With these new Guidelines,
the Commission is explicitly seeking to curb the public financing of airport
infrastructure. National, regional and local authorities would therefore have
to comply with more restrictive rules limiting their ability to invest in the
development of new or existing airport infrastructure (investment aid) as well
as in the financing of day-today operations of smaller airports (operating
aid).
While the AER and ACI
Europe consider that promoting fair competition, efficiency in public financing
and attracting more private investment are legitimate goals, they are extremely
concerned with some of the Commission’s proposals, for a number of reasons.
These proposals will
affect regional airports in particular. Following a 10 year transitional
period, regional airports with more than 200,000 passengers per year will no
longer be able to receive public operating aid.Instead, they will be required
to hike the fees they charge to passengers and airlines so as to fully cover
their costs. This ignores the economic reality of the airport business, where
full cost recovery through user charges is simply unachievable due to extremely
high capital intensity and fixed costs. This is particularly the case at
smaller airports, where these costs need to be borne by fewer airlines and a
much smaller number of passengers. The result will be a loss of air services
and decreasing connectivity, and even airport closure – with very harsh
consequences for the regional communities they serve.
Per Inge Bjerknes,
Chairman of the AER Working Group on Regional Airports and Vice-Chariman of the
County Council of Ostfold (N) commented “For our Regions, there is no escaping
the fact that airports are strategic public infrastructure and that they need
to be treated as such. In particular for peripheral and scarcely populated
regions, the connectivity they afford is essential and unparalleled - it allows
more than 5 million jobs across Europe and
needs to be supported, not degraded. Part of these new State aid rules seem to
show that the Commission is more concerned with fiscal austerity than promoting
growth and jobs. They absolutely need to be reconsidered”.
Beyond regional airports,
the Commission is also looking at prohibiting investment aid at larger
airports. While these airports are usually able toself-finance their
development, public aid can still be required for once-off landmark airport
projects involving massive investment. The Commission proposal is in sharp contrast
to the way airport development is being financed outside Europe
in both developed and emerging economies. Public financing is an essential part
of airport infrastructure development not only in the Gulf and Asia, but also
in the United States
Olivier Jankovec, Director
General ACI Europe added “These new rules – and in particular the 200,000
passenger threshold - risk condemning small regional airports to limit their
development or to close down. They are also introducing limitations on public financing
of airport development which fly in the face of the airport capacity crunch
brewing here in Europe – a move that would
probably be considered foolhardy in the rest of the World. Clearly, these
proposals have not been properly thought through in terms of their impact on
our sector and beyond on the wider European economy.”
He added “We fail to
understand the overt discrimination these rules would introduce in favour of
the competing rail sector, which gets an astonishing and unquestioned 32billion
euros of public aid every year.”
EC missed opportunity on state aid rules to
Europe’s airports and airlines, says ERA
The European Commission’s
(EC’s) proposed rules on state aid to Europe ’s
airports and airlines are detrimental to ERA and its members.
"While the EC has a
declared objective to protect regional development and accessibility in Europe ’s more remote regions, this is at odds with its
intention stated in the new guidelines to phase out some elements of aid for
airports over a 10-year period. Regional operators and airports are crucial to
the economic prosperity of Europe ’s regions.
In some cases aid plays a vital role in supporting regional communities and air
services. It is essential that this is done fairly and transparently to avoid
distortions of competition but simply banning aid does not address the problem.
What is needed is more transparency on where aid is granted so that distortions
of competition are avoided. The launch of some new routes could be impacted by
today’s announcement, as will the future viability of some existing routes to,
from and between the regions of Europe ",
said ERA’s Director General, Simon McNamara.
McNamara continues: “The
European Commission has historically failed to enforce fair and consistent
rules for the allocation of state aid to Europe ’s
airports and airlines. The revised guidelines published today are a missed
opportunity to address this failure and to provide more clarification and
transparency.”
“In addition, the proposed
guidelines do not establish an efficient complaint-handling procedure that
would allow operators or airports to challenge guideline breaches.”
ERA’s Director General
also highlights the fact that the guidelines do not address intermodal
competition in the EU. “The guidelines do not consider the disproportionate
difference in treatment of rail and air when it comes to state aid. The rail
sector in Europe has always been hugely
subsidised and yet this seems to be accepted as the norm - where is the level
playing field when it comes to air and rail competing?”
“ERA has consistently
defended its members’ position to support growth in the regions and will
continue to lobby the EC on their behalf for a fair and transparent system,”
concludes McNamara. - See more at: http://www.traveldailynews.com/news/article/55562/proposed-new-ec-state
