AIR TRANSPORT TO TAKE THE ECOLOGICAL INITIATIVE

November 19, 2022?

It is obvious that air transport has become the preferred target of ecological dictators. They have succeeded in making this activity, which, let us remember, generates less than 3% of CO2 emissions, the first of the responsible for global warming. Of course there is no question of discussing the impact of flights on the climate, but it would be high time to take a strong initiative if only to nail the beak to the jealous opponents of this activity yet so useful to humanity, not only because it brings people closer together and is a factor of peace,?but because it is also essential to the global economy.?

The major contribution of air transport to the prosperity and well-being of the planet will not save it from unfair accusations and will not protect it from egological taxation. Little by little we feel it coming, unless the actors themselves take the initiative of a mandatory contribution. If ecological taxation were to be decided by any political authority, whether global, European or even only national, it seems obvious that the traceability of its use would be impossible to follow. The amounts levied would inevitably end up in an overall budget that would be used at the whim of the politicians, without it being able to be controlled. However, the only interest of such a contribution is to finance the ecological transition of air transport and notto contribute to feeding the coffers of certain structurally?loss-making land carriers.

It would therefore be wise for the air transport authorities to take matters into their own hands. Why not entrust the case, for example, to IATA, which is still the best representative of airlines. This could take the form of a resolution applicable initially to all companies distributed through the BSP. Imagine a contribution of 5 euros or dollars per passenger, which could also be modulated between short and long haul flights. Air transport issues just over 4 billion flight coupons year after year. ?Admittedly, not all of them pass through the BSP channel, but the latter must still represent 60% of the total. I am thinking of BSP because it is a quick and unstoppable way to raisemoney, and we are still talking about $10 billion to $12 billion a year. IATA is perfectly capable of cashing in this manna and storing it securely. ?

It would then remain to determine its use, which should be linked solely to improving the ecological performance of the sector. This could be the subject of votes in IATA assembly or decision of the Board of Governors, based on projects submitted by operators. In this way, the money collected from customers would be directed directly towards improving air transport. This system would also have the advantage of avoiding unfair competition between the actors because all would be subject to the same rules.?

It will be objected that low-cost?carriers ?do not use the BSP and that, therefore, they could avoid such a contribution. However, the stakes are still very high. Low-cost airlines carry around 700 to 800 million passengers a year. ?It would therefore not be fair for them not to participate in this fundraising, which would further accentuate the differential they have vis-à-vis traditional carriers. It will then be necessary to find a fair way to collect their participation. This could perhaps be done through airport charges, which are sufficiently complex to be able to accommodate such a levy. However, all carriers, including low-cost carriers, are obliged to use airports.

The major difficulty is that, very often, airlines take initiatives too late. The best example was the management of "overbooking". By not deciding for themselves what compensation disembarked passengers should receive, they allowed the authorities to take coercive measures and they had a very heavy hand. The same phenomenon has been repeated with the management of delayed or cancelled flights. Policy decisions are taken only by considering the exclusive interest of consumers without taking into account the difficulties of operators.

Ecology has become the first issue of the next 10 years at least. Will air transport leave it to others to receive the inevitable taxation without being able to control its use for its own benefit and not that of its competitors?