The Business Travel Coalition (BTC) has called on industry leaders to sign a letter protesting about apparent EC plans which could undermine the GDS de-regulation.
EC officials are considering a change in the definition of "parent carriers" and specifically whether Lufthansa, Air France and Iberia are parent carriers of the GDS Amadeus in which they have a 46.4% stake.
If the EC decides they are not, the safeguarding principle of mandatory participation will fall.
Kevin Mitchell, chairman of the US-based BTC, said: "The EC is virtually moments away from rendering hollow the CRS Code of Conduct that protects consumers, corporate buyers and TMCs vis-Ã -vis full airfare content, data privacy safeguards and pricing discipline in the marketplaces for travel distribution and air transportation services in Europe."
He said the next step was "to secure the attention of the EC and ensure it reverses course."
He called on industry participants to sign a letter to Matthias Ruete, EC director general for transport and energy, to express "grave concern over recent developments related to the Commission review of the CRS Code of Conduct."
The letter adds that any change in definition of "parent carrier" would "strip the Code of the basic consumer protections that have been overwhelmingly endorsed by consumers, business travellers and travel agencies in the stakeholder consultation process."
It says that any change should have been part of the public consultation process.
The letter concludes: "As you might imagine, we are extremely dissatisfied with both the content and procedural aspects of DG TREN's management of this issue.
"It is clear that now, more than ever, the term "parent carrier" requires a precise definition and input from all stakeholders.
"Therefore, in the name of better regulation, we would urge you to consider reopening the public consultation to enable this matter to be discussed in a fair and open manner.”
* To sign the letter, please go to: http://www.AdvancedSurvey.com/default.asp?SurveyID=53788
Closing date for signatures is July 26.
Full contents of letter:
Matthias Ruete
Director General for Transport and Energy
European Commission
Rue de la Loi, 200
B-1049 Brussels
Dear Mr Ruete,
We the undersigned Signatories are writing to express our grave concern over recent developments related to the Commission review of the CRS Code of Conduct. It is increasingly clear that some in DG Energy and Transport (DG TREN) are intent on redefining the term "parent carrier" in the Code.
We understand that the Commission's view is that the term "parent carrier" will be interpreted on a case-by-case basis and, revealingly, that the definition of a "parent carrier" requires control, even though the Code clearly states that ownership OR control triggers the parent carrier requirements. Such a definitional change would strip the Code of the basic consumer protections that have been overwhelmingly endorsed by consumers, business travellers and travel agencies in the stakeholder consultation process.
Compounding our concern over this ongoing regulatory redefinition is the overall consultation process. If the definition of "parent carrier" is being de facto changed through a new interpretation, then such a change should have been front and centre of the consultation process. Instead, no direct questions have been asked about the meaning of this definition or what a change would mean. Furthermore, we feel that we have been misled by the Commission which has publicly stated the need to maintain the basic core protections associated with "parent carrier" while apparently behind the scenes preparing to make them meaningless.
Contributing to this confusion is a recent statement by an Amadeus spokesperson, saying that they have not been subject to the parent carrier requirements for the past two years. We now understand more fully the Commission statement buried in the Commission Summary of Consultations: "There appears to be confusion among stakeholders about the interpretation of the definition of 'parent carrier.'"
As you might imagine, we are extremely dissatisfied with both the content and procedural aspects of DG TREN's management of this issue. It is clear that now, more than ever, the term "parent carrier" requires a precise definition and input from all stakeholders. Therefore, in the name of better regulation, we would urge you to consider reopening the public consultation to enable this matter to be discussed in a fair and open manner. This should not be a hasty process concluded during August but one which is keeping with the vital issues at stake for consumers and all other participants in the air transport and travel distribution markets.
We would be grateful if you could take the time to meet with us, as soon as schedules permit, in order to discuss the issues at stake and how the Commission intends to proceed further with the Code's revision.
We look forward to your response.
Yours sincerely