Category: Aviation

Brexit & Aviation 114

We are now in that strange no-man’s-land between Christmas and the New Year.  Often a time when people are gathering their reflections on the year that’s passing.  It’s a time to look ahead too.  Look ahead with hope and optimism, in so far as one can.

There’s a couple of news stories floating around primed to stir-up new political conflicts as we burst into 2020.  A “will they or won’t they?” series of speculations about the rules that the City of London may or may not have to follow post Brexit is running.  Similar speculations could be applied to transport but that’s not at the top of the agenda just now.  It seems crazy to state the obvious but leaving an organisation based on law will have legal consequences regardless of the sector.

Next year, talks will proceed along the lines of the Political Declaration that was drawn-up by the two parties, in October last.  That document is non-binding but does set the tone for what the UK and EU want or wanted at the time.  No doubt a red line for the EU27 Member States in the 2nd phase of the Brexit negotiations will be a level playing field[1].  As I’ve pointed out before, in aviation technical regulations and standards are just as important as tariffs.  In my last item, I poo pooed “no alignment” because my Mr Spock like logic says; no one aims for a lose-lose outcome.  Do they?

Today, some right-wing activists are shouting; let’s get back to gallons, ounces and yards.  Having won battles like the change of the British passport colour to blue[2], there’s a group that has been emboldened by Brexit.  All British passports issued from early 2020 will be blue.  National newspapers[3] print the cry; let’s have temperature reported in Fahrenheit and liquids in pints and fluid ounces.  All this might be easily dismissed but it is as well to remember that a whole lot of things have been dismissed and then they came to be.  Unfortunately, for us appeasing a populist political trend is part of the play book of the new UK Government.  On 31 January the Department for Exiting the European Union (DExEU) will come to an end.  The UK PM will next switch from phrases like: “Get Brexit Done” to “Taskforce Europe” to whitewash the fact that Brexit goes on and on.  At the same time the UK Parliament will become no more than a bystander in what’s to come.   

None of this retrograde thinking or smoke and mirrors is in the best interests of the Country.  We are at a time when digitisation is transforming the heart of aerospace manufacturing.  Aviation businesses are implementing significant changes to maximise opportunities in more integrated systems.  Being side-tracked into British imperial theme park romanticism will mean a declining marketplace.

These Brexit stories will be a part of the popular news in the year ahead but so will be the US Presidential race.  What happens in the US will have a global impact, especially if the incumbent is re-elected.  That will be in the foreground while EU – UK talks will be in the background until a crunch decision time comes.  There will be more than one of these crunch times throughout the year.  Expect a predicable line to be taken as the Conservatives tighten their grip on power.

[1] https://www.epc.eu/en/publications/Ensuring-a-post-Brexit-level-playing-field~26c1e0

[2] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/passport-design-changes/changes-to-the-design-of-british-passports

[3] https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/01/now-sovereign-nation-must-bring-back-imperial-units/

Brexit & Aviation 113

As we have found over the last 3-years and more, reports and reality are often far apart.  Being reported is that the British Prime Minster (PM) is saying that there will be “no alignment” with the European Union (EU) after Brexit is done[1].  Boosted by a UK Parliamentary majority this stark statement maybe no more than playing to the galleries.

However, political positions are hardening.  The UK Government has excluded an extension of the transition period and enshrine this in the Withdrawal Agreement Bill (WAB).  Many believe that this is not a good-faith implementation of the Withdrawal Agreement negotiated with the EU.

Now, the UK Parliament’s role in scrutinising any future relationship has been diminished.  So, if EU-UK negotiations go badly there’s no holding back the hard-core right-wingers who are unconcerned if the UK reverts to trading on only WTO terms.

So quickly to become bullish is a high-risk strategy. Having been at this process for so long it’s likely the EU will remain united and undaunted by the threat of a breakdown in talks.  Afterall, it deals with States that are bigger and more powerful than the UK.  So, maybe the UK PM is still primarily speaking to a domestic audience.  As the slogan “Get Brexit Done,” used by the Conservative Party in their 2019 General Election messaging fades into the background, the UK’s place in the world seems more vulnerable[2].

