EUROPEAN AVIATION SAFETY AGENCY
86. In December 2005 the European Commission published
proposals which would extend the role of EASA to cover rule-making
and standardisation on flight operation and personnel licensing.
The UK Government decided that, based on EASA's unreliable performance,
it could not agree to these proposals.
87. In a letter to the Committee, dated 11 October
2006, Sir Roy McNulty, Chairman of the Civil Aviation Authority
(CAA) indicated that progress had begun to be made in EASA, but
confirmed there was still much work to be done:
"The Agency has advanced in terms of recognising
that there are problems, and by setting in motion remedial action—but
as yet it is all very much work in progress which now needs to
be effectively managed to a successful conclusion, and the pace
of improvement needs to quicken further."
We were therefore somewhat surprised that just seven
weeks later, the Secretary of State wrote to the Committee Chairman,
the day before our evidence session, to advise us that the Government
had decided to agree the regulation, and that the UK's general
reserve would be lifted.[127]
The Secretary of State explained that he was confident that the
performance of EASA had picked up sufficiently over the last year
and that the reserve was no longer needed.[128]
He told us:
"I can assure the Committee that the view
I take on these matters is driven by an overriding concern for
safety, and I would not be in a position where … I would
be cavalier in any way with safety. I am informed by the judgment
that the CAA, which has an outstanding record on these issues
brought to me…".[129]
88. It would certainly be a great achievement
if the serious problems identified with EASA—which encompassed
budgetary difficulties; financial, business and manpower planning;
and management and governance processes—had been ironed
out in less than two months. The Department's supplementary evidence
indicates that, in many cases, the improvements have not yet been
made; rather there has been some indication that the Agency is
planning to improve processes, and that it has a strategy to act
upon the recommendations made to it by national authorities and
consultants. It seems that, in agreeing to lift the UK's general
reserve, the Department is taking much on faith.
89. Given the precarious nature of the embryonic
improvements the Department described, we remain concerned that
the powers which stand to be transferred include regulation of
operators and crew. It is of considerable concern that EASA already
has powers for type certification and airworthiness of design
of aircraft and parts.[130]
The Department advised that, should there be a deterioration in
the Agency's performance, the UK would have further opportunities
to express its views in Council before the final adoption of the
Regulation, and that the UK could delay extending the Regulation
through the legislative process. The Department must be certain
that safety standards will not be compromised by the transfer
of powers from national authorities to EASA. We will continue
to monitor developments and the negotiation of the Regulation.
The UK's safety standards must not be compromised.
126 
