• Home
  • AIR
  • 2008
  • Aviation Intelligence Reporter – March 2008

Aviation Intelligence Reporter – March 2008


Heathrow T5: For the want of a nail…
Environment: Next year’s election results
Security Issues and the EU-US Summit
Is Michael O’Leary the dieu ex machina in the State Aid tragedy?
Two interesting developments in passenger rights: 2-0 to the airlines


To read the full report please login first.

login here

Do you want to become a member?

click here

Heathrow T5: For the want of a nail…

Heathrow Terminal 5 opened, as planned, in a blaze of publicity. Sadly, whilst there was publicity galore, that seems to be where the planning ended. Publicity there was, but not of the sort that had been planned on.

Environment: Next year’s election results

Someone once was said to have broken into the Kremlin and stole the following year’s election results. The final resolution of the Aviation Environment Summit, to be held at the end of April in Geneva, is likewise now available on the black market. The analogy with the Kremlin is not all that far from the mark. To their enormous credit, and notwithstanding political reality, the airline industry worthies (IATA, ATUG, CANSO, the ACI – all the usual suspects) insist that they will continue to back ICAO as the source of environmental regulation. Furthermore, whilst supporting market based processes (such as emissions trading) in principle, the final resolution rejects the European ETS for aviation. Only a global system, with global acceptance, will be good enough, the resolution pompously intones.

Security Issues and the EU-US Summit

In February, the EU announced a raft of new security measures aimed at improving and strengthening Europe’s security. As expected, the arrangements, which we reported in our February Intelligence Reporter, were passed by the European Parliament in mid March. The new rules set out a series of common security procedures, but also provide that the Member States can require additional security as they see fit, and that in doing so, they can also specify who will then pay for it. Remembering that the first rule in aviation security is that ‘more is better, as long as you pay for it’ this should make for an interesting period. The common package of agreed measures includes the introduction of Sky Marshals, who we were assured would be ‘specially selected and trained’. That is a relief. The reverse of that vacuous sentence would not bear thinking about.

Is Michael O’Leary the dieu ex machina in the State Aid tragedy?

Last month we likened the Olympic Airways/Airline state aid saga to a Greek tragedy. This month, the next enthralling act was played out. Ryanair has gone to the European Court of Justice, protesting the state aid ruling against it at Charleroi, dating back to February 2004. You may recall that Charleroi was not allowed to cut a special deal with Ryanair to subsidise passenger handling charges. The case is the basis of all the further (and growing number of) state aid cases in the aviation industry. To not be held to be illegal state aid, the aid needed to be limited in time, digressive and transparent. The gods had spoken. And now that word is in doubt.

Two interesting developments in passenger rights: 2-0 to the airlines

Legislators tend to introduce passenger rights legislation in the face of customer/voter demand that they do so. Generally, these are resisted by the airlines, which argue that they can be trusted to self regulate (at least up until the next crisis and demands for legislative intervention). Helping the airlines out tends to be the courts.

Tags: , , , ,