The aviation sector relies on long-term commitments to regulated markets.  Global investment is more likely with an assurance of stability and a sense of direction.  Contrary to right-wing political opinion good regulation benefits growth.  At the same time, it benefits sustainability as unprecedented climate change continue to escalate.

Thinking about how to achieve a close and constructive relationship with the EU is vital.  The practical downsides of Brexit is starting to become evident[3].  It could be that the political struggle for a Brexit is ending an initial stage.  Now, the daunting task to define Brexit is only just starting.

If anyone considers it’s easier for the UK to pivot towards the United States rather than the EU they are in for a shock.  Federal law governing international aviation less flexible and more complex than EU law whatever some may wish you to think.  Reality will bite quickly and not to the advantage of the UK.

There will be people thinking about these challenges over Christmas and the New Year.  Most of us will be happy not to hear a Brexit word or a three-letter abbreviation for a couple of weeks.  2019 will not be missed.  It’s quite enough to know that 2020 will be full of breaking news and tantrums about the ups and downs of this continuing saga.

[1] https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/12/20/boris-johnson-insists-will-no-alignment-eu-brexit/

[2] https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/getting-brexit-done-brings-defense-challenges

[3] https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/uk-news/huge-changes-british-holidaymakers-flying-17440064

Brexit & Aviation 112

It has been reported that the British Prime Minister will put his Brexit bill before MPs on Friday, 20 December.   Before the UK General Election (GE), the Withdrawal Agreement Bill (WAB) passed a vote on the floor of the House of Commons (HoC) by 329 votes to 299 votes.  However, the Prime Minister then withdrew the WAB.  Now, with an overall majority in the UK Parliament, the WAB should make progress and pass into UK law before the UK leaves the European Union (EU) on 31 January 2020.

The appointment of the HoC Speaker takes place on Tuesday, 17 December.  The HoC must choose its Speaker after the GE, and this is the first thing it does on the first day it meets after the GE.  Then there’s the State opening of Parliament on is Thursday, 19 December.

EU leaders have expressed hope that the decisive UK GE victory last week will bring more clarity to the UK’s position in coming negotiations.  Meanwhile the EU has changed.  Ursula von der Leyen is in post as the first woman President of the European Commission.  The European Parliament (EP) 16 – 19 December session in Strasbourg has just kicked-off.

I assume that the 73 British MEPs elected will need to give up their seats in the European Parliament (EP).  The current composition (751 MEPs) of the EP continues to apply for as long as the UK is an EU Member State.  A new composition of the EP will apply at the date of the withdrawal of the UK (from 751 to down to 705 MEPs).

The EU Council presidency of held by Finland comes to an end as we end the year.  Next in line is Croatia: January-June 2020 and then Germany: July-December 2020.  Recently the European Commission has said that Europe must unblock Single European Sky (SES) under the leadership of the Croatian and German Presidencies.   This is strongly in the interest of the UK, but the UK will no longer be around the table in 2020.  Making SES work means reduced flying times and using less fuel.  Environmental imperatives.

Back in September this year, the UK Government and UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) expressed the view[1] that remaining a member of the EU Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) was a shared goal.  If the new UK Government and EU decide that this cannot be achieved, then much work will need to be undertaken.

On passage of the WAB into UK law, there will then be a transition period to undertake EU-UK negotiations, based on the Revised Political Declaration[1].   This document is very light on aviation matters.  The Government wants negotiations done by the end of 2020 and the deal in force at the start of 2021.  This is exceptionally speedy given the change of political climate and the vagueness of existing commitments.

[1] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/publications/revised-political-declaration_en

[1] CAP1714: The CAA’s guide to Brexit No Deal & Aviation Safety

Brexit & Aviation 111

And so, it begins.  It’s December Friday 13th.  The winter election is over.  The results of the UK General Election (GE) are with us[1].   The election victory for the UK Conservative Party is complete.  Their leader, Boris Johnson will continue as UK Prime Minister with an overall majority in the UK Parliament.

