Instant results cannot be expected, but persistent and patient effort exercised by the EU, as well as others
through dialogue and by other means, are steadily spreading also in China recognition of the universalvalues which we espouse. That is why the EU has insisted that the the EU dialogue should be keptcomprehensive and substantial with no subjects excluded a priori. Moreover, the EU has made it clear thatwe expect our dialogue on human rights to lead, not just to Chinese acknowledgement of internationalcommitments, but also to concrete improvements in the human rights situation in China.
(2000/C 27 E/175) WRITTEN QUESTION P-1602/99
by Benedetto Della Vedova (NI) to the Commission
(7 September 1999)
Subject: Airlines and the rules relating to overbooking
Particularly during the summer, and to the ever-greater inconvenience of users/consumers/travellers,
airlines (including ones based in the European Union) resort with ever-increasing frequency to the practice
of overbooking (the selling of more seats than are actually available on a given flight), which requires
airline staff to decide, on the basis of highly obscure criteria, that certain passengers will not be allowed toboard the aircraft, even though they hold a proper ticket. Such passengers/consumers consequently faceunforeseen and often lengthy delays in their travel arrangements, unexpected additional expenditure whichis frequently not reimbursed by the airline, and problems stemming from their inability to secure a returnflight at a preselected time. Such occurrences are considerably more serious if they relate to interconti-nental flights to or from the European Union.
The various provisions stemming from the current rules drawn up by the Commission (Council Regulation
(EEC) 295/91 of 4 February 1991 (
1)) are totally inadequate in relation to the degree of inconvenience
suffered when overbooking occurs. In particular they do not apply to flights from a third country to a EU
destination, they do not exclude the requirement for passengers to provide additional departure confirma-tion, they do not define the minimum check-in time as a strict deadline [no comment here], and they donot specify the percentage of seats which the airlines are allowed to overbook, whilst the penaltiesprescribed do not appear to be a sufficient inducement to the airlines to pay the required compensation topassengers who have been denied boarding.
Is the Commission aware of this situation? Does it not consider the legal nature of the measures adopted
so far to be the cause of their inadequacy? Does it intend to adopt further measures of a different nature in
order to ensure that the rights of travellers/consumers are upheld?
(1) OJ L 36, 8.2.1991, p. 5.
(2000/C 27 E/176) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1663/99
by Lucio Manisco (GUE/NGL) to the Commission
(22 September 1999)
Subject: Citizens rights and airlines
In August an enormous number of European citizens at every airport in the European Union were
subjected to cavalier treatment and bullying by airlines in connection with flight delays, transportconditions and delays in the delivery of luggage. The passenger, as a legal person who draws up a contractwith an airline, has become a passive object and a helpless victim of these arbitrary practices.
Does the Commission not consider that Regulation 295/91 (
1) should be amended as a matter of urgency
to include flight delays in the context of fines to be charged to the airline for the benefit of passengers?
(1) OJ L 36, 8.2.1991, p. 5.C 27 E/144 EN 29.1.2000 Official Journal of the European Communities