I was told China, I guess it was confused with Singapore.
The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) has drawn sharp criticism from the European Cockpit Association (ECA) over a proposal by some member states to force what the pilots’ group characterizes as full and unfettered global airline deregulation. The proposal, now under development by two working groups consisting of a relatively small group of countries, calls for the ratification of a multilateral convention to fully liberalize market access for international air transport and change the rules governing ownership and control (O&C) of airlines. According to the ECA, such a move would encourage many more airlines adopt “flags of convenience,” and “obscured interests” have sought to quietly rush the process such proposals typically undergo.
“This is…full scale, instant, worldwide liberalization that would change the aviation industry overnight,” said ECA president Dirk Polloczek. “The fact that you don’t hear many voices against this agreement is not because there is a consensus, but because there is a deliberate and partisan effort to keep this deal off the radar. We find both the process of drafting this agreement as well as its content nothing less than scandalous.”
In an interview with AIN, Polloczek criticized the working groups—one dedicated to the development of international agreements on the liberalization of market access and air carrier ownership and control and the other to “competition matters”—for what he characterized as a lack of transparency in their deliberations. “It’s not the complete Air Transport Regulation Panel [ATRP] that is participating in those two working groups,” he said. “It’s basically limited to some countries, and the whole process and proceedings are very intransparent…we’re not really sure what’s going on there.”
At a June 8 to 11 meeting in Dubai, Working Group 1 (WG1) examined draft texts associated with the basic agreement and side protocols on passenger traffic, cargo traffic and ownership and control. Working Group 1 consists of Singapore, the U.S., the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Jamaica, Switzerland, Germany, France, New Zealand and Australia, which chaired the meeting and drafted the group’s paper for consideration. The ECA’s umbrella organization, the International Federation of Airline Pilots Associations (IFALPA) acts as an observer. Meanwhile, Jamaica chairs Working Group 2, which also consists of the U.S., the UAE, Canada and the UK. Polloczek wondered aloud about the motivation for choosing Jamaica to chair Working Group 2.
“There are a lot of countries that are involved in the process that can contribute much more than Jamaica does, so it was a strange decision,” he said. “From out point of view it was not very convincing that this whole idea was really developing in the right way and that’s why we decided to go public with our criticisms now.”
Contacted for comment on the ECA’s charges, ICAO asked AIN to email a written query, to which it hadn’t responded as of press time.
Presented in March of this year, the paper drafted by Working Group 1 did nothing to address labor, social, environmental or fair competition issues, claimed Polloczek. “These topics cannot be separated or left to be dealt with at a later stage,” he said. “A text on liberalization cannot be accepted until all issues are properly addressed and solved.”
Working Group 2, meanwhile, has yet to produce any papers, reflecting what the ECA has criticized as an uneven and de-linked process. During Working Group 2’s meeting, the UAE and the U.S. dominated the debate about that panel’s remit of fair competition, said Polloczek. “Both have different motivations to do so,” he noted. “The U.S., of course, wants to defend its Chapter 11 regulation and its own industry, and the UAE urgently needs to open up worldwide traffic rights for its expanding fleets.”
In fact, added Polloczek, he suspects the three main international airlines from the Persian Gulf—Qatar Airways, Emirates Airline and Etihad Airways—have acted as instigators. “I think the last meeting took place in Dubai on purpose,” he said, adding that, originally, ICAO canceled the meeting due to concerns from European countries about the lack of “safeguards” in Working Group 1’s draft and that fact that both working groups hadn’t completed their papers. “A week later it popped up again on the agenda…Until a week before the meeting we didn’t even know where to go. So they managed to get this meeting back on the agenda, and I think it’s very obvious what kind of interests drive the agenda here.”
ICAO’s schedules call for the next Air Transport Regulation Panel meeting to take place from September 1 to 4 on Montreal, where all the countries in the panel will get a chance to participate. Although once the paper makes its way to next year’s ICAO general assembly for ratification, only those countries that ratify would participate in the agreement, the ECA fears a “snowball effect” in which those countries could pressure non-participants by withholding foreign investment.
The ECA has lobbied representatives from several European countries to call for an impact assessment, which, said Polleczek, some countries have recently started. “So many of the European countries are now sharing our concerns and saying ‘we need to have a different approach to this,’” he concluded.
