My travel plans were only slightly affected by Iceland’s wayward volcano but I understand some members of the European Parliament and the European Commission were less fortunate. This is good. Hopefully they now have a better appreciation of the value and performance of an industry they are so keen to regulate but which otherwise they tend to take for granted. Kiwi growers from New Zealand to flower tillers in Africa all got a good appreciation of just how important and indispensable aviation really is.
This reminder came just about in time. If the rumors are anything to go by, the new parliament and commission is about to go into one of their regulatory overdrive periods and what better target for something like this than aviation? For some reason aviation is the first that comes to their minds when there is a need to pay for something (see Galileo) or where, in their view, passengers must be protected by big brother (and increasingly big sister).
We all know what EU regulatory zeal can lead to… just think of past attempts to standardize the curvature of bananas and the proposed ban on some French cheeses because of their too high concentration of bacteria (never mind that it is the bacteria that make the cheese in the first place).
Whenever I see the Air Passenger Bill of Rights prominently displayed at airports, I cannot avoid wondering why the EU thought it so important to create something like this when train passengers in many EU members states suffer far more than what the airlines will ever be able to mete out on their passengers. Take Belgium. If a train is on time, it makes the evening news. So, where is the Bill of Rights for train passengers? Train operators have to pay but the conditions are far less strict than what is imposed on the airlines.
But apparently, the air passenger bill of rights is one area Brussels is planning to do more work on and guess which direction it will go. Also on the agenda is seat pitch! Mind you I am not against having more rights and more legroom. However, those things are between me and the airline I have chosen and I do not need a European Parliament or the Commission to act on my behalf. Let them stick to safety related issues and leave the business part alone!
Apparently they also want to meddle with carry-on luggage rules in an effort to standardize the rules across carriers. Here again we stumble on a clear
case of uncalled for interference from officialdom in something that is an issue of service being offered and in the end, competition. With the unbundling of their services, airlines are offering an a la cart travel product which is just fine. You can create your own price by picking what you really need and paying or not paying (and how much) for the carry-on should be my decision and not something decided by people in Brussels or Strasbourg wanting to demonstrate how important they are.
When passengers buy their tickets, they enter a contract with the airline and they expect value for their money. Most of the time they get it too. But the relationship between the passenger and the carrier is not that of a Lord with hereditary privileges (the passenger) and an underdog trying to cheat the Lord (the airline). It is a business relationship, nothing more, nothing less.
So, Parliament and Commission would do much better to oversee safety and facilitate the business (where in the past their record was not exactly spectacular) and interfere with the rest as little as possible. Seat pitch and carry-on rules are none of their concern.