Ahead of political group meetings in Strasbourg this week to formulate positions within the European Parliament Committee on Transport and Tourism (TRAN) on the Kirkhope report on the CRS Code of Conduct, and in anticipation of a TRAN vote in late May on the report, the International Airline Passengers Association (IAPA), the Institute of Travel Management (ITM) and the Business Travel Coalition (BTC) late last week provided their initial reactions to the key amendments tabled. 

Consumer Organizations said to the letter they sent to MEPs "First and foremost, the Consumer Organisations would like to express their strong endorsement of Mr. Kirkhope’s proposed amendments to the Commission proposal. Of major significance is his solution to address the dangerous legislative loophole exposed in the Commission’s draft under the definition of ‘Parent Carrier’ (Article 2 (g)), by establishing CRS ownership as a fully independent criterion when assessing parent carrier status. The introduction of this test takes into account the incentives for abuse which exist for airlines meaningfully participating in the capital and governance of a CRS and limits the discretion of the Commission which had previously declared its intention to designate parent carriers on a case-by-case basis using ‘effective control’ as the only critical criterion . Mr. Kirkhope has the consumer’s best interests at heart and we heartily commend his approach.

A number of constructive amendments have been submitted calling for full divestiture by airlines with stakes in system vendors over time. Whilst airline divestiture would ultimately be the best solution for the Consumer Organisations, since it would completely eliminate the airline ownership problem that necessitates CRS rules, in the near term Parliament’s priority must be to ensure that any ambiguities are eliminated with respect to the existing Code of Conduct."

The organizations stressed "Mr. Kirkhope’s amendments in our view represent a significant and workable compromise in this respect. Failure to apply strict ex-ante rules to airline-owners of CRSs immediately will result in the reinforcement and creation of dangerous monopolies in a number of European countries. In our letter to Parliament (with additional signatories) of 3 April 2008 we wrote that since the Commission’s declaration of last November, which made it clear that the CRS Code of Conduct applies to no-one, airline owners have been free to discriminate in favour of the CRSs they own and CRSs have been free to discriminate in favour of their owning airlines. Travellers all across the EU and beyond are, as a result, at risk of being subjected to higher fares, less choice and poorer service.

Given the market conditions described above, we have grave concerns in relation to amendments 46 and 47, which provide the Commission with the continued competence to confer parent carrier status on the basis of ‘effective control’ alone. In a similar vein, amendment 44 eliminates the ownership test entirely, leading us directly back to the status quo and the same flaws exposed within the Commission proposal. These amendments are absolutely the wrong approach, since they disregard the consumer’s voice in order to give a regulatory free hand to a handful of national airlines which are free to abuse their CRS ownership positions.  The notion advanced that the CRS rules should be harmonized with the effective control standards in the merger setting misses the point. In the interest of millions of dispersed European travellers, we strongly urge you and members of your group to reject these three amendments."

The letter was signed by Jonathan French, Industry Affairs Spokesman, International Airline Passengers Association, Paul Tilstone, Executive Director, Institute of Travel Management and Kevin Mitchell, Chairman, Business Travel Coalition.