Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-12-17-Speech-3-203"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20031217.7.3-203"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I should like to begin by thanking the rapporteur, Mr Lisi. It goes without saying that I, along with my colleagues, expect passengers travelling on European airlines to be treated in a fair and respectful manner. I also firmly believe that if their travel plans are disrupted and it is the fault of the airline, then that airline should take full responsibility. Sadly this regulation, in its present state, will badly damage our airline industry and, in particular, our regional and low-cost carriers, thereby threatening jobs and reducing the opportunities the consumer has come to expect in terms of choice and a competitive level of airfares.
It is therefore with regret that I will be unable to support this regulation, for the following reasons.
First, in the final draft of Article 6, referring to delays, the regulation is seriously flawed. The exclusion of extraordinary circumstances places an unacceptable financial burden on the carrier. Situations such as industrial disputes, air traffic delays, adverse weather conditions and possible terrorist threats cannot be foreseen by any airline. Therefore to include full reimbursement, as well as a return flight to the first point of departure, is wholly unacceptable. To suggest that the airlines will be able to obtain compensation from third party providers is a myth. Maybe they will apply to heaven if it is a weather problem.
Secondly, referring to Article 5 on cancellations, I echo my previous points. The impact of this regulation has taken no account of Parliament's support in strengthening our regional airports. Nor has the Commission thought through the impact on charter carriers, which often have only one or two flights a week to particular destinations.
In conclusion, at the beginning of this process I criticised the Commission on its ill-timed, badly drafted proposal. It ignored the new voluntary commitment and failed to provide a financial impact assessment. An extra GBP 1 billion of costs for the airlines will not benefit passengers but will penalise them by increasing the price of tickets and reducing choice.
The irony is that none of these rules would apply to third country airlines flying into the EU. If the Commission wanted to give our business away to the rest of the world, then it has done a jolly good job."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples