The Dutch Flight Reduction proposal at Amsterdam Schiphol is introverted, not global
First is an AP report on a Dutch Court of Appeals permitting the government to reduce the number of flights at Amsterdam’s Schiphol Airport (AMS) from 500,000 per year to 460,000. Second is the response of IATA, Air Canada, United Airlines, FedEx, JetBlue, British Airways, Vueling, Lufthansa, and Airlines for America in response to this decision. Europe’s aversion to aviation’s impact on the environment is most salient. There have been previous attempts by the EU and individual countries; so far, these initiatives have been stopped. THE ATTEMPT TO RESTRICT AMS MERITS ANOTHER INJUNCTION.
It appears that the Netherlandsi is experiencing cognitive dissonance on several levels; they include:
- Kingdom of the Netherlands was an original signatory to the Chicago Convention on on December 7, 1944, along with 51 other states .
- In reliance on that Treaty, the Dutch Government has initiated legal proceedings before the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) against the Russian Federation for its role in the downing of flight MH1.
- The Kingdom has been a participant in ICAO’s Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA)1 from the start of its voluntary phase on 1 January 2021.
- Yet the same sovereign’s refusal to publish documents about a controversial CO2 standard for aircraft is being challenged in cour.t For unspecified reasons, the Kingdom has withheld decisions and research about the CO2 standard, emission trends, biofuels and offset rules – all of which were drafted or developed behind closed doors at UN aviation agency ICAO – the Netherlands is in breach of EU law.
- Part of the ICAO CORSIA program is the adoption by participating Members in the UN Organization’s Balanced Approach to Aircraft Noise Management2 .
- the Dutch government attempted to order Amsterdam’s Schiphol Airport, one of Europe’s busiest aviation hubs, to reduce the number of flights from 500,000 per year to 460,000. The decision by a judge in Haarlem found that the Netherlands failed to follow the Balanced Approach as required by the country’s obligations under ICAO’s agreement. The Balanced Approach has also been endorsed by the EU.
The process adopted by the UN Aviation organization is not onerous and it is designed to assess multiple alternatives to the most EFFECTIVE noise reduction. An AMS Balanced Approach hypothetically might find that the reduction in flights might not deliver the system benefits assumed by the Dutch proprietor. Such as, the noise contours do not significantly reduce; the net benefit is not as expected. Or the demand blocked by the reduction cause a significant number of passengers to use airports in France or Germany. The AMS action would only benefit the Dutch, but there would be little to no benefit to Europe’s environment. This second example is why ICAO ‘s members adopted CORSIA and The Balanced Approach: GLOBAL IMPACTS ARE ESSENTIAL TO A TRUE REDUCTION.
In each of these examples this country’s policy as to aviation appears to be bifurcated in its logic – supporting key ICAO principles while taking actions that contravene those international agreements.
The strongest statement as to why this reduction in flights was posted by AMS:
What Schiphol means for the Netherlands
“By facilitating optimum links with the rest of the world, Schiphol helps create social and economic value. It’s the airport’s mission. There’s NO DOUBT ABOUT IT: THE EXTENSIVE NETWORK OF DESTINATIONS CONTRIBUTES TO OUR WELL-BEING AND OUR PROSPERITY. So how does it work?
…
Well-being and happiness
A world without flying is now difficult to imagine. For many of us, it makes it easier to explore undiscovered places. Seeking out the sun in the winter. Or visiting family and friends in far-off places. Air travel links us to the rest of the world, boosts our well-being and happiness and expands our knowledge of other cultures.
In verbinding
Connected When it comes to connectivity, only one airport in Europe outperforms Schiphol. This means that the Netherlands has excellent links with the rest of the world, as the rest of the world does with us. It’s quite an achievement for a relatively small country. So how is it possible? Schiphol serves as a hub, where many passengers meet their connecting flights to their ultimate destination.
Boost to the economy
Schiphol and its role as a hub means more for the Netherlands than just convenient holiday flights. All of these connections and flights give a major boost to our economy and prosperity. Although the Netherlands may ‘only’ be ranked 28th economy in the world, we are among the top 5 export countries and rank number 8 for foreign investors. What’s more, SCHIPHOL ACCOUNTS FOR 2 TO 5 PERCENT OF THE GROSS NATIONAL PRODUCT (GNP) AND PROVIDES BETWEEN 120,000 AND 360,000 JOBS.
Growth has its limits
At the same time, demand for air travel is increasing. This is because the economy is growing. The more money we have to spend, the more holiday flights we take. When business is booming, the number of business trips rises. But Schiphol cannot simply grow forever.”
Limiting factors
It is essential to take account of the negative impact of air travel. Both locally, for community residents affected by noise nuisance and impaired air quality, and globally, because of the influence on climate change.
This is why safety, and the environment will always be limiting factors in terms of Schiphol’s contribution to the prosperity and well-being of the Netherlands.
The message is replete with significant positive contributions from AMS, but it acknowledges the possible limitations due to the environment. Those two major policy considerations need to be balanced in the government assessment of what is best for both the environment and the economy. OH, BY THE WAY, the AMS restriction likely will move the traffic to nearby airports and the system impact may be negligible and even negative for THE CONTINENT.
Amsterdam court gives green light to plan to reduce flights at busy Schiphol Airport
THE HAGUE, Netherlands (AP) — Appeals court judges in Amsterdam ruled Friday that the Dutch government can order Schiphol Airport, one of Europe’s busiest aviation hubs, to reduce the number of flights from 500,000 per year to 460,000.
The Amsterdam Court of Appealoverturned a lower court that concluded in April the government of the Netherlands did not follow the correct procedure when it told Schiphol last year to cut flights.
The airport, civil aviation organizations and airlines that included Dutch flag carrier KLM challenged the government’s order. Friday’s decision can be appealed to the Dutch Supreme Court.
The Amsterdam appeals court said in a statement Friday that it “ATTACHES CONSIDERABLE WEIGHT TO THE INTERESTS OF LOCAL RESIDENTS” IN THE DENSELY POPULATED REGION WHERE PEOPLE HAVE COMPLAINED FOR YEARS ABOUT NOISE POLLUTION FROM THE AIRPORT.
In a written response, Schiphol said it accepted the ruling and hopes for a new aviation traffic order from Dutch authorities “as soon as possible with clear and enforceable environmental limits that provide clarity and perspective for all parties involved.”
The airport said that “the most important thing for us is that Schiphol becomes quieter, cleaner and better.”
KLM said it was “disappointed about the ruling” and studying it.
The carrier said it would “continue to engage with other stakeholders in seeking the best way to reduce the number of people affected by aircraft noise.”
Schiphol already is attempting to address the issue. Earlier this year, the airport announced plans to phase out all flights between midnight and 5 a.m., to ban private jets and the noisiest planes, and to abandon a project for an additional runway.
——————————————————
Airline trade association, IATA, have released a statement on the Dutch Appeal’s Court ruling of capacity constraints at Schiphol Airport.
“IATA statement read that ‘we are disappointed by the decision of the Dutch Appeal Court to overturn a court decision which found the Dutch Government’s experimental regulation to reduce capacity at Schiphol in violation of its obligations under the Balanced Approach.’
Governments have long recognised that international aviation must operate to global standards. As a result, governments, including the Dutch Government, are signatories to the Chicago Convention and its Annexes, which include the Balanced Approach. The Balanced Approach has even been enshrined in European Law.
“This is a disappointing outcome for travellers, shippers, the Dutch economy, and airlines. As we examine the ruling and its complexities, we seek clarity from the Dutch Government on its intentions. The full impact of this decision on the planned capacity cuts is unclear and there are no established international processes for such a retrograde exercise. We also urge the European Commission to defend its laws and air service agreements. And most importantly, we continue to ASK THE DUTCH GOVERNMENT TO REVERT TO THE BALANCED APPROACH which is the most effective and only internationally accepted means of dealing with the noise concerns of the local community,” said Willie Walsh, IATA’s Director General.
The parties that joined IATA’s action include Air Canada, United Airlines, FedEx, JetBlue, British Airways, Vueling, Lufthansa, and Airlines for America.
