WRITTEN QUESTION E-0874/02 by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. International Air Transport Association (IATA).
Date: 2002-04-02
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: IATA, air freight rate, air transport, common transport policy, consumer protection, inter-company cooperation, restriction on competition, transport company

C 309 E/54

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

12.12.2002

it
Framework Decision were to cover administrative fines, and this issue is currently being discussed,
should in large part resolve the problem of cross-border enforcement of fines and thus eliminate the need
for differential treatment of residents and non-residents.

With regard to proportionate fines, the Honourable Member is referred to the answer given by the
Commission to Written Question P-3092/00 by Ms Kauppi (3): While the Commission is generally of the
opinion that fines should be proportionate to the severity of the offence for which they were imposed, it
must be acknowledged that it is very difficult to determine in individual cases whether this criterion has
been met or not. Different Member States may have different sets of values and what would appear
proportionate in one Member State may be seen as disproportionate in another.

The Commission is aware of the fact that there are significant differences among Member States in relation
to fines for speeding offences. There is no legislation at Union level that sets maximum amounts to be
imposed in such cases.

As regards the White Paper on European transport policy, the Commission is indeed currently examining
what would be the most effective way of harmonising certain sanctions and controls (particularly as
regards speeding and drink-driving).

(1) Case C-29/95 [1997] ECR I-285 (judgment given on 23.1.1997).
(2) OJ C 278, 2.10.2001.
(3) OJ C 136 E, 8.5.2001.

(2002/C 309 E/061)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0874/02

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: International Air Transport Association (IATA)

(2 April 2002)

The Commission has conducted a study of airlines’ cooperation on fares and routes within the trade
association IATA. IATA’s general exemption should have expired in June 2001, though the Commission
was reportedly prepared to extend it for a further year. However, the Commission was also to study
whether there are other, better ways of airlines cooperating to enable passengers to find cheap and flexible
fares.

What was the outcome of the Commission’s study? Does the Commission not consider that IATA reduces
competition and therefore the opportunities for consumers to enjoy cheap and good quality air travel? Can
IATA continue to exist with, in principle, a permanent exemption?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(27 May 2002)

As follows implicitly from the mere existence of the group exemption for International Air Transport
Association (IATA) passenger tariff conferences the Commission considers that these conferences, which
involve price fixing, are in principle restrictive of competition. The group exemption applies under certain
additional conditions and obligations only. In particular, the discussions must be limited to fares that can
be used on the services of several different carriers (so-called interlinable fares) and may not cover any
fares that airlines set for their own services (so-called on-line fares).

In February 2001 the Directorate General Competition issued a Consultation Paper to seek views on, in
essence, whether the benefits secured by the tariff consultations (that is the ability for passengers to
interline) could be secured by less restrictive means. Responses were received from Member States, airlines,
travel agents and consumer groups.

12.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 309 E/55

The vast majority of the respondents held the view that the IATA passenger tariff conferences secure an
important benefit in the form of multilateral interlining and that this benefit was unlikely to be replicated
by any alternative, less restrictive system. While most respondents acknowledged that withdrawing the
block exemption for the passenger tariff conferences would not mean the end of interlining altogether,
many felt that without the tariff conferences, consumers would have a smaller choice of flexible fares and
smaller airlines might have fewer interlining opportunities and as a result find it harder to compete.
However, some respondents argued that, as alliances develop, at least in the longer-term alliance or
bilateral products might offer similar benefits to the benefits of IATA interlining.

In view of these responses the Commission proposes to extend the block exemption for passenger tariff
conferences for three years, until 30 June 2005, under the further obligation that air carriers participating
in conferences collect certain data on the relative use of the passenger tariffs set in the conferences and
their relative importance for actual interlining. This Commission proposal was published on 13 April 2002
in the Official Journal (1) and third parties are invited to submit their comments within one month.

(1) OJ C 89, 13.4.2002.

(2002/C 309 E/062)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0881/02

by Patricia McKenna (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(2 April 2002)

Subject: Algeria’s refusal to issue visas to an EU technical committee

Algeria has signed Articles of Association with the European Union, Article 2 of which states that: ‘the
respect of democratic principles and respect for basic human rights constitute an essential part of this
Accord’. Only weeks after signing this, the Algerian State has refused to issue visas to a technical
committee of the EU (under the EIDHR programme) to oversee civil society representation in Algeria.

What is the Council’s opinion on the fact that this has happened?

Does it intend to rescind the EU Association Agreement unless visas are granted to EU officials to oversee
the fulfilment of this Agreement?

Reply

(30 September 2002)

It was brought to the Council’s attention that a mission of experts to Algeria, with the participation of
Commission officials, was scheduled for February in the framework of
the European Initiative for
Democracy and Human Rights. However, the Embassy of Algeria in Belgium did not issue the visas
requested by the Commission officials, as the Mission of Algeria to the European Communities wanted
more time to prepare them.

Although originally scheduled for February, a mission of experts to Algeria in the framework of the
European Initiative for Democracy and Human Rights took place, with the participation of Commission
officials, at the end of April. It confirmed the willingness of the Algerian authorities to cooperate with the
EU in the field of human rights.