Tag: Aviation

Brexit & Aviation 78

The political cartoonists are having a field day.  Brexit is giving them so much ammunition.  There’s never been a more fertile time for creative portraits of the ridiculous antics of politicians.  Every metaphor you can think of has been tried at least once.  For me a picture of headless chickens just about sums it up.  UK MPs have had the chance to identifying a way forward but keep coming back to stalemate.

Unfortunately, that leaves the worst-case scenarios still on the table in law.  The worst-case being a No-Deal Brexit outcome.  Study after study[1][2] shows that a No-Deal Brexit threatens to put the aviation and aerospace sector at a significant competitive disadvantage in the UK.  Failure to secure a sound Brexit deal that maintains a good strategic partnership will cause significant supply chain and investment problems.  We must remember that an aircraft may have over 4 million parts. These components come from all over the world to be integrated into a product.

Although some politicians remain in denial this should not come as any surprise.  For one, the EU’s Single Market has over 500 million customers and an economy over 5-times bigger than the UK’s.  Before 2016, the Single Market was often championed by the UK because it made it easier and cheaper for UK companies to sell their products.  Now, we are in the Brexit Twilight Zone[3] there’s a pretence that these facts don’t matter.

In a sad way, it’s ironic that many voted for Brexit and leaving the EU in June 2016 with a view to protecting their jobs in fear of globalisation.  Now, UK jobs will be lost as it’s clear that the civil aviation and aerospace sector is entrenched in the EU.  Miltary spending alone can not support the thriving sector we have come to take for granted.

In a recent statement, the European Commission said: “A No-Deal scenario on 12 April is now a likely scenario”.   A “disorderly” Brexit by accident is still avoidable but it may mean a UK General Election or a further referendum, and if there was a long extension, there maybe participation in the 2019 European elections due to take place between 23-26 May 2019.  Since there’s still no coherent strategy coming from the UK Government, I suspect a long extension is inevitable.  The possiblity of a so called #flextension is already built-in to the existing treaty.  This could be agreed until say; 31 December 2019.   Such an extension could be shortened only if both sides agree.  That would be time enough to work up a coherent strategy with a workable majority in the UK Parliament.   

Update: Now the UK Prime Minister is seeking a further extension from the EU to delay Brexit until 30 June 2019.  So, that’s the starting position with an aim to try to aviod European elections being needed in the UK.  

[1] https://eandt.theiet.org/content/articles/2019/01/no-deal-brexit-threatens-future-of-uk-aerospace-industry-report-warns/

[2] http://www.imeche.org/docs/default-source/1-oscar/reports-policy-statements-and-documents/imeche-brexit-and-aerospace-report-final.pdf?sfvrsn=2

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nightmare_at_20,000_Feet

 

Brexit & Aviation 77

The original Brexit transition date has gone by.  Am I comfortable writing this on 1st April?  Well it’s past lunchtime so it would now be bad form to make a joke about the whole debacle.

It’s another day of UK Parliamentary “indicative” votes or should I say evening?  We might imagine a compromise be sought and happiness reigns.  However, every time I hear a UK politician talk about compromise, they usually mean others coming around to their point of view.  The outcome of the “indicative” votes held by the House of Commons (HoC) on 27th March were received with disappointment but at least they were an attempt to move forward.   Regarding the future course of the Brexit the, UK Parliament is deeply divided on the big decisions, but voting patterns are starting to emerge.

Clearly, the international money markets think that a “soft” Brexit is the flavour of the day.  UK’s currency hasn’t ducked and dived too much for a while.  On the table is the proposal to remain in a Customs Union (CU) with the EU Member States.  This doesn’t explicitly touch on civil aviation although it does concern the movement of goods and services.  Implicit in this arrangement is close cooperation and collaborative working.  So, it’s conceivable that might extend to such possibilities as participation in European Agencies.

Whilst compromise and consensus are desirable and nice to talk about, the tone of the continuing public debate isn’t getting any calmer.  The BBC News Reality Check[1] team just published a reasonably worded assessment called “Brexit: Will flights be disrupted?”.  Reading some of the comments to this item posted on Social Media indicates that we have a long way to go.  The more polite ones are along these lines: I can’t believe people really think this is an issue, we few our planes before the EU and media starts scaremongering just before the Easter holidays.  The knee-jerk reactions of vocal Brexit supporters are to deem anything that paints their project in a negative light as: bias and scaremongering, regardless of its veracity.

There’s a tendency to ignore the fact that the single market in aviation has transformed flying for British air travellers.  There’s greater choice and competition and new routes across Europe and beyond.   It’s impossible to go back to the 1970s.  And who would want to go back to a State controlled industry without much concern for passengers?  Ignoring the reality that the EU has delivered is twisted and downright foolish.  After nearly 3-years no one knows what Brexit is or will become.  It’s a truly shocking situation.

[1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47225806

Brexit & Aviation 76

History gives us a context within which to set current events.  Rooting through some boxes, I came across a copy a UK CAA Safety Regulation Group in-house publication called “Aviation Standard” dated March 1991.  I kept it because it had a picture of me as a newly joined young airworthiness surveyor.  At the time the aviation industry was suffering the effects of recession and the Gulf War.  Pressure was on to keep fees and charges low but not to let up on essential safety activities.

What’s interesting is that 28 years ago the news was that the Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA) Headquarters was to move from London Gatwick to Hoofddorp, near Amsterdam Schiphol.  The 18 JAA Countries had decided to move from sharing office space with the UK CAA at London Gatwick to a new building in the Netherlands.

The staff newspaper had a large page describing the work of the CAA’s Systems and Equipment Department.  At that time, the department that I joined had 22 specialist design surveyors and supporting admin staff.  There were 5 technical specialist sections, addressing hydromechanical, cabin safety and environmental systems, power plant installation and fuel systems, and electrical and avionics.   This department covered all types of aircraft large and small, helicopters, airships and even hovercraft.

Contrary to the belief of some people, The UK has played a major part in shaping how aviation safety regulation developed in Europe.  What we have is as the result of concerted efforts over more than a generation.  It saddens me greatly to think that we are in the process of trying to dismantle that achievement.  An achievement that is recognised worldwide.

Back to the current challenge of Brexit and how it’s being exacerbated by political indecision and pure folly.  New Aviation Safety legislation has passed into European law ready to come into force if there’s a No-Deal Brexit.   The effects of this law are to create a breathing space so that companies can re-establish the approvals they need to operate.

Also, a new UK Aviation Safety Statutory Instrument (SI) was passed by both the House of Commons and the House of Lords and published as UK law.

The UK industry group; ADS has published a useful summary that is available on their website[1].  No doubt this will be updated as we discover if the planned leaving date of either 12 April 2019 or 22 May 2019 is to happen, or Brexit gets cancelled or delayed again.  Whatever UK Parliamentarian do it doesn’t seem the No-Deal Brexit outcome has yet been killed off for sure.

[1] https://www.adsgroup.org.uk/blog/no-deal-brexit-and-the-state-of-preparatory-aviation-safety-legislation/

 

Brexit & Aviation 74

It’s a good question to ask.  Will cooperation, coordination and convergence end with Brexit?[1]

An instant answer might spring to mind dependent upon your position with respect to Brexit.  Rather let’s look at the subject in more depth.  In my experience aviation safety regulation operates on 3-levels.  Each level is essential even though, from time to time, one may think itself superior to another.   Between the 3-levels there are dependencies.

  • One is political. No surprise.  Lawmakers are responsible for the high-level policy and the framework of law necessary to make regulation possible.
  • Another level is administrative. As is often said: the devil is in the detail.  Well crafted laws need to be drafted by creative people who know enough about both legislative and technical matters.
  • Of my 3-levels, the last one I mention, but it could have been the first, is the technical Without technically competent expertise the whole enterprise can be built on sand.

So, when asking what could happen to cooperation, coordination and convergence, I must address all 3.  There’s some freedom of movement but all the above need to comply with the standards set down internationally by ICAO.

In the event of a No Deal Brexit outcome the prospect of major disruption is real and should not be underestimated.  To my 3-levels there will be a shock to the system.  At the political level mutual trust will have to be re-established.  At the administrative level new processes or procedures maybe put in place.  At the technical level it’s less clear what new working arrangements may be needed.

Whatever happens with Brexit the laws of aerodynamics will not change.  The factors that cause accidents will not change either.   And airworthiness directives will continue to be issued.

Making a regulatory system work efficiently and effectively doesn’t happen overnight.  Prolonged efforts must be applied and sustained.  One or two big events can upset priorities very quickly.

Back to Brexit. Whatever those who sold the separation may have said, Brexit is sowing the seeds of disharmony.  Once the decoupling of plans has started so the drivers for action change too.

No surprise but this is significant in respect of the UK.  Historically, in the drafting of law and associated instruments (advice, guidance, notices and so on) there’s a tendency to reserve some arbitrary powers for those implementing the text[1].  EU law tends to be structured in a hierarchical manner with high-level objectives at the top and considerable detail at the lower levels.

In the last 25 years of European aviation regulatory harmonisation these two approaches have been blended.  When it works, people get the best of both worlds.  Unfortunately, Brexit is a divergence that has lack of certainly at its heart.  Several free marketers see a more arbitrary approach as a way of getting around the public interest whenever it suits them to do so.  Thus, cooperation, coordination and convergence between the EU and UK may not end with a big bang but a slow drift.

[1] In the early 90s, for applicants for approval, the need to “satisfy” a UK CAA Surveyor in the interpretation of notices and requirements was often wide ranging.

[1] https://www.mro-network.com/maintenance-repair-overhaul/

 

Brexit & Aviation 73

Reading the arguments made by those most enthusiastic supporters of the UK’s Brexit, even at this moment of acute crisis, they paint a picture of a so called: “managed No-Deal Brexit”.  There’s an illusion that somehow the fragile contingency measure put in place to temporarily mitigate some the worst damage caused a No-Deal outcome makes everything OK.  I call them fragile because none of the measure or guidance put in place has been tested or even been evaluated in terms of costs and benefits or been subject to much independent scrutiny.

The House of Commons libary reports that the UK is a party to some 800 international agreements negotiated by the EU.  That’s a complex and detailed framework established over many decades.  The UK Government will need to replace them if Brexit is to take place.   As has been referred to in this Blog, there are a significant number of aviation agreements to address given the international nature of the business.

One example is that; as a result of Brexit, the UK will cease to be a part of the European Common Aviation Area (ECAA).  Yes, some contingency measures are drafted to mitigate potential damage to air travel between the EU and UK, but they hardly substitute for the existing agreement.  Less is less for the UK.

Under current aviation rules, the EU’s Open Skies Agreement allows member airlines, including those registered in the UK, to operate in each other’s countries.​  As an airline, if you want to benefit from the existing Open Skies agreement post-Brexit, you must be majority EU owned[1].  Less is less for the UK.

In the field of aircraft maintenance, repair and overhaul, British licenced engineers will be losing some of the privileges that they now enjoy.  Individuals may find a way round this by holding multiple licences but at their own expense, in their own time and with less flexibility.

The issues surrounding the recent civil air accidents, highlight the importance of getting aircraft certification right first time and fixing problems quickly.  In Europe, aircraft design and production organisations are required to hold approvals.  These European approvals are much valued and well recognised.  There’s no safety benefit in being required to hold multiple approvals from regulators both in the EU and in the UK.  This is just turning the clock back for the sake of it.

This week, much has changed but much has remained the same.  An extension to the Article 50 process does give the UK Government a little breathing space.  A letter, a formal instrument of the Article 50 extension, has been sent after UK Prime Minister May agreed with the EU.  That has activated Paragraph 3 of the Article 50.

Will UK Politicians come to a rational compromise?  That’s anyone’s guess.  The consequences of No-Deal are huge and shouldn’t be discounted.  The cost of the EU membership is small when compared with the cost of Brexit.  UK Politicains need to honestly say: Brexit will make you poorer, do you still want it?

Surely, there’s going to be a lot of updates to air law in the coming months[2].

[1] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/comment/ryanair-brexit-uk-shareholders-airline-ownership-eu-airline-rules-no-deal-cliff-edge-a8817391.html

[2] https://www.aerosociety.com/events-calendar/brexit-what-now-for-aviation

 

Brexit & Aviation 72

Last week, new implementing procedures agreed under a Bilateral Air Safety Agreement (BASA)[1] between the UK and US, were discussed with the aerospace and aviation industry at the Embassy of the United States in London[2].

In the event of a No-Deal Brexit the UK would not be able to continue to participate in the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) regulatory system.  However, the UK is saying that design validation processes will be “similar” to those implemented under the existing EU-US bilateral agreement.   Also, there will be continued acceptance by the UK and US of each other’s aviation maintenance approvals.

The UK is working on other bilateral safety arrangements with the aviation authorities in Canada and Brazil.  These are the major aircraft manufacturing countries that have a long history of cooperation on aircraft certification and maintenance.  The international Maintenance and Certification Management Teams (MMT/CMT), both of which consist of representatives from the National Civil Aviation Agency of Brazil (ANAC), EASA, the US FAA and Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), are taking steps to mutually recognise each others approved organisations.

The UK Government has published updated guidance for the aerospace sector and is preparing for EU Exit[3].  Clearly more import-export agents are going to be needed in the coming years.  Everyone is preparing for the commercial impacts on all the sectors of the aviation industry.   The political and economic uncertainty continues to be unsettling.

Despite all the preparations that have been made, the EU’s European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) has warned that a No-Deal Brexit could “jeopardise” aviation safety standards[4].  That said, current No-Deal Brexit proposals are just temporary solutions.  Only a comprehensive EU-UK agreement will ensure the seamless air connectivity air travelers have come to expect.

 

[1] https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/uk-and-usa-sign-safety-accord-to-apply-in-event-of-n-456652/

[2] https://www.caa.co.uk/News/UK-signs-post-EU-exit-air-safety-agreements-with-USA/

[3] https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-aerospace-sector-and-preparing-for-eu-exit?

[4] https://www.theparliamentmagazine.eu/articles/news/no-deal-brexit-could-‘jeopardise’-eu-aviation-safety-standards

Brexit & Aviation 71

I have an admiration for the staff at the House of Commons library.  At least someone is trying to keep track of what’s going on[1].

So far, there have been 475 Brexit related Statutory Instruments (SIs) laid before the UK Parliament.  That’s 79% of the expected 600 SIs. In other words, a great deal of new UK legislation that needs to be in place the day after Brexit.  What’s astonishing is that we hear nothing from our law-makers about these acts of law-making.  The total focus is on the uncertainly over the direction that will be taken by the UK.  There are statements that Brexit is “deadlocked” but there remain many choices that can be made.  However, unless something is agreed exiting European Union (EU) treaties will, by automatic process of law, cease to apply to the UK in 18 day[2].

This situation impacts treaties with non-EU Countries too.  A House of Commons library paper looks at the UK Government’s progress in renegotiating and agreeing replacement treaties with Countries outside of the EU[3].

The UK Government has published a policy on EU Air Services[4].  Unfortunately, there’s little new in the policy and it’s substantially worse than the current arrangements.  Airlines are enacting their contingency measures, but much remains unknown.   For example; Ryanair[5] have said:

“We welcome the Civil Aviation Authority’s decision to grant our UK based airline, Ryanair UK, with a UK AOC, allowing Ryanair to operate UK domestic routes and UK to non-EU routes in a post-Brexit environment.

The risk of a ‘no deal’ Brexit in March is rising, and despite our robust post-Brexit structures, including our post-Brexit plan around European ownership, we continue to call for the UK and EU to agree a transition deal from 31 March 2019, so that any disruption to flights and British consumer summer holidays in 2019 can be avoided.”

The robust post-Brexit structure they are talking about is to change the voting rights of British shareholders such that the rules of being a European airline can be met.

For travellers who contemplate booking holidays or flights to, from or via the UK it may be prudent to wait for a few days.   Certainly, there’s a need to take out travel insurance that can cover a flight cancellation as a result of Brexit.  The insurance sector maybe one that will be benefiting from the increase in uncertainty but that’s their job.

[1] http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-8370/CBP-8370.pdf

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

[3] https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CBP-8370

[4] https://www.gov.uk/guidance/air-services-from-the-eu-to-the-uk-in-the-event-of-no-deal

[5] https://corporate.ryanair.com/news/ryanair-welcomes-caas-issuing-of-uk-aoc-for-ryanair-uk/

 

Brexit & Aviation 70

I wrote the first of my Brexit & Aviation series a year ago.  Now, this is the 70th one.  A year ago, there did seem to be some form of honest negotiations going on.  Commentary often considered and reasoned over the pros and cons of different approaches to Brexit.  When I said: “Brexit is going to complicate aviation in Europe.” I didn’t realise the level of understatement those words entailed.   Complexity is one aspect of the problem.  It’s the confusion of not having a sense of direction that doubles the troubles.  It’s the legs that fake news strories get that is concerning.

“It has been quite shocking to get so far in the political process without having any real clarity about the future. That can’t be positive for the economy.”  That’s not my writting but that’s the words of Willie Walsh Chief Executive Officer IAG in their Annual Report.

Last year, the possibility that the UK would retain membership of the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) was real.  Now, bit-by-bit this possibility is waning as a predominantly anti-European tone has been set by the current UK Government.  The implications of Third Country status are being played out as preparations continue for a No-Deal Brexit outcome.  Industry is taking measures[1], and planning more, to insulate itself from the hard-line taken by Conservative politicians.  Large costs are being incurred and it isn’t going to be long before those cost get passed on to the paying passenger.  Although strangely there are some bargains offered for flights and holiday packages because prices factor in an incentive to overcome the caution and level of uncertainty people feel.

A year ago, I did say: “There’s a chance of reaching Brexit day with no clear vision of the future”.  My crystal ball must have been working overtime that day.  Lawmakers are not doing their job.  In normal times there’s a rigorous sequence that is followed that tests legislation before it hits the statute book.  The extream brinkmanship of the last year leaves the UK with a huge to-do-list and no time to practically test new legislation before it’s enforced.

There was an expectation that Bilateral Aviation Safety Agreements (BASAs) would be signed between the UK and others.  This would be used to detail the cooperation between the UK and others, including any mutual acceptance of certificates.  Unless I am mistaken, there isn’t much signed between anyone at this moment time.

A great deal of the difficulties that the UK faces are associated with the “red lines” that have been the policy for the UK Government.  These have tied the hands of all those involved in negotiations to such an extent that an impasse was inevitable.  UK Brexit advocates dismissed talk of duplication of activities and costs with no tangible benefits.  Nevertheless, that is the position the UK finds itself in.

Next week, if an Agreement is accepted the UK will have until 31 December 2020 to solve the thorny issues of international aviation.  During that time that UK will have many of the obligations of an EU Member State but no so many rights.   If an Agreement is not accepted then it’s back to the drawing board – again!  The prospect that Brexit will fail is becoming real.  Maybe that’s why the £ has gained value.

I think, the UK House of Commons is likly to reject Prime Minister May’s Deal next Tuesday.  Then on Wednesday it’s likly to reject a No-Deal outcome to Brexit.  An impass in the UK Parliament should then trigger a return to the people of Britain.  With so little time remaining on the clock an extended Article 50 period seems certain.  If I’m wrong in these predictions then I’m still no worse a sage than UK Ministers and MPs in Parliament if the recent International Trade Committee is anything to go by.

[1] https://www.aviation24.be/airlines/ryanair/ryanair-moves-spare-parts-from-the-uk-to-the-eu-in-anticipation-of-a-hard-brexit/

Brexit & Aviation 69

Brexit has entered a surreal phase.  The days pass by, now there’s only 26[1] left and circular stories circulate like a perpetual merry-go-around.   Let’s remind ourselves that UK law, as it’s currently written means the UK’s exit from the European Union (EU) on a fixed date regardless of any provisions made for that event.  When you think about it the legislation is truly ridiculous but that is how MPs in the UK House of Commons voted.

The facts are that the Brexit that the public were sold in June 2016 isn’t available.  It doesn’t exist.  MPs who are describing a Brexit “No-Deal” outcome as short-term risks are being irresponsible.  They are like the criminals who in a storm lure ships onto the rocks in order to plunder[2].  Wrecking a Country’s economy and standing in the world is well underway but there’s still time to stop it.

Aerospace design and manufacturing will be hit severely by this ruining poltical behaviour.  Today, the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) is responsible for the issuance of civil aircarft Type Certificates and organisation approvals in the EU Member States.  After its withdrawal, the UK will resume these tasks under its obligations as “State of Design” under the Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation.  That may sound fine, in of itself.  However, at the formation of EASA the UK was encouraging its technical experts to leave the UK and join the new Agency in Cologne in Germany.  That move was successful and as a result the national expertise on the certification of design and manufacturing was run down.

Detailed regulations cover the issue of aviation safety certificates for aeronautical products, parts and appliances.  These are complex, changing and subject to international agreements.   The expertise necessary to be a leading country in aerospace design and manufacturing is not easily acquired.   So how will the UK meet its obligations as a “State of Design”?  The best guess is that it will “cut and paste” the exiting European rules, regulations and their implementation as best it can.  When technical changes happen it will follow those changes.

Will the UK train up a new generation of national technical experts?  Much of that will depend on the funding made available to do so and any ambitions for the future.  In the past, the fees and charges, paid by industry were used to fund the activities of the technical experts.  That route may not be open post-Brexit since industry will strongly object to paying twice for the same service.

Even if new technical departments are created this is not a light bulb that can be switched on in a moment.  To put new bilateral agreements in place, aviation partners will need proof that new technical departments are capable, competent and properly resourced.  All of the above typically take many years not months or days.  Hence my view that Brexit has entered a surreal phase.  The reality and the fiction are widely different.  A delay is highly likely and eminently wise given the impass and the ever revolving poltical merry go around.

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

[2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrecking_(shipwreck)

 

Brexit & Aviation 68

Steve Bell is an acquired taste.  His cartoons are topical but sharp political satire.   I framed a cartoon of his years ago.  It cruelly depicted the endless march of Liberal Democracy.  The way I remember it was seeing lots of important characters striding purposefully on a staircase that looked like a Möbius strip.   Going round and around.  The cutting point being that lots of energy and industrious activity was going nowhere.

This week has been just like that cartoon depiction but for Conservatives and Labour Party’s.  Walk outs, important meetings, speeches and a flurry of activity but there has been little real progress towards a practical Brexit endgame.  Who would go into a room negotiating and beat yourself up in front of the party across the table?

Now, opening on March 14th is the chance that the UK House of Commons could send UK Prime Minister May back to the EU to request an extension to the Article 50 process.   Even so, it’s not clear what that extra time would be used for even if it was agreed by the EU Member States.

The European Parliament (EP) has 4 plenary sessions when it can ratify the UK Withdrawal Agreement before European elections in late May this year.  If this is not approved at one of those EP sessions, it’s unlikely to be voted on until after the Summer.  An Article 50 extension beyond the end of June 2019 suggest that the UK should take part in European Parliament elections[1].  A mix of interrelated events will always make this last-minute change complex but not impossible.

Extra time would seem to be wise given where we are at this moment.  The latest UK Government publication on the implications for business and trade of a No-Deal exit on 29 March 2019, makes stark reading.  It’s written as a summary document and so detail is missing but the message is one of lack of preparedness (no mention of aviation).  With the votes in the UK Parliament delayed there’s little notice for businesses, employees, investors and communities on what may be the biggest economic and trading change they face in a lifetime.

In aviation, people are moving their approvals and licences to other States.   For example, UK licenced engineers are looking to transfer their UK licences to an EASA Member State.  Not everyone will need to do this and there’s no doubt that a UK license will remain of value around the world.

In addition, some provisions are being made to soften the extremes of an abrupt UK withdrawal, but the effects of a No Deal Brexit will be penalising[2][3].  A so-called World Trade Organisation (WTO) No-Deal Brexit doesn’t exist for civil aviation.

[1] European Parliament elections will begin on 23 May and end on 26 May 2019.

[2] https://www.eesc.europa.eu/en/our-work/opinions-information-reports/opinions/aviation-safety-after-brexit

[3] https://www.adsgroup.org.uk/blog/eu-aviation-safety-regulation-for-a-no-deal-brexit/?ref=upflow.co