Simon Bunce, director of legal affairs at Abta, has urged for a comprehensive re-evaluation of the Package Travel Regulations (PTRs), advocating for a fresh approach.
As the UK redefines its regulatory frameworks post-Brexit, travel industry leaders are contemplating significant changes to better align with domestic needs.
The Need for Comprehensive Revision
The Abta legal chief, Simon Bunce, has called upon the Department for Business and Trade (DBT) to completely overhaul the Package Travel Regulations (PTRs). Speaking at a Travlaw event in London, he proposed that the department start with a clean slate, emphasising that leaving the European Union presents a unique opportunity to create regulations tailored specifically for the UK travel industry.
PTRs were initially created as a part of the broader Package Travel Directive, which Bunce describes as a compromise solution. With the evolving demands of the industry and the global travel landscape, Bunce argues that the current regulations are outdated and no longer serve the best interests of UK travel organisers.
Diverse Opinions Among Stakeholders
Not all stakeholders echo Bunce’s sentiments. Krystene Bousfield, a partner at Travlaw, suggests a less radical approach, advocating for simplification rather than a complete rewrite. She believes that while the regulations require adjustments, a fresh start may not be necessary.
Alistair Rowland, Blue Bay Travel’s chief executive and Abta’s chair, acknowledges issues within the current PTRs. Yet, he concedes that the risk allocation has increasingly burdened travel organisers, making them liable for unforeseen incidents during holidays.
Regulatory Review and Industry Reactions
The DBT has initiated a comprehensive review of PTRs, following a Call for Evidence in September 2023. The assessment of submissions is in progress as the department seeks stakeholder input for reform.
Craig Belshaw from the DBT conveyed in an Abta conference that there’s potential to draft entirely new legislation, underscoring the department’s open stance on regulatory reform. The collection of feedback aims to ensure that any legislative changes align with the industry’s needs.
The Atol Reform Conundrum
Bunce sees the delay in Atol reform as a chance to address the broader regulatory landscape. The reform’s initial postponement in mid-January has shifted timelines, offering a window to reassess strategic objectives.
Anthony Browne, the aviation minister, indicated that updates on Atol reform might be anticipated within the year. The anticipation of these updates keeps the industry stakeholders in a state of expectancy, hopeful for reforms that address their concerns.
Rowland reiterates the desire for a comprehensive reform outcome. The goal, as he emphasises, is not merely to reach the end of the reform process but to ensure that the adjustments made are beneficial in the long run.
Critiques and Opportunities in Reform
The hesitation to entirely overhaul PTRs stems partly from differing views on how best to redistribute risk between organisers and consumers. Bunce’s assertion that the current risk balance unfairly penalises organisers has garnered both support and contention within the industry.
The delay in Atol reform serves as a broader reflection of the complexities involved in regulatory modifications. However, it also presents an opportunity for stakeholders to voice their opinions and influence potential changes.
Many in the industry see the delay as a chance to strategically align PTR and Atol reforms, encouraging a unified approach to regulation that advances the UK travel sector.
Forward-Thinking Legislative Approaches
Revisiting travel legislation offers a chance to craft rules that better reflect the current travel environment. With global travel dynamics continuously evolving, there’s consensus that regulations should be adaptable.
The DBT’s willingness to consider new legislative frameworks could signify a progressive shift in travel regulation approaches. This openness to change resonates with industry stakeholders eager for policies that facilitate growth while safeguarding consumer interests.
The emphasis on beginning with a ‘blank sheet of paper,’ as per Bunce’s recommendation, highlights a desire for innovation in regulatory design, steering away from dated compromises.
Conclusion
In summary, the call for a PTR rewrite by Abta’s legal chief has sparked significant dialogue within the travel industry. While opinions vary, the shared objective remains: to create a regulatory framework that effectively balances the interests of both organisers and consumers, thereby strengthening the UK’s travel sector.
The conversation initiated by Abta highlights the complexities and opportunities in reimagining travel regulations for a dynamic industry.
With stakeholder input and government openness to reform, the UK travel sector stands at a crossroads of regulatory innovation.
