Cargolux fined. Again.

The European Commission has fined 11 airlines almost 800m euros (£690m) for fixing the price of air cargo between 1999 and 2006.  Had the Commission not intervened the "deplorable" cartel "would have continued", said EU Competition Commissioner Joaquin Almunia.  The illegal cartel had harmed both companies and consumers, he said.

British Airways was fined 104m euros, Air France-KLM 340m euros and Cargolux Airlines 79.9m euros.  The fines follow lengthy investigations by regulators in Europe, the US and Asia, dating back to 2006.  The EU said that the airlines "co-ordinated their action on surcharges for fuel and security without discounts", between early 1999 and 2006. "The carriers contacted each other so as to ensure that worldwide air freight carriers imposed a flat rate surcharge per kg for all shipments."

The Commission imposed the biggest fine - 340m euros - on Air France-KLM, which was formed from a merger in 2004 and which now owns Martinair, which was also fined.  "It is deplorable that so many major airlines coordinated their pricing to the detriment of European businesses and European consumers," said Mr Almunia.  "With today's decision the Commission is sending a clear message that it will not tolerate cartel behaviour."

Airline: Fine (euros)

Air France-KLM (includes Martinair): 339.6m

British Airways: 104m

Cargolux: 79.9m [Click here to read about their earlier $124m fine in the USA]

Singapore Airlines: 74.8m

SAS: 70.2m

Cathay Pacific: 57.1m

Japan Airlines: 35.7m

Air Canada: 21m

Qantas: 8.9m

LAN Chile: 8.2m

BA said it had already made a £350m provision for any possible fines over the cargo price fixing.  A BA spokesman said the airline's fine fell "within the provision made by the company in its 2006/7 report and accounts".  The German carrier Lufthansa escaped a fine because it alerted the regulatory authorities to the cartel.  The maximum fine the Commission could have imposed on any single carrier was 10% of their 2009 turnover.

The US Department of Justice has already charged 18 airlines and several executives in its investigation of the cargo cartel and imposed more than $1.6bn (£997m) in fines.  The Commission's decision will have an impact on several pending legal actions by European companies against some of the airlines.  A group of firms, led by the Swedish telecoms group Ericsson and Dutch electronics giant Philips, are suing Air France-KLM and its Martinair subsidiary for 400m euros.

Video snippets from RTC 25th October

Many thanks to our Multimedia Department (Outside Broadcast Unit) for the following video snippets from the Ramsgate Town Council meeting at Chatham House School on 25th October...

Jobs Promised 8½ mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnO5DsICoyE

Noise & Health 6½ mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MHpIoO7KBq0&feature=mfu_in_order&playnext=1&videos=LR2iZqla9B0

Worse health and education services? 2 mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jnv8oPVFJU0&feature=mfu_in_order&playnext=1&videos=RVhdl8aOSCc

Follow the money 1½ mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ku6kz1R_AuM&feature=mfu_in_order&playnext=1&videos=OWNuQQMOXI4

Impossible to land planes safely until NEXT November 2½ mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wr0L_OztAFQ&feature=mfu_in_order&playnext=1&videos=mvoiutz5fvU

Living Next to Noisy neighbours 2 mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mr1ot2rUVs&feature=mfu_in_order&playnext=1&videos=DLkM3c2aOk0

WRIT of MANDAMUS (A writ issued by a superior court ordering a public official or body or a lower court to perform a specified duty)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADv4cQCqAAA&feature=mfu_in_order&playnext=1&videos=VtFfWkM3B7c

Our MPs’ views on Night Flights 1½ mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXSi-c0vmsI&feature=mfu_in_order&playnext=1&videos=JjxdtkaY-Xk

Development & Public Safety Zones 3 mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-I7_RJUshM

Previous Court Judgement about Planning Permission 5 mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udVzcN0daCg&feature=mfu_in_order&playnext=1&videos=CFSY-wwg1i0

It makes all the difference, remembering to press the start button. Ahem.

See more on: Health

Questions for TDC for the consultation

Eleven pointed questions

Here's an economy dozen of the finest, freshest questions to come marching in the door, demanding answers.

