The Hindu Business Line : Air turbulence

OVER THE PAST two seasons, the Open Skies Policy has allowed many international airlines to expand services into India and help swell the flow of tourists. The 20 per cent increase in tourist arrivals in January and February this year over that a year ago can be attributed as much to the increased availability of seats as to the general buoyancy in the economy. Amid such rapid progress, the impasse in India-UK bilateral talks on air services sticks out starkly. The January talks, held nearly two years after the earlier edition, remained inconclusive with the two sides failing to arrive at a consensus on critical issues. The British side was in favour of the resumption of talks in March second week but India remained non-committal.

London is in a hurry, understandably so. Buoyed by the jump in traffic, Britain's designated airlines are looking to increase flights and add new destinations, particularly in South India. The pressure from Indian expatriates in Britain, who are keen to have more direct flights to more destinations in India, has also been a factor in these talks as they have often expressed reservations about having to travel through another point in Europe or in West Asia. India wants more peak hour slots at Heathrow airport on reciprocity, particularly for flying out to more destinations in the US and Canada, a demand so far resisted by the British authorities. Britain's offer of alternative slots at some other airports has not been acceptable to New Delhi. The demand for more peak-hour slots at Heathrow is being raised at a time when British Airways has tightened its grip on the airport by paying a hefty price to acquire slots from carriers in distress. True, BA may not be the sole beneficiary even if the Indian authorities allow more flights to more Indian cities than now. There are at least two other designated airlines, Virgin Atlantic and British Midland, which are likely to compete for new routes and an increased number of flights.

This is not the only issue vis-à-vis flying into the UK. Environment and security have emerged as critical issues. Faced with the prospect of trebling of air travel in the next 30 years, the British Government has decided to approve two runways — one at Stansted by 2012 and the other at Heathrow by 2002 — and the construction of the sixth terminal at Heathrow. However, the expansion plans sit badly with London's green aspirations. Britain is committed to reducing greenhouse gases and there is demand that the airlines operating through Britain's airports meet the full cost of environmental consequences of unrestricted emission. The current air passenger duty barely meets half the cost of damage the government estimates is done by aircraft emission. Sooner or later, the government will, therefore, insist on airlines covering the environmental costs.

With the declaration of Code Orange in the US in December, the security issue has assumed a new dimension with airlines flying to the US having to cope with stricter security norms. While the heightened security is certainly a priority in air travel, the question is: Who will pay for it? IATA has urged governments to shoulder the financial burden of air transport security. Aviation, it is argued, cannot be discriminated against when the state provides security free of charge to other modes of transport. Most governments have remained silent on the issue. Clearly, air travel is becoming more complicated than having enough slots in Heathrow.