Relationship with the Department
for Transport
21. Several witnesses told us there was a need for
a greater degree of integration and co-ordination between the
CAA and the Department for Transport. The Airport Operators Association
told us that, in conducting a recent consultation on bringing
foreign-registered aircraft into the UK, the Department had failed
to discuss the likely costs of the associated regulatory requirements
with the CAA, and had therefore estimated the cost to be £0.25
million when the real cost was more likely to be "in the
order of tens of millions of pounds."[32]
It argued that it was important both that CAA specialists were
given the opportunity to contribute to Government thinking, and
that Department officials had a thorough understanding of the
CAA's regulatory approach and practice. It called for greater
efforts towards joint working and the earlier involvement of the
CAA in policy-making.[33]
22. Mike Toms of BAA told us that he thought the
CAA had not been "wholly engaged" in the determination
of the policies contained in the Government's Air Transport White
Paper.[34] He cited the
CAA's reaction to the White Paper's commitment to building a new
runway at Stansted as soon as possible, in which it said that
its statutory duties may cause it take a different stance from
the Government. He argued that this potential conflict could cause
problems for BAA:
"If it was to lead to a different position on
the right date for the development of Stansted's runway that would
create a significant policy tension for us because we could build
the runway to one date, we could build it to the other, but we
[could not] build it to both."[35]
23. Barry Humphreys of Virgin Atlantic argued that,
as the CAA was an independent regulator, there were bound to be
differences of approach and view with the Department for Transport,
but that those differences were "overwhelmingly" managed
satisfactorily.[36] The
CAA similarly argued that its occasional differences of view from
the Department were rare and that, in the vast majority of cases,
there was close alignment on policy positions. It felt that its
advice was generally well received by the Government and that
the Government's subsequent actions were usually consistent with
that advice. It detailed its role in influencing the Government's
White Paper, arguing that much of its detailed technical advice
had been instrumental in shaping the outcome of it.[37]
24. The Minister for Aviation told us that she firmly
believed that the Government's policy of integrated working with
the CAA was very good. She said that the CAA had played a critical
role in the development of all aspects of the White Paper and
explained that, in addition to the Secretary of State meeting
with the Chairman of the CAA on a quarterly basis, officials from
the Department and the CAA also met on a "very regular basis"
to discuss development and policy.[38]
25. The latest version of the Sponsorship Statement
for the CAA, which was published in May 2006, includes a specific
reference to communication between the CAA and the Department—reproduced
in Box 2—which was not present in the previous November
2002 version.Box
2: Reference to communication in the CAA's Sponsorship Statement
