Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-12-17-Speech-3-205"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20031217.7.3-205"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, it may be worthwhile just to reflect for one moment on why it was thought necessary to introduce legislation to make compensation a legal right for those air passengers who face cancellation and delay through no fault of their own. It was thought necessary because some airlines had got into a very bad habit of cancelling flights at the last minute, overbooking flights, inflicting delay because of inefficient operational practices and then, to add insult to injury, they treated their victims – their passengers – with total disdain and little or no sympathy.
Members may wish to dwell on the fact that a voluntary code of practice did exist with the more reliable airlines. However, the refusal of the so-called low-cost carriers to sign up to this voluntary agreement and the low levels of compensation given to the victims meant action on a more formal basis was required. The pendulum had to swing back in favour of the consumer to a more reasonable, balanced position.
The proposal before us is a first step in ensuring that the travelling public are protected when transport operators fail to live up to their promises and obligations. I look forward to similar schemes being introduced with other modes, particularly ferries and so-called high-speed ships.
What we have before us today is not perfect. I regret that the Council of Ministers insisted on charter flights being included. I also regret the removal of extraordinary circumstances in the delay section, but welcome the exemption of rotor operators, the levels of compensation agreed and the inclusion of the low-cost carriers.
This proposal is not perfect: it poses many questions in regard to existing legislation and highlights areas where existing legislation is inadequate. I cite the package travel directive as one example. But we must recognise that at last consumers and the travelling public are being given rights that they deserve, backed up with compensation when airlines fail in their promises.
Over recent months I have been subjected to every kind of doom-and-gloom scenario from some airlines and even certain Members of Parliament. But remember this: if the airlines do not cancel or overbook, if they run the services they advertise on time and stick to their contract with the travelling public, then this proposal will not cost them one euro. It becomes expensive to airlines when they fail to deliver – and what is wrong with that?"@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples