natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In line with the classification scheme in the ‘ Community guidelines on financing of airports and start-up aid to airlines departing from regional airports’ of September 2005, your rapporteur proposes raising the field of application to 5 million passengers per year, so that it would apply to airports of Category B (‘national airports’, with an annual passenger volume of between 5 and 10 million) and Category A (‘large Community airports', with more than 10 million passengers a year) ( Amendment 1 ).
In line with the classification scheme in the ‘ Community guidelines on financing of airports and start-up aid to airlines departing from regional airports’ of September 2005, your rapporteur proposes raising the field of application to 5 million passengers per year, so that it would apply to airports of Category B (‘national airports’, with an annual passenger volume of between 5 and 10 million) and Category A (‘large Community airports', with more than 10 million passengers a year) ( Amendment 1 ).
In some Member States (Spain, Portugal, Greece, Sweden and Finland), airports are operated in a system of airport groups.
In some Member States (Spain, Portugal, Greece, Sweden and Finland), airports are operated in a system of airport groups.
In these Member States, there are rules which may be incompatible with the provisions of this directive.
In these Member States, there are rules which may be incompatible with the provisions of this directive.
To avoid future uncertainties and possible legal disputes, it should be expressly pointed out that these structural particularities may continue even when the provisions of this directive are applied ( Amendments 3 and 15 ).
To avoid future uncertainties and possible legal disputes, it should be expressly pointed out that these structural particularities may continue even when the provisions of this directive are applied ( Amendments 3 and 15 ).
The Commission proposal provides for a national independent regulatory authority to be set up in each EU Member State and given the task of implementing the provisions.
The Commission proposal provides for a national independent regulatory authority to be set up in each EU Member State and given the task of implementing the provisions.
In Germany in particular, the requirement to set up a single, central regulatory authority will lead to considerable problems because of Germany's federal structure.
In Germany in particular, the requirement to set up a single, central regulatory authority will lead to considerable problems because of Germany's federal structure.
In view of this, consideration should be given to whether it is actually necessary to lay down a particular institutional structure.
In view of this, consideration should be given to whether it is actually necessary to lay down a particular institutional structure.
Instead, effective implementation of the directive’s principles, regardless of the institutional structure, should be the main consideration ( Amendments 16 and 17 ).
Instead, effective implementation of the directive’s principles, regardless of the institutional structure, should be the main consideration ( Amendments 16 and 17 ).
Some amendments are also proposed in connection with the requirement for consultation, as the obligation to provide information which the Commission proposes to impose on airports (and partly also on airlines) exceeds what is required for this directive ( Amendments 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 13 ).
Some amendments are also proposed in connection with the requirement for consultation, as the obligation to provide information which the Commission proposes to impose on airports (and partly also on airlines) exceeds what is required for this directive ( Amendments 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 13 ).
In its explanatory memorandum, the Commission remarks that public and privately-owned airports generally have an interest in maximising profits.
In its explanatory memorandum, the Commission remarks that public and privately-owned airports generally have an interest in maximising profits.
In some circumstances this can lead to inappropriately high charges and thus to distortions of the air transport system.
In some circumstances this can lead to inappropriately high charges and thus to distortions of the air transport system.
This criticism is certainly true in some individual cases.
This criticism is certainly true in some individual cases.
However, your rapporteur takes the view that airports, like all economic undertakings, should not be prevented from achieving an appropriate return on investment through airport charges.
However, your rapporteur takes the view that airports, like all economic undertakings, should not be prevented from achieving an appropriate return on investment through airport charges.
At the same time, airport operators should provide airport users with sufficient information on the business model on which charges are based ( Amendments 2 and 6 ).
At the same time, airport operators should provide airport users with sufficient information on the business model on which charges are based ( Amendments 2 and 6 ).
The right of airport users to appeal to the independent regulatory authority in the event of disagreement with a decision on airport charges carries with it the danger that some airlines will impede progress in modifications to the airport charging system.
The right of airport users to appeal to the independent regulatory authority in the event of disagreement with a decision on airport charges carries with it the danger that some airlines will impede progress in modifications to the airport charging system.
Your rapporteur therefore proposes a higher threshold for the exercise of the right of appeal.
Your rapporteur therefore proposes a higher threshold for the exercise of the right of appeal.
Furthermore, care should be taken to ensure that any disputes do not block the decision-making process ( Amendment 5 ).
Furthermore, care should be taken to ensure that any disputes do not block the decision-making process ( Amendment 5 ).
The development of new airport infrastructures is increasingly becoming a major challenge to the European air transport system.
The development of new airport infrastructures is increasingly becoming a major challenge to the European air transport system.
Your rapporteur therefore proposes the introduction of a new article to make it possible to include the costs of approved infrastructure projects in the calculation of charges.
Your rapporteur therefore proposes the introduction of a new article to make it possible to include the costs of approved infrastructure projects in the calculation of charges.
This would make it easier for airports to carry out new projects and prevent sudden, excessive jumps in the level of charges.
This would make it easier for airports to carry out new projects and prevent sudden, excessive jumps in the level of charges.
As the construction of new infrastructures is usually a long-term project and does not bring any short-term benefits for airport users, pre-funding in the context of charges should only operate with the agreement of airlines and after they have been informed of its duration and scope.
As the construction of new infrastructures is usually a long-term project and does not bring any short-term benefits for airport users, pre-funding in the context of charges should only operate with the agreement of airlines and after they have been informed of its duration and scope.
Thus account should be taken of the principles formulated by the ICAO for pre-funding of infrastructure projects (see subparagraph ‘ Pre-funding of projects’ in the ‘ ICAO’s policies on charges for airports and air navigation services, Doc.
Thus account should be taken of the principles formulated by the ICAO for pre-funding of infrastructure projects (see subparagraph ‘ Pre-funding of projects’ in the ‘ ICAO’s policies on charges for airports and air navigation services, Doc.
9082/7 ’ ( Amendment 12 ).
9082/7 ’ ( Amendment 12 ).
СТАНОВИЩЕ на комисия по икономически и парични въпроси
OPINION of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs
до комисия по транспорт и туризъм
for the Committee on Transport and Tourism
The primary objective in relation to the regulation of airport charges should be to ensure that commercially driven airports with significant market power do not abuse their dominant position by charging excessively for facilities and services while at the same time ensuring that economically efficient investment in the development of such airports can be remunerated.
The primary objective in relation to the regulation of airport charges should be to ensure that commercially driven airports with significant market power do not abuse their dominant position by charging excessively for facilities and services while at the same time ensuring that economically efficient investment in the development of such airports can be remunerated.
Mechanisms for the independent regulation of airport charges have already been put in place in a number of Member States.
Mechanisms for the independent regulation of airport charges have already been put in place in a number of Member States.
The model of economic “incentive” regulation which has been adopted in a number of Member States generally involves an independent regulator reviewing utilities’ charges at set intervals against specified criteria and setting charges on the basis of an efficient cost structure for the utility and allowing a reasonable return on economically efficient investment.
The model of economic “incentive” regulation which has been adopted in a number of Member States generally involves an independent regulator reviewing utilities’ charges at set intervals against specified criteria and setting charges on the basis of an efficient cost structure for the utility and allowing a reasonable return on economically efficient investment.
This system of regulation normally allows for consultation with airline users and more general consultation as part of the process.
This system of regulation normally allows for consultation with airline users and more general consultation as part of the process.
It is also normal practice for charges to be set for a period of years so as to promote regulatory certainty and facilitate the financing of economically efficient investment on the most attractive terms possible.
It is also normal practice for charges to be set for a period of years so as to promote regulatory certainty and facilitate the financing of economically efficient investment on the most attractive terms possible.
It is not all clear that the proposal put forward by the Commission is consistent with that model.
It is not all clear that the proposal put forward by the Commission is consistent with that model.
While the stated objective of this Directive is to establish a set of common principles and leave discretion with Member States on how they give effect to these principles, the Directive is in fact quite prescriptive in its approach.
While the stated objective of this Directive is to establish a set of common principles and leave discretion with Member States on how they give effect to these principles, the Directive is in fact quite prescriptive in its approach.
One area of concern is the proposed application of the Directive to all airports with a passenger throughput of 1 million or more.
One area of concern is the proposed application of the Directive to all airports with a passenger throughput of 1 million or more.
The real issue is whether an airport can exercise significant market power in setting charges.
The real issue is whether an airport can exercise significant market power in setting charges.
In reality many airports with throughput well over 1 million passengers are not in a position to exercise such power, particularly airports reliant on public funding to support their operations.
In reality many airports with throughput well over 1 million passengers are not in a position to exercise such power, particularly airports reliant on public funding to support their operations.
The provisions for compulsory annual consultation on charges allied to the exchange of detailed information together with the fact that this consultation is confined to existing airline users only – as indicated above under existing systems of incentive regulation, charges are generally set for a period of time unless there are substantive grounds for revising the charges.
The provisions for compulsory annual consultation on charges allied to the exchange of detailed information together with the fact that this consultation is confined to existing airline users only – as indicated above under existing systems of incentive regulation, charges are generally set for a period of time unless there are substantive grounds for revising the charges.
While the intention behind this provision in the Directive is not entirely clear if it were to mean that charges would be open to review on an annual basis this could well give rise to a very short term perspective and practical difficulties in managing airport businesses.
While the intention behind this provision in the Directive is not entirely clear if it were to mean that charges would be open to review on an annual basis this could well give rise to a very short term perspective and practical difficulties in managing airport businesses.
The focus should be on the principles of consultation and transparency with detailed mechanisms left to Member States.
The focus should be on the principles of consultation and transparency with detailed mechanisms left to Member States.
The fact that any matter within the scope of the Directive can be referred to a dispute resolution authority and that the decisions of the authority will be binding, particularly given that the criteria to be applied in arbitrating on such disputes are not stated nor is it made clear that a Member State could exercise its discretion in establishing such criteria – in the case, for example, where a dispute arises from a conflict between airline users’ short term perspective and the longer term development needs of an airport what criteria will apply in deciding the dispute?
The fact that any matter within the scope of the Directive can be referred to a dispute resolution authority and that the decisions of the authority will be binding, particularly given that the criteria to be applied in arbitrating on such disputes are not stated nor is it made clear that a Member State could exercise its discretion in establishing such criteria – in the case, for example, where a dispute arises from a conflict between airline users’ short term perspective and the longer term development needs of an airport what criteria will apply in deciding the dispute?
Under the incentive regulation model, independent regulators are normally required to strike a balance between the needs of existing users and the future development of an airport in the interests of economic efficiency.
Under the incentive regulation model, independent regulators are normally required to strike a balance between the needs of existing users and the future development of an airport in the interests of economic efficiency.
While fully accepting the importance of transparency and cost efficiency in the setting of charges it is important to acknowledge that the interests of existing airline users are not necessarily synonymous with investing in airport capacity that might have the effect of facilitating competitor airlines to improve their market share at the airport or to enable market entry by rival airlines in the future.
While fully accepting the importance of transparency and cost efficiency in the setting of charges it is important to acknowledge that the interests of existing airline users are not necessarily synonymous with investing in airport capacity that might have the effect of facilitating competitor airlines to improve their market share at the airport or to enable market entry by rival airlines in the future.
The inclusion of provisions relating to the differentiation of charges – as the objective is to set out common principles and not to prescribe particular charging regimes, the issue of whether to facilitate the offering of differential pricing is a matter best left to Member States under the subsidiarity principle.
The inclusion of provisions relating to the differentiation of charges – as the objective is to set out common principles and not to prescribe particular charging regimes, the issue of whether to facilitate the offering of differential pricing is a matter best left to Member States under the subsidiarity principle.
It is important that any measure should not try to impose a rigid framework that runs counter to focusing on incentive regulation of airports that have significant market power or which creates an unstable environment for airport investment in the future.
It is important that any measure should not try to impose a rigid framework that runs counter to focusing on incentive regulation of airports that have significant market power or which creates an unstable environment for airport investment in the future.
The inflexible adherence to the dispute settlement model for regulation of charges, together with the absence of any explicit mandate for the regulator to undertake incentive regulation of airport operators with significant market power, suggest that the draft directive may have the unintended effect of cutting across models of incentive regulation currently in place.
The inflexible adherence to the dispute settlement model for regulation of charges, together with the absence of any explicit mandate for the regulator to undertake incentive regulation of airport operators with significant market power, suggest that the draft directive may have the unintended effect of cutting across models of incentive regulation currently in place.
Also the criteria to be applied by an independent regulatory body in either setting charges or in resolving disputes in relation to charges is therefore key and the draft Directive is silent on this.
Also the criteria to be applied by an independent regulatory body in either setting charges or in resolving disputes in relation to charges is therefore key and the draft Directive is silent on this.
At minimum it ought to be clearly provided that Member States can establish independent regulatory bodies to set airport charges in line with specified criteria in a transparent and objective way as an alternative to the dispute resolution option.
At minimum it ought to be clearly provided that Member States can establish independent regulatory bodies to set airport charges in line with specified criteria in a transparent and objective way as an alternative to the dispute resolution option.
Комисията по икономически и парични въпроси приканва водещата комисия по транспорт и туризъм да включи в доклада си следните изменения:
The Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs calls on the Committee on Transport and Tourism, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following amendments in its report:
За тази цел летищата предоставят редица съоръжения и услуги, свързани с работата на самолетите и обслужването на пътниците и товарите, разходите за които обикновено се възстановяват чрез летищните такси
For this purpose, airports offer a number of facilities and services related to the operation of aircraft and the processing of passengers and cargo, the cost of which they generally recover through airport charges.
Следва да се отбележи, че летища с по-малък брой пътници имат по-малко възможности за възстановяване на разходите чрез подобни такси .
It should be noted that airports with smaller numbers of passengers have fewer opportunities to recover costs through such charges.
(13а) Съществува известна конкуренция между летищата, но пречките пред конкуренцията продължават да съществуват.
(13a) A degree of competition among airports exists but obstacles to competition remain.
Член 1, параграф 2, алинея първа
Article 1, paragraph 2, subparagraph 1
Директивата се прилага за всички летища, разположени на територията, която е обект на разпоредбите на Договора, и открити за търговски трафик с годишен трафик над 1 милион пътници или 25 000 тона товари.
This Directive applies to any airport located in a territory subject to the provisions of the Treaty and open to commercial traffic whose annual traffic is over 1 million passenger movements or 25 000 tonnes of cargo.
Директивата се прилага за всички летища, разположени на територията, която е обект на разпоредбите на Договора, и открити за търговски трафик с годишен трафик, представляващ повече от 1% от вътреобщностното движение на пътници.
This Directive applies to any airport located in a territory subject to the provisions of the Treaty and open to commercial traffic whose annual traffic represents more than 1 % of total intra-Community passenger movements.
The 1 million threshold is neither justified by any objective criteria, nor is it compatible with any of the existing categorisations of airports.
The 1 million threshold is neither justified by any objective criteria, nor is it compatible with any of the existing categorisations of airports.
It would introduce heavy regulatory burden on the competent authorities and introduce high costs for regional airports.
It would introduce heavy regulatory burden on the competent authorities and introduce high costs for regional airports.
The Directive should target airports with a significant market power.
The Directive should target airports with a significant market power.
Any numerical threshold risks unnecessarily regulating many airports that do not require regulation, while excluding some that may require regulation..
Any numerical threshold risks unnecessarily regulating many airports that do not require regulation, while excluding some that may require regulation..
Therefore a general threshold based on EU criteria in terms of traffic volume should be applied.
Therefore a general threshold based on EU criteria in terms of traffic volume should be applied.
Член 1, параграф 2а (нов)
Article 1, paragraph 2 a (new)
Без да се накърняват разпоредбите на параграф 2, държавите-членки могат:
Without prejudice to paragraph 2, Member States may:
i) да прилагат настоящата директива за всички летища, намиращи се на територия, която е предмет на разпоредбите на Договора и отворена за търговски трафик, чийто годишен трафик представлява повече от 20% от общото движение на пътници в съответната държава-членка; или
(i) apply this Directive to all airports located in a territory that is subject to the provisions of the Treaty and open to commercial traffic whose annual traffic represents more than 20 % of total passenger movements in the Member State concerned; or
ii) да решат да включат или изключат от прилагането на настоящата директива, въз основа на изследване на пазара, проведено от компетентни национални органи в съответната държава-членка, всяко едно летище, намиращо се на нейната територия, което е предмет на разпоредбите на Договора и е отворено за търговски трафик.
(ii) decide to include or exclude from the application of this Directive, on the basis of a market test conducted by the competent national authorities of the Member State concerned, any airport located in its territory that is subject to the provisions of the Treaty and open to commercial traffic.
Подобно изследване на пазара се провежда след изчерпателна консултация с ръководния летищен орган и потребители на съответното летище.
Such a market test shall be carried out after full consultation with the airport managing body and users of the airport concerned.