British Airways on Wednesday strongly attacked the US “open skies” model for liberalising international aviation markets and claimed that the US proposal for allowing foreign airlines some degree of commercial control over a US carrier was “a recipe for confusion.”
The US and the European Union are seeking to negotiate a liberalised transatlantic aviation market.
The text of a treaty was agreed late last year by the European Commission and the US government, but European member states have made their approval conditional on the US transportation department (DoT) easing its rules on foreign control of US airlines to balance US access to the European domestic market.
The DoT finished its public consultation earlier this month and is expected to issue the final text for the rule change in coming weeks.
BA is one of the carriers with most at stake under the terms of the proposed US/EU deal, as it would lead to an opening of the lucrative routes between the US and London Heathrow, its global hub, to more airlines. At present direct routes between Heathrow and the US are restricted to four carriers: BA and Virgin Atlantic from the UK; American Airlines and United Airlines from the US.
The stance of the UK government, which took a lead in blocking the last proposed US/EU aviation deal in June 2004, will be crucial to the success of the negotiations. It is facing fierce but conflicting lobbying from UK carriers, such as BA and Virgin Atlantic, which oppose the terms of the deal, and from BMI British Midland, which is strongly in favour.
Martin Broughton, BA chairman, said on Wednesday the airline had “grave doubts” that the proposed change in US rules would allow European airlines greater access to the US domestic market.
“It all seems designed to give the appearance of change without really changing anything. It’s a recipe for confusion,” he said in a speech to the Wings Club, an aviation forum, in New York.
He said if the DoT failed to improve its offer, it was “not clear” the deal would have any commercial value to EU airlines. He added that under the US proposal the “very limited degree of influence” that a foreign airline would be able to exercise over a US carrier was “not going to reassure a minority shareholder that he will be able to protect what could be a substantial investment”.
