 |
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
By Daniel Baxter |
||||
 |
May 16, 2010 - The
Air Transport Association of America (ATA), the trade organization for
the leading
"Once again,
airlines, their customers and the communities that they serve are at the
mercy of political forces beyond their control. We can only hope that
facts rather than misguided impulses gain the upper hand in the debate
about the proposed per-aircraft fee.
"Further burdening
air transportation with another tax puts the well-being of our customers
at risk. That is crystal clear. The simple reality is that this is not a
"green" proposal, it is a plan to financially penalize airlines and
thereby force them to cut back air services that passengers and shippers
want. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
"Contrary to what
some have said in support of the per-aircraft fee, airlines do not
wastefully schedule their flights. The economics of this industry do not
permit that. Stubbornly high fuel prices, inefficient air traffic
control systems and dismal financial results mean that airlines have
strong incentives to schedule their flights as efficiently as possible
and reduce the consumption of jet fuel.
“We respond to
those incentives every day. The result is an unrelenting focus on
efficiency that has produced an extraordinary environmental record,
which dates back decades. That commitment continues today as evidenced,
for example, by our ongoing involvement in the development of
alternative jet fuels. What the airline industry needs is government
policies that encourage more investments that reduce greenhouse gas
emissions, not punitive taxes that stifle investment in technology and
upgrades.
"Finally, as we
have repeatedly said with respect to a per-aircraft fee, international
treaties that the "We are hopeful that the remarkable environmental record of the airline industry, our long-demonstrated commitment to working to improve that record, and the needs of passengers and shippers will persuade those who advocate imposition of the per-aircraft fee to abandon their efforts." |
||||
