• Civil Aviation Regulation

Aerospace is today trans-boundary in nature at an industrial level and via air links crossing the globe, transporting people and goods to developed and emerging markets. For this key contributor to the UK and EU economies and economic growth to operate with maximum efficiency and safety, requires a common set of harmonised rules.

The creation of common aviation legislation and regulations in Europe, which started through co-operation agreements 50 years ago, has been positive for aviation safety not only in Europe, but on a global level as well. It has supported the continued success of the European [including the UK] aerospace industry in the global market place. A single European certification requirement has reduced costs and time for development, certification and production. In addition, regulatory co-operation has created more industry competition, ultimately providing customers with greater choice.

Today, inextricably close European regulatory co-operation – via EASA – facilitates the free movement of European products and services, not just within Europe but worldwide, assisting non-European authorities in certifying European products and services. Reciprocally, it issues European certificates for non-European products.

From a safety perspective, co-operation across national boundaries has brought strong confidence to authorities and the public about how safe it is to fly4. Through a high, consistent level of aviation safety across Europe, the number of accidents has fallen over the years and so has the number of fatalities.

Flight safety internationally benefits from European co-operation that brings virtually all of Europe onto one level playing field. European regulations are largely harmonised with those of US and Canada through a collaboration based on mutual trust with the respective national authorities. The close working between EASA and its bilateral partners [USA, Canada and Brazil], based on mutual trust and a harmonisation of regulation, stands as an example to the rest of the world's aviation community.

Far from diminishing UK influence in global aviation, the EASA regime has provided a conduit for UK influence on aviation safety and security within Europe and beyond on behalf of the UK passengers flying on airlines around the world; indeed, the UK has been a major driver of ever-closer alignment on regulatory matters across Europe and the negative impacts of its withdrawal would be felt across the continent, to such an extent that EASA would likely be diminished in stature as an organisation.

The EASA system is not without its imperfections. Its requirements for the General Aviation community have been described as over-burdensome and disproportionate; however, this has also been said of the UK Civil Aviation Authority and positive changes in this respect have recently been implemented in Europe and the UK.

As the UK Government commits the country to honouring the 2016 EU referendum result to leave the Union, it is vital the UK seeks to maintain its influence on the development of aviation rules across the globe. Currently this influence is achieved to a significant extent through the EASA rulemaking programme, and through EASA with other countries such as the USA and China. A key outcome of negotiations should be to preserve as far as possible influence on the regulation-setting process within EASA. The UK and EU must also avoid regulatory divergence on safety rules between any separate UK regime and EASA, which would undermine UK competitiveness, create barriers to trade and investment and compromise the achievement of continued safety improvement.

It is critical to the aerospace sector that following Brexit there is an aviation regulatory regime in the UK and Europe that allows industry to be competitive and develop innovative products, that supports the provision of a choice of quality services for the consumer, and allows aviation safety standards to be maintained and improved using the latest technology. Moreover, for the UK there needs to be a fully-functioning regulatory system from day one – 20 March 2019 – otherwise there could be disruption to air travel and business operations impacting the air travelling consumer, business performance and, ultimately, the UK economy.

This paper identifies three options open to the UK and the EU. The UK could: [i] remain a full member of EASA; [ii] take an off-the-shelf participation option as Switzerland and Norway have done; or [iii] withdraw from EASA and repatriate all regulatory powers back to the UK Civil Aviation Authority, potentially contracting some activities back to EASA. Transition arrangements would be needed with these having to be extensive for the third option for the UK and the EU aviation sectors to achieve the safety, consumer and industry outcomes outlined above in both the short and the long terms.

The case for the first option is very strong: the UK should remain within EASA.