It’s almost certain that the Parliamentary scrutiny of the previously tabled Withdrawal Agreement Bill (WAB) will now be a cursory matter as it’s pushed through at speed.  The UK’s membership of the European Union (EU) will come to an end.  Next year will be one that breaks ties that have linked continental Europe and the UK since my childhood.  Even now it’s not entirely clear what that will mean to either party.

Newly elected Conservative Members of Parliament (MPs) are committed to Brexit.  That said, amongst them there’s a great number of different views as to the direction that should be taken post-Brexit.  Deciding the future EU-UK relationship with respect to aviation is a matter for the UK Government in its future negotiations with the EU.  At this stage it’s not clear what path that negotiation will take.

A cabinet reshuffle may take place on next Monday.  There are no signs that this will include Transport.  Transport related polices are not so evident from the Conservative’s election manifesto.  There’s some mention of efforts to boost productivity and innovation.  Also, investment in skills and training get a few lines.

UK MPs will return to the House of Commons (HoC) on Tuesday, 17 December.  Then the following Thursday is likely to see a new Queen’s Speech where the UK Government’s sets out its legislative agenda.  Britain is due to leave the EU on 31 January, the 4th deadline since the 2016 referendum.  It’s certain that January will be dominated by the legislative work to pass the WAB.

However, this is not Brexit “done”.  If the WAB passes, the UK will enter a transition phase where its relationship with the EU will, in practice remain unchanged until 31 December 2020.  In many ways the real work is just beginning.

[1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50765773

Brexit & Aviation 110

If it happens, leaving the European Union (EU) does not mean that the UK will not have a vital relationship with the organisation in the future.  Sorry about the double negative.  The simple indisputable facts of geography, cultural heritage, shared history, political experience and social bonds mean that a closeness exists that goes way beyond relationships with other places.

Unravelling the UK’s EU membership is only at its beginning and yet it’s proving to be painful and tortuous.  Just now, there’s the possibility of another extension to the initial part of the process.  This possess more choices for Prime Minister Johnson as he twists and turns on the Brexit spit.

There’s hammering on and attempting to leave the EU on 31 October with “No Deal” and then blaming all and sundry.   Genuine short-term thinking in the extreme.  There’s continuing with the detailed Parliamentary scrutiny of the Withdrawal Agreement Bill (WAB) in the hope that it will not take long or be too mean a radical reshaping of the deal.

Finally, there’s stopping the WAB’s scrutiny process with the aim of provoking a UK General Election (GE) and making Christmas 2019 one no none will want to remember.  As in 2017, with the faint hope that one political Party or another will rule the roost as we go into the New Year.

This weekend, the indications are that the last option is taking shape.  Monday may bring a “yes” or “no” to the prospect of a winter election.  Certainly, winter is coming.

When UK Ministers talk of the fantastic opportunities there are for new free trade deals all over the world there’s a tendency to forget aviation and the aerospace industries.  By its nature aviation is a global business.  Within that mobility is nothing new.  Go to Seattle or Toulouse and there’s many Brits who have made their home in those cities.

The term: “Brain Drain” was prevalent throughout my early education[1].  It was when highly qualified British engineers and scientists were attracted to leave the UK to work on exciting well-funded projects and for better prospects in other Countries.  Even in the early 1980s, when I graduated as a young engineer many of my colleagues left these shores and didn’t return.

If it happens, I’d dearly love to be optimistic about post-Brexit prospects in the UK, but the signs are not good.  Amongst politicians and public alike, not only is there an endemic backward-looking nostalgia but also a lack of realism about the nature of the international cooperation needed to succeed in the future.

Today, the economic situation is different from the 1970s, but the weaknesses of that time like; low productivity, short-termism and the lack of a common vision remain with us.  Brexit is the wrong medicine for our ailments.

[1] http://doc.ukdataservice.ac.uk/doc/6099/mrdoc/pdf/6099uguide.pdf

Brexit & Aviation 109

Preposterous isn’t a big enough word to sum up what’s going on in respect of the UK Government’s approach to the UK Parliament.   Having entirely messed-up during the special session on Saturday last, the UK Prime Minister (PM) has tried to ask the same question again of the House of Commons (HoC) and been sent packing.  Therefore, it stands that the HoC has not approved the Withdrawal Agreement (WA) and has called for the PM to secure an extension under Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union until at least 31 January 2020 for the purpose of holding an early General Election (GE) before the end of the extension period.   Will this happen?  We have yet to see.

In conversation, I find that even amongst those who avidly follow the progress of Brexit there’s an incorrect notion.   It’s that the WA represents a deal between the EU and UK that defines their future relationship.  That’s not so.  The WA can be described as a divorce settlement and thus needs to be binding.  That said, the accompanying document, titled Political Declaration (PD), setting out the framework for the future relationship between the EU and the UK is not binding.  The PD is essentially a starting point for the next even more complex and difficult negotiation.

Rushing these historic and complex texts through the legislative process is causing concern.  There has been more than 3-years of ups and downs and backwards and forwards, but the final legal text has only just been put in front of Members of Parliament.  The European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill is not an easy read.

Industry continues to highlight the importance of avoiding a No Deal Brexit, but there’s some relief that the text on regulatory cooperation on aviation safety is positive[1].  The text is vague about close cooperation between the EU’s EASA and the UK’s Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) but at least they are both explicitly mentioned.

Today, high standards of aviation safety are achieved by having common standards and sharing technical expertise and experience.  As the two parties separate there’s a considerable need to keep a close eye on new arrangements and any tendency to diverge for political reasons and not technical ones.  Cooperation doesn’t just happen ad-hoc.  It requires a dedicated effort and active mechanisms to make it work.  Confidence building initiatives take time when different means are used to get to the same outcome.

[1] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/publications/revised-political-declaration_en

Brexit & Aviation 108

After a day of drama, Britain awakes this Sunday with no clear view of what happens next.  The clock keeps ticking and, if deadlines mean anything, then the next one is 11 days away.

It’s true that under no circumstances was disentangling the UK from a 40 years relationship with the European Union (EU) going to be easy.  Are we heading towards a new postponement?  It seems highly likely regardless of the UK Prime Minister’s (PM) latest letter[1].  It seems that PM Johnson is taking advice from P G Wodehouse: “It is a good rule in life never to apologise. The right sort of people do not want apologies, and the wrong sort take a mean advantage of them.”  We could argue about who’s right and who’s wrong but let’s look at what’s on the table instead.

One of the biggest changes that is evident in the new Withdrawal Agreement (WA) concerns the “level playing field”.  That is that the binding commitments for the UK to maintain minimum standards in the areas of social and environmental policy, tax, competition and State aid have been removed from the WA.  The detailed discussion has been put off to the post-Brexit EU-UK negotiating phases.  A closer future relationship means more obligations and a looser relationship means less and this will be linked to the level of market access.   A framework for the future relationship is set out in a new Political Declaration[2].

Looking at the House of Common (HoC) business for Monday, 21 October 2019, several motions for approval of Statutory Instruments (SIs) are to be agreed.  The reality for Brexit is that much existing European regulation is being incorporated in UK law[3].  Many of the proposed changes are to align the text with the appropriate UK institutions as opposed to the European ones.

Therefore, whatever future changes there may be to the “level playing field” and this applies to aviation as much as anything, at least initially both EU and UK will be pretty much aligned.  The political direction post-Brexit will greatly depend on the outcome of a pending UK General Election (GE).  That must come given that the UK Government trying to do all this has no majority in the UK Parliament and a record of loosing votes.

We are in a fast-moving and unpredictable environment.  It’s a good idea not to make too many knee-jerk reactions or draw too many conclusions.  PM Johnson has, in a half-hearted manner applied for an extension to the Thursday, 31 October 2019 end date.  We will soon see if this is granted by all the parties involved.  Ongoing political and economic uncertainty may yet signal the end of the Brexit project.  The genuine technical reality of the benefits of working together for the common good in Europe remains.

[1]https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/840660/PM_to_Donald_Tusk_19_October_2019.pdf

[2] Political Declaration setting out the framework for the future relationship between the European Union and the United Kingdom;

[3] https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201920/cmagenda/ob191021.htm#_idTextAnchor005

Brexit & Aviation 107

Remarkable as it may seem we are just 18 days to UK Prime Minister Johnson’s artificial Brexit deadline of 31st October 2019[1].  Whatever happens next, we know relative to the UK’s current EU Membership, Johnson’s proposals are substantially negative[2].

We know the opinion polls are showing that the British public has turned against Brexit.  Brexit means bureaucracy, debt, less choice, loss of influence and perpetual turmoil.  Why on earth would anyone still want it?  Even those who might want it are likely to say they don’t want what’s on offer.  For example, the DUP in Northern Ireland has already rejected the notion of a “double customs” solution[3].

Next weekend, hundreds of thousands of people will take to the streets to demand a People’s Vote in what will be one of the largest protests in British history.  There’s still someway to go before this matter is settled.  Clearly, the European Union (EU) wants to avoid a disorderly Brexit and establish as close a future relationship as possible with the UK.  I hope that that wish is reciprocated.

In aviation, about 1 in 10 UK pilots think Brexit is positive[4].  I don’t know if cabin crew, air traffic controllers or engineers have been surveyed on the same subject.  That said, I’d be surprised if the result was different for any of the aviation professions.

Civil aviation has a well-established system for reporting what happened when things go wrong.  There’s a mature system under REGULATION (EU) No 376/2014[5] that states the rights and responsibilities of people in the European aviation system.  This is a way of sharing aviation safety information between authorities in the EU.

It’s vital.  Let’s say an aircraft has an undercarriage failure in Spain.  Then weeks later a similar type of aircraft has a similar failure in Finland.  It’s vital to join the dots to ensure the authorities fully understand what’s going on in day-to-day operations.  Much of this safety information is shared via the European Central Repository (ECR) called into being by EU legislation.  As a non-EU State and not being a member of EASA, the UK will lose direct access to the ECR[6].  Yes, information can be requested from the ECR through a written procedure but that’s no substitute to having direct access to the database.  I expect this is one of the many important issues associated with data sharing that are just waiting to pop out of Brexit.

[1] https://interactive.news.sky.com/2017/brexit-countdown/

[2] https://ukandeu.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/The-economic-impact-of-Boris-Johnsons-Brexit-proposals.pdf

[3]https://www.repubblica.it/esteri/2019/10/12/news/dup_s_nigel_dodds_rejects_double_customs_brexit_solution_it_cannot_work_-238366257/?refresh_ce

[4] https://www.balpa.org/Media-Centre/Press-Releases/Only-one-in-ten-pilots-think-Brexit-will-be-positi

[5] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:JOL_2014_122_R_0002&rid=24

[6] https://info.caa.co.uk/brexit/ocurrence-reporting/

Brexit & Aviation 106

I’m waiting for the headline: The European Union (EU) has agreed to extend #Article50 a third time.  This could delay any possible #Brexit until June 2020.  Now, that sounds a lot saner than jumping off a cliff edge.  Especially if Britain and Ireland say they can bridge the gap between their two positions.  The Pound Sterling shot up as the markets took stock of the News that Prime Minister Johnson may not want to force us out of the EU on October 31st with No Deal.   Nevertheless, there’s a hell of a lot of people who remain with no trust in this administration.  The cold hard reality is that agreeing with Ireland most likely means the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP)[1] will be very unhappy.  Then the prospect of getting any deal through the UK Parliament gets even harder.

Amongst the latest news from Ireland is a series of Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)[2] on Brexit from the Irish Aviation Authority (IAA).  Post Brexit Ireland realises that it will need to develop new trade routes, especially those of air transport.

