitating the use of „best practices?
at Europe's congested airports.
The Commission is uniquely placed to stimulate innovative
solutions for increasing airport capacity at an EU level, by
maximizing the hourly aircraft movement rates to match the current
"best in class" standards achieved by the top performing European
airports. However, it has failed to do so, with the policy options
put forward unlikely to bring about the necessary outcome. For
example, adding slot reservation fees, aimed at increasing slot
utilisation, will add cost, administrative burdens and complexity
to airlines and business aircraft operators. Equally, future
technological solutions from SESAR are totally ignored. Such
changes would generate substantial capacity, whereas current
proposals mandate additional processes that add costs and no
benefit.
Mike Ambrose, Director General, ERA said: “It is not
surprising that the superficial and incomplete analyses in the
impact assessment undertaken for the Commission have resulted in
flawed proposals. The Mott MacDonald study confirms that a more
robust analysis would have demonstrated their serious adverse
economic and social consequences to the EU peripheral
regions.”
“The importance of non-scheduled operations is barely
acknowledged by the EC's proposal," said Fabio Gamba, CEO, European
Business Aviation Association. "The reality is that our historical
rights and investments at primary and secondary airports have been
totally disregarded. In consequence, our gradual marginalization
will have a negative impact on businesses and local communities
during a time of great social and economic uncertainty. Solving the
capacity crunch cannot be done to the detriment of a crucial part
of the economy; it must incorporate it.”
ERA and EBAA are calling for the European Parliament and Council
to reconsider some of the fundamental proposals made by the
Commission and will expose the failings to the regional and
national representatives across Europe to ensure that the negative
aspects of the proposed regulatory amendments are removed.