FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1962
1962 - 0936.PDF
934 FLIGHT International, 14 June 1%> IMPLEMENTING THE LICENSING ACT . . . tions of flying hour costs for Viscounts. You must go far deeper than that. An operator's attitude to fares is based on his own costs and the Board were not able to go into the operators' figures, break them down, and find out how they were arrived at. To some extent the Board were misled on this business of costs. Look at the London-Glasgow promotional fares. They are probably as low as you can get, but there are very special reasons there— mail and that sort of thing. Nevertheless, we would still say it was probably an underdeveloped route. There is probably room for a higher fare—a businessman's service with a little more leg-room and space to open and read a newspaper. We think there are potential passengers who are prepared to pay for that. On the London-Paris route, on the other hand, lower fares are needed and we think we could make a significant difference in fares and traffic—lowering fares and increasing traffic. With competition there is a much more versatile approach to the market and this attitude is very important. Five or six years ago when we talked of VLF fares on Britanriias, low fares was a bogey word for the Corporations. But suddenly it has become terribly fashionable, and BEA go into the low-fare market. But that may not always be the answer on every route. . Can we turn to the appeal procedure provided in the 1960 Act? I gather your company are not too happy about it? We have very strong views about this. You have this eight- man Board and these very responsible people take their time listening to everything that is said to them. The reading matter in the transcripts would take days to go through. The Board reach their conclusions; a period of time elapses; and then a man who—as far as I can see—has no real terms of reference comes on the scene. He hasn't simply the duty of checking the procedural aspects of the original hearing; in effect you have a re-hearing. The Commissioner daes not seem to have a policy of his own, but he is just doing what the eight men have done before. There is another protracted procedure. What the Commissioner does that the others didn't do it is difficult to say. It would be a more reasonable procedure if it was the other way round—have one man take the original hearing and then let the eight men take the appeal, if that is to be the final decision. You are not asking then, that the right of appeal should be elimin ated? We are not saying that the Minister should not have the right of veto, or that there should not be something in the nature of an appeal. There is a policy check in the USA with recourse to the President. It is very hard to see how the Commissioner could have reversed the Board's findings on a policy basis, taking the new Act into consideration and the reasons for its enactment. But the Board has deliberately restricted its consideration to quite a narrow sector of the British economy. For example, they state that they have taken no account of governmental agreements on traffic rights. There may be, I don't say there always are, good national politi cal reasons for an inter-governmental agreement. Again, the Board said it was not their function to consider the possible damage to other forms of transport caused by a decision. If the Board will not take, or is not equipped to take, these national factors into account, then surely there must be a form of appeal? I would go along with you on that. But if the Commissioner had said he wanted to hear evidence on some other important national factor, say the effect on surface transport, and then if he gives his recommendations in the light of such new evidence, that I could understand. But that is not what is happening now. You have spoken several times about "the policy" governing de cisions; but one of the criticisms of the Board, as set up by the Act, is that they have no known policy. That was a criticism that Curtis made. I have pointed out elsewhere that in their "specific''' reasons for their decisions on the European applications they almost always restrict their observations to words like "the impact on BEA was small." I find it hard to think that this "specific" reason, given 13 out of 18 times, constitutes a policy. If there is not a known and under standable policy, how can you have an appeal that is only a "policy check" ? We think we can detect a policy. The formula which shared out traffic growth was a development of policy; that seemed to be the methed which was applied in their North Atlantic decision and it was laid down for the European applications. Certainly, if ever there was a route where the formula could be applied, it was the North Atlantic. Your case then, as I understand it, is that if the Board are developing a policy then it would be codified and applied both to the Boat (J hearings and to the appeals procedure ? It that were done then at least we should know where we stand. At the moment the uncertainty is as bad for the Corporation as it is for us. They seem to be motivated by fear—fear as to how far we might be given a share of their routes. If a formula was laid down then they would know the extent to which we might be licensed, and it probably would remove their fear. In general, then, would it be fair to say that you are not satisfied with the way the 1960 Act is working out ? Far from it. It is an expensive and time-consuming exercise, largely due to the attitude of the two Corporations. We did not expect them to clap their hands in joy at the new Act, but neither did we expect them to react with such intensity. There is one further question I would like to put. In a recent lecture I ventured to prophesy that all the carefully allocated licences granted by the Board could be set aside by future commercial agreements between the operators themselves. Would you say there was any possibility of this prophecy being realized? Is the sort of agreement apparently now being considered between the American transatlantic carriers possible between British independents ? For example, a divi sion under which you concentrated on the North and South Atlantic and BUA concentrated on the European routes? There need not be anything to worry about with operators coming to an understanding about their individual efforts. We do not have any specific understanding with BUA about "areas" but matters find their own level on the basis of cemmonsense. Mr Bamberg's last answer leaves open the possibilities of more formal agreements—or mergers—between two independent or previously competing companies. In a licensing situation which is still malleable, still in a formative stage, presumably this is another aspect to which more thought might be given. What happens, for example, to a licence which is granted to one company if the company—or part of it—passes to a competitor? FORTHCOMING EVENTS June 17-19 Oporto Aero Club: Third International Rally. June 18-20 BIS/Societe Francaise d'Astronautique j Eurospace Symposium on Space Technology, Paris. June 20 Kronfeld Club: Film Evening. June 22-24 Gothenburg Aero Club: Rally. June 23-24 Vichy Aero Club: International Rally. June 24 Tiger Club: Display, Wolverhampton. June 29-30 College of Aeronautics: Cranfield Open Days (June 29 by invitation only). June 30-July 1 Fifteenth International Tour of Sicily, Palermo. June 30-July 1 Airo-Club de Basse-Normandie: Flers Rally. June 30 RNAS Yeovilton, Som: At Home. July 7 RNAS Abbotsinch, Renfrewshire: At Home. July 11-28 RAF "Cavalcade of Flying," Royal Tournament. Earls Court, London. July 14 RNAS Brawdy, Pembrokeshire: At Home. July 20-21 RAeC: Business Aircraft and Touring Competition. July 21 RNAS Lossiemouth, Morayshire: At Home. July 28 RNAS Culdrose, Cornwall: At Home. Aug 6 Tiger Club: Display, Fair Oaks. Aug 11 HMS "Ariel," Lee-on-Solent: At Home. Aug 16-18 Royal Aero Club: National Air Races, Coventry. Aug 19 Tiger Club: Display, Shoreham. Sept 3-9 SB A C Flying Display and Exhibition, Farnborough. Sept 15 RAF "At Home" Day.
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
