Emissions trading.

The European Regions Airline Association (ERA) has attacked Tuesdays vote of the European Parliament Environment Committee (ENVI) which it says will increase the cost of emissions trading to the airline industry by more titan 400% compared with the European Commissions (EC) original proposal. Speaking at the ASD Annual Convention in Barcelona, Mike Ambrose, Director General said: The EC s original proposal had significant weaknesses but was at least supported by an impact assessment of sorts. The amendments proposed by the ENVI, however, have been made without even a simple impact assessment. The majority of MEPs who voted would have had no idea of the severe economic, social or even environmental consequences of the actions they were taking. ENVI has treated the objectives of the Lisbon Agenda as a joke. To propose such changes without any consideration of the impact on the industry jobs and Europe's international competitiveness is unacceptable." Whereas the original proposal permitted C[O.sub.2] allowances based on 100% of airlines average annual emissions during 2004-2006, the ENVI has reduced this to 75%. In addition, ENVI has proposed that 50% of this allowance should be auctioned and that the cost of all C[O.sub.2] permits should be multiplied by a factor of two if the EC does not develop legislation before 2010 to address NOx emissions. The ENVI has also proposed that the scheme should be brought forward from 2011 to 2010. In order for the scheme to begin in 2010, airlines would need to be collecting and recording data from January 2007 despite the law not having been agreed. It is thus impracticable. "These vindictive amendments illustrate ENVI's embarrassing lack of understanding of the massive impacts their actions might entail," said Ambrose. ERA has always recognized that Emissions Trading is the most constructive of economic instruments, and the industry has supported it. ERA and a number of other European operator trade associations suggested amendments to improve the EC proposal, many of which were taken up by the Transport Committee (TRAN) and were based on a proper impact assessment, independently commissioned by industry. "The extremism displayed by ENVI this week both reduces its credibility and harms the cause of sincere and well-meaning environmentalists," Ambrose concluded.