In the UK a “No-Deal Readiness Report” has just been released[3].  The part of the Government document on UK airlines highlights that Brexit means more bureaucracy and not less as some people may have claimed:

  • UK airlines operating to and from the EU will need to obtain a Part-TCO safety authorisation from the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) and an operating permit from each relevant Member State. The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) website provides extensive and detailed information on the actions that airlines need to take on its website.
  • UK aviation personnel involved in the operation and maintenance of aircraft (pilots, cabin crew, engineers and air traffic controllers) will need to ensure they have obtained the relevant licences and safety authorisations from the CAA and EASA. The CAA website provides extensive and detailed information for the action that personnel and UK airlines need to take.
  • EU airlines will need to apply for an operating permit from the CAA, their website provides extensive and detailed information on the actions that EU airlines need to take.

Further on the document is quite clear that UK regulatory bodies will no longer be able to license products for the EU market.  UK regulators will take on regulatory functions currently carried out by EU regulatory bodies, like the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) in Cologne.  Further on in section E, the document talks about Aerospace goods.  It doesn’t make pleasant reading.  If the UK leaves without a deal, the EASA will no longer automatically recognise aviation safety certificates and approvals issued by the UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA).

Aerospace companies continue to warn of “serious risk” in current plan, as the UK Government fails to reassure them about participation in EU agencies.   It might be nice to think that the UK will continue to be a global aviation leader but in this new situation it will be in competition with its former partners.  I suppose few who voted in 2016 realised any of this would be an outcome in 2020.

[1] The Democratic Unionist Party is a unionist political party in Northern Ireland favouring British identity

[2] https://www.iaa.ie/news/2019/10/02/iaa-publishes-brexit-faqs

[3] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/no-deal-readiness-report

Brexit & Aviation 105

The title of this Government’s Brexit proposals could be called: I’m Sorry I Haven’t A Clue.  But that title has been taken by a long-running BBC Radio comedy series.  And I do mean long-running.  The last series was number 71.  If you listen to this clip of “The Uxbridge Dictionary[1]” it might mask the Brexit murk for a minute or two.  By the way, Uxbridge is the Parliamentary Constituency of the Prime Minister.

Here’s a point to clarify.  I keep seeing references to the global aviation regulator ICAO.

Now, as I have mentioned before, ICAO is the International Civil Aviation Organisation.  It’s the organisations 75th birthday this year and that’s good reason to celebrate.  It brings together 193 of the world’s States.  However, ICAO is not a “regulator”.  It does not issue approvals, licences or certificates.  It does not have enforcement powers, like a CAA.  I was going to say that it does not investigate aviation accidents but, I believe it has in one or two special cases.

A key technical role of ICAO is to set Standards and Recommended Practices.  From that the States develop their own framework of legislation that empowers their organisations, sometimes called Agencies or Authorities or Administrations or Directorates to do the regulatory work.

It must be like this given that there’s a great range of different legal systems across the globe.  In fact, those who created ICAO recognised this reality from day one and it’s enshrined in the Convention on International Civil Aviation, also known as the Chicago Convention[2].   The Convention is explicit about the complete and exclusive sovereignty of contracting States.  Although as I learned last week there’s one or two exceptions to this exclusivity.

The European Union (EU) is recognised as a regional organisation at ICAO.  Nevertheless, each European State has, or shares a delegation at ICAO’s HQ in Montreal.   When it comes to making policy for international civil aviation the EU Member States work together.  Coordination is vital to make an impact inside a multinational and multicultural organisation like ICAO.

Yet, its unclear how Brexit will change this arrangement, or if it will change at all.  The opportunity to work together on common interests is always possible.  On issues, like climate change it’s highly likely that Europe and the US will have more in common than say; China, India and Russia.

Where difficulties are more likely are when technical standards in Europe and the US differ.  Then the possibility of competition to set international standards might present awkward choices.

[1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p00vm9vk

[2] https://www.icao.int/publications/pages/doc7300.aspx