QUESTION 1
Would you please ask TDC to put the Schedule 106 currently applicable to Kent International/ Manston Airport up on its website so that the electorate can see what it says?

QUESTION 2
I notice that Infratil advises KIACC of the number of passenger and cargo flights each month. Could you please email me Infratil's month by month breakdown of the number of aircraft movements for each of these categories for the period April 2009 to August 2010 or, better still, arrange for them to go up on TDC's website?

QUESTION 3
Could you please ask Infratil to give a month by month breakdown of the number of cargo flights and the number of passenger flights between 23:00 and 7:00 from April 2009 to August 2010 and either email them to me or put them up on TDC's website?

QUESTION 4
Can you assure those under the flight path that there is always air traffic control and RFF [Rescue Fire Fighting] at the airport whenever a plane lands or departs? [Any variation of 'no' in answer to this question is truly alarming for the populations of Ramsgate and Herne Bay.]

QUESTION 5
Does the current Section 106 define 'scheduled'? [I note that Alan Stratford & Assoc raised the question of the definition of 'scheduled' in 6.22 of their Review of the Section 106 in 2005. This report was commissioned by TDC and is still on their website.]

QUESTION 6
For a flight to be 'scheduled', it simply has to be done according to a timetable. Unlike a passenger airline, a cargo airline's timetable might vary considerably especially if it is flying fresh produce. The airport's Geographical and Administrative Data states that Security requires 24 hour advance notice. Customs and Immigration requires notice by 15:00/16:00 hours on the previous day depending on whether it is summer or winter. In other words, these cargo flights which are arriving and departing during the night are not emergency flights; they have a schedule which has to be notified to the airport in advance. They are, therefore, scheduled night flights. Why have the appropriate fines not been collected for the Community Fund?

QUESTION 7
Who are the legal advisers who will be helping TDC through the negotiation process for the new Section 106 and how much relevant aviation experience have they got? I understand under the FOI we are entitled to know.

QUESTION 8
Why have TDC ignored the advice regarding Enforcement and Penalties in the report they commissioned from Alan Stratford & Assoc in 2005 [pps 31, 33]?

QUESTION 9
Could TDC please explain how ignoring Alan Stratford's recommendations benefits the electorate?

QUESTION 10
Except in emergencies, all QC4 aircraft have been banned from Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted between the hours of 23:30 and 6:00am since October 2005. No aircraft over QC4 are allowed to land between 23:00 and 7:00am. There is a movements limit and a noise quota. Could KIACC please explain, therefore, how QC4 aircraft come to be flying in over Ramsgate and Herne Bay at any hour of the night without penalty when this is not allowed at the UK's busiest, noisiest airports? This benefits Infratil but I cannot see how it benefits TDC's electorate.

QUESTION 11
Why has the consultation period on the night flights been reduced from 6 months to 12 weeks? Once again the benefits to Infratil are easier to see than the benefits to the electorate.

Council told to disclose legal advice over night flights

Thanet Council has been ordered to make public legal advice it received over controversial night flights from Manston Airport. The council caused controversy when it entered into an agreement in 2005 with the airport’s operators Planestation that permitted additional scheduled flights to take place beyond 11pm.

At the time, many residents in the area were dismayed, saying they faced noise disruption. There were claims that the change was one that should have required planning permission. Council chiefs had initially refused to disclose the advice of its lawyers, relating to a variation in the terms of what is known as a Section 106 agreement.

It rejected a request made under the Freedom of Information Act, saying the advice was legally privileged information and there was no public interest in releasing it. But now an information tribunal has officially ruled that the council was wrong.

A panel that considered a formal appeal said councillors had already referred to the legal advice during the course of a public council meeting when the issue of the impact of night flights had been raised. As a result, the full contents of the lawyers’ advice, which addressed the issue of whether the change in policy needed planning permission should be released, the panel concluded. In a statement, the council insisted it had not deliberately sought to suppress the information. The statement said:

“Thanet District Council is committed to providing as much information as possible to the public. However, the council took legal advice in this case and we were advised not to release any information which would jeopardise the future of a passenger service at Kent International Airport.”

kentonline 2nd Aug 2006