The Economist welcomes your views. Please stay on topic and be respectful of other readers. Review our comments policy.
You must be logged in to post a comment. Log in to your account.Don't have an account? Register
So you're suggesting the airlines pay adding another cost to pass on to passengers.
" To comply with the “use it or lose it” rule, many airlines resort to artifice—flying smaller planes than necessary in order to spread capacity across their slots, for example, and even running empty “ghost” flights to ensure that the runways are busy at the appointed time"
Hogwash too! There was one example a long time ago where an airline ran a "ghost flight" between Heathrow and Cardiff. But why would an airline run a ghost flight? The reason slots are so expensive at Heathrow is because airlines can make money out of them. Running an empty plane would be monumentally stupid - you might as well fill it up with passengers and earn money.
Congestion pricing can be implemented without pricing slots - just raise landing charges at peak times (and then reduce them at off peak times because otherwise it will just make airports richer and passengers poorer).
Heathrow is simply full. It doesn't have a peak. The problem here is not slots or airlines. There are two ways to reduce high slot prices (which by the way are a formidable barrier to entry). Reduce demand. Or increase supply - a new runway. That would bring competition. But the government has been woefully lacking here.
Slot rights are basically a transfer of wealth from the public/airport operator to private shareholders of airlines.
They should be stopped.
The public and the airport operator aren't the same thing. The airport operator (at least in the UK) is even worse than airlines: a monopolistic entity with private shareholders.
Incumbents always invoke "expertise" or "reliability" with the notion of why resources can't be allocated by the market. In my industry of energy, we have utilities who fight to the death the ability of the market to make rational allocation decisions - invoking "reliability". I have come to believe that "reliability" has replaced "patriotism" as the last bastion of the scoundrel - apologies to Samuel Johnson.
Silly newspaper. What kind of campaign donations could start-up airlines afford? When the government is for sale, only the rich and established need come to the table.