UK – Page 34 – John Vincent

Aviation & Brexit 88

Tuesday, 23 July draws closer and the naming of a new UK Conservative Party leader and subsequently a new UK Prime Minister (PM). It seems increasingly likely that the Conservative Party is going through the motions with only one outcome on the table: Mr Johnson gets selected and then pushes, in whatever ways possible, to get the UK to leave the European Union (EU) by Halloween this year. Little, if anything is new as repetitious and shallow arguments get thrown around like confetti for the bride of Frankenstein.

In the early months of this year there was a flurry of detailed articles written about how aviation would be affected if the UK left the EU with or without a deal. The common expectation was that the transition would start at the end of March. Since then a few have taken the time to update their positions but most of what was written remains motionlessness. Without a sense of political direction advancing policy positions is a precarious activity. However, a high-level desire to see liberal aviation market access arrangements continue does seem to exit within both UK and EU. To that extent, a No-Deal Brexit outcome represents a big step backwards for all Europeans.

Although it’s not relevant to international air travel, it’s notable that British media interviews continue to focus on The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). The GATT was the precursor to the World Trade Organisation (WTO). Article 24 is being cited as a universal solution to objections to a No-Deal Brexit. However, this proposition has been debunked multiple times and doesn’t stand scrutiny[1].

[1] https://fullfact.org/europe/gatt-nine-lives-article-24-again/

In recent weeks, talk of international companies planning relocate their operations to other parts of Europe[1] has not phased the populist proponents of Brexit. Thus, it’s vital for businesses to plan for a No-Deal Brexit where only temporary provisions will exist between the UK and EU. However, reports show that the UK is still not prepared for a No-Deal Brexit in October.

For aircraft design and maintenance and pilots and cabin crew, there may be no sustained mutual recognition between the EU and the UK for aviation licences, approvals and certificates. In addition, the UK will no longer benefit from EU Bilateral Aviation Safety Agreements (BASAs).

Mounting concerns are being voiced about the prospect of a No-Deal Brexit and the subsequent impact on aviation and the traveling public. To date, Conservative and Labour Party leaders would rather sweep such concerns under the carpet.

The online help from the UK Government, the European Commission (EC) and on the CAA and EASA Brexit microsites remain the best available information.

[1] https://www.chathamhouse.org/expert/comment/japanese-warning-over-fallout-hard-brexit-not-idle-threat

Aviation & Brexit 87

It’s reported that this year’s Paris Air Show was worth £ 8 billion to the UK economy. More than 70 companies were exhibiting at this global marketplace for the aviation industry. Today, the UK’s place as a world leader in aerospace design and manufacturing is built on regulatory alignment, integrated supply chains and top-class research and innovation. All three of these are severely challenged by the Brexit project.

Sadly, the leading candidate to be the next UK Prime Minister seems to have turned a blind eye to the facts. This week he’s quoted as saying that the impact of leaving the European Union (EU) without a deal would be “very, very small”[1]. For those accustomed to evidence-based policy making this glib political assurance is playing well with a narrow party electorate but is very far from true.

The interdependencies within aerospace design and manufacturing businesses across the whole of Europe didn’t arise overnight. Since the 1960s, there’s been one direction set towards more and more working together. This approach has delivered success on the world stage. One leg of this success stands on is the high level of confidence in each other’s institutions, regulatory cooperation and the harmonisation of rules.

Meanwhile, Conservative (and Labour) politicians have played to prejudices by telling their constituents of “faceless Brussels bureaucrats.” Whilst the truth is that there are a great number of civil servants in the UK and Brussels who are exemplary in their work.

The success of European aerospace design and manufacturing gets taken for granted. The strength of cooperation, collaboration and coordination is swept under the carpet. In cahoots, the national media then tends to highlight the stories politicians feed them about discord, mistakes and rivalry.

Since the general populace has had little need for knowledge of how the system works, just that it’s safe, then an unhealthy situation of glib and unsustainable predictions persists. This goes some way to explaining why a candidate for UK PM can get away with saying the impact of leaving the European Union (EU) without a deal would be “very, very small”.

Usually a political campaign has a phase where a candidate needs to create credibility and legitimacy for their campaign so people will take them seriously. This stage is being bypassed in the UK.

[1] https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-leader-johnson/johnson-says-impact-of-no-deal-brexit-would-be-very-very-small-idUKKCN1TW29S

Aviation & Brexit 86

A new Conservative Party leader should be named on Tuesday, 23 July and then appointed UK Prime Minister (PM) one day later. That’s only if the Government’s majority in the UK Parliament hasn’t crumbled. Then the House of Commons (HoC) summer recess begins one day after[1]. The HoC returns on Tuesday, 3 September just before the political Party conference season gets started. So, the idea that there’s time to apply Article 50 and negotiate a new deal with the European Union (EU) before the 31 October exit day is pure fantasy. If there was unity, harmony and a convergence of positions then a small chance exists. None of those three words can reasonably be used to describe the situation.

A lot of political talk still centres around the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and peculiar notions that it might be easier to get a deal with over 160 Countries than it is to deal with 27 Countries. The WTO framework doesn’t cover key aspects of the UK economy, like: Aviation, Medicine, Export Licencing and Digital Data. Often expressed as a sign of more “Unicorns”, frustration continues to grow amongst those who have gained a smattering of knowledge after 3-years of this merry-go-around. As a result of all the nonsense spoken, there’s little doubt that Brexit is damaging the UK’s reputation as a good place to do business.

If Boris Johnson enters Number 10, Downing Street as PM then he could discard his firm promise to leave the EU, come what may on 31 October only then to see his Government fall. Thus, the strong likelihood of a “No Deal” outcome with no implementation/transition period is looming. Without a formal withdrawal agreement there’s only the temporary contingency measures that both the EU and UK[2] have published so far. I’ve written about this in my Blog 61, 71 and 74.

One area of significance is how this event will impact aerospace Design Organisations (DO) who are primarily based in the UK. Approvals issued by the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) to a UK DO, before the exit date will remain valid for 9 months from the day after the 31 October. To provide continuity, UK DO’s are being encouraged to apply to the UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA)[3] for a national approval in advance of the exit day. One small silver lining is that the UK CAA will not charge an up-front fee for issuing these approvals, provided the scope is the same as the EASA approval and no technical investigation is required. After that a fee is changed for surveillance of the DO approval under a published scheme of charges.

This is one subject area amongst a large number, across many industries. Yes, Brexit is a magnificent way to create extra bureaucracy and we will all end up paying for it in the long run.

[1] https://www.parliament.uk/about/faqs/house-of-commons-faqs/business-faq-page/recess-dates/

[2] https://www.gov.uk/guidance/prepare-to-work-and-operate-in-the-european-aviation-sector-after-brexit

[3] https://info.caa.co.uk/eu-exit/aerospace-design-organisations/

Aviation & Brexit 81

It’s about a month ago since I last wrote. This has been a busy month. European Parliamentary elections took place on Thursday in the UK. The results of those elections will not be known until late on Sunday. A long process of local and regional counting will take up most of Sunday. What it will mean in the UK is still unclear but at least these were real votes in real ballot boxes. The outcome of which should be a sound indication of the current public mood.

The UK is now in the position where if it ratifies the existing EU-UK Withdrawal Agreement (WA) before 31 October 2019, an EU withdrawal will take place on the first day of the month following the completion of the ratification procedures. However, there are no signs that national ratification is on the cards. The UK’s two largest political parties have given-up on negotiations to come to a compromise on Brexit. This should be no surprise since a deal between the Conservatives and Labour would still have to pass the through a grid-locked House of Commons (HoC). A compromise involving the UK staying in a Customs Union (CU) is more than the hard core Brexit supporting Conservatives can accept. Now, as if the above wasn’t enough, the UK’s Prime Minister is stepping down. A starting gun has been fired on a that leadership race and it’s unlikely to be helpful to any potential political compromise.

The Brexit stasis continues to have a pressing and disruptive impact on the aviation and travel industries. Recently, the travel firm Thomas Cook reported a £1.5bn loss for the first half of the year[1]. Behind this were several factors but one of the bigger ones was potential customers putting off their summer holiday plans.

With Brexit delayed until later this year, the UK is exporting people. Now record numbers are applying for Irish passports[2] and that may give a boost to aviation in Ireland. As an indicator, I’ve had a conversation with a person prepared to relocate his businesses if Brexit remains unresolved.

In the technical regulation arena, the objective would seem to be to maintain as much continuity as possible[3]. Our international rules-based system assumes that Countries will work together to improve conductivity. But the situation remains fluid between the UK and EU, and there are still big questions to answer before we reach 1 November 2019.

The power-play going on between US and China is not a good background in which to continue with the uncertainty of Brexit. The UK should be defending multilateralism in this situation. A choice needs to be made since the UK’s aviation future need not shift from an influential rule-maker into a rule-taker. In this region, retaining membership of EU Agencies, like EASA remains a viable option.

Brexit is now in a go / no-go position. I’m more of the opinion that the project must be terminated and quickly. Even if it is not, close alignment with the EU still has major benefits. Is there the political vision in the UK to steer Brexit to a conclusion? It’s going to be well into July 2019 before we even have a hint as to the answer to that question. 3-years since the UK referendum and its only uncertainty that is certain.

[1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48292318

[2] https://www.irishpost.com/news/how-to-get-irish-passport-166453

[3] https://ebace.aero/2019/news/latest-news/ebace2019-session-looks-at-impending-brexit/

Brexit & Aviation 79

The European Union (EU) has agreed to extend #Article50 a second time. This could delay any possible #Brexit until 31 October 2019. What implications will this have on the UK while it remains in the EU? A British Parliament House of Commons briefing explains the situation.

The times we are in could never be called normal. Brexit trundles on laying waste to everything it touches. At the same time, British MPs go on a jolly Easter holiday as if nothing much is happening. But political activists on the ground in the UK are busy campaigning vigorously for UK local elections and an almost certain European Parliamentary election.

Over the last week, talking to people in the US, those who are not avoiding the subject are as divided as we are in the UK. The object of their division is one man. President Trump is either the best President ever or the source of all a nation’s problems. The Canadians I spoke to, are confused and mystified by the reported behaviour of the UK.

The event I was attending in Atlanta was run by Aviation Week[1]. They are reporting the substantial impacts of Brexit and there’s nothing positive to say on the subject. The expectation is that it’s going to be a “difficult summer” to say the least. The lack of clarity over all aspects of the UK’s current situation remains astonishing. The danger is that it becomes easier to do business in other Countries and the industry avoids investment in the UK.

To say something positive, it was refreshing to see the UK’s Aerospace Wales[2], a trade body representing the aerospace and defence industries in Wales, was exhibiting in Atlanta.

[1] http://m.aviationweek.com/awincommercial/uk-airlines-airports-already-see-substantial-brexit-impact

[2] www.aerospacewalesforum.com

Brexit & Aviation 77

The original Brexit transition date has gone by. Am I comfortable writing this on 1^st 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 27^th 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 75

Travelling between the UK and Europe at some indeterminant future date? Planning your holiday for 2019? You may need to take a lot of extra steps before you travel. Both the EU and UK are taking measures to mitigate any severe disruption to air travel post-Brexit.

For EU registered airlines, EU law will continue to apply to flights to and from the EU. For passengers on a flight departing from the UK, similar passenger rights should continue to apply after the UK leaves the EU. The UK Government has said flights will not be cancelled due to Brexit. However, if there is flight disruption due to Brexit, you probably will NOT get compensation. Air travellers only get compensation if a delay is deemed to be within the airline’s control. Clearly Brexit and its repercussions are beyond their control.

In order to off-set the concerns of many travellers, companies are issuing advice[1] and guarantees[2]. Also, their Terms and Conditions may be updated to say that the cancellation of flights due to Brexit will NOT be deemed to be within their control. Some airlines may class a Brexit cancellation in the same category as a natural disaster like a volcanic eruption or earthquake.

A lot of effort is being put into assuring business continues, whatever the outcome of Brexit. But offers of Brexit guarantees are not for free, someone is baring the costs.

One of the least favoured options is that there be No-Deal between the EU and UK post Brexit. Now, the uncertainty continues as it’s clear the UK will NOT be leaving the EU this coming Friday. A Salutatory Instrument has been passed by the House of Commons (HoC) that has changed the planned leaving date to either 12 April 2019 or 22 May 2019.

Last night, the British Parliament took control of the HoC agenda and conducted a series of “indicative votes”. There was no majority for any of the Brexit options on the table. However, amongst UK Members of Parliament, the “Peoples Vote” option, a further referendum, secured the biggest vote in favour (268 votes).

Another EU summit is being planned in Brussels for the week commencing 8 April 2019. Another extension will be on the table if progress hasn’t been made in the UK. Each extension taken up by the UK shortens the planned transition period by a corresponding amount of time. The current Article 50 period can last as long as the Treaties on which it is based. A positive option is desperately needed to plot a way forward. The option to revoke Article 50 is always there.

[1] https://www.easyjet.com/en/help/boarding-and-flying/brexit

[2] https://support.thomascook.com/Travel-Advice-Safety/Leaving-the-EU-Brexit-Questions/1134032422/How-will-Brexit-affect-my-holiday.htm

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