5 Single European Sky
| Committee's assessment
| Politically important
|
| Committee's decision
| Not cleared from scrutiny; further information requested
|
| Document details
| (a) Commission Communication about accelerating implementation of the Single European Sky
(b) Draft Regulation concerning aerodromes, air traffic management and air navigation services
(c) Draft Regulation consolidating and amending four Regulations concerning the Single European Sky
|
| Legal base
| (a) —
(b) and (c) Article 100(2) TFEU; co-decision; QMV
|
| Department
| Transport
|
Summary and Committee's conclusions
5.1 The Single European Sky (SES) initiative
was launched in response to the growing problem in air traffic
management (ATM) delays in the late 1990s. The principal objective
of the SES is to deliver a seamless, safe, sustainable, efficient
and interoperable European ATM system capable of meeting future
capacity needs and not artificially constrained by national borders.
5.2 The legislative basis for the SES
was established in April 2004 with the entry into force of four
high-level Regulations, now termed "SES I". These Regulations
were amended by Regulation (EC) No. 1070/2009 to introduce a performance
scheme and network management function and to accelerate the formation
of cross-border "functional airspace blocks" (FABs)
involving two or more states collaborating to improve operational
efficiency in their combined airspace. These amendments were part
of the SES second package (SES II) aimed at expediting the delivery
of SESAR (SES ATM Research), which is the technological/industrial
complement to the SES and crucial to its realisation.[18]
5.3 The SES Framework Regulation requires
the Commission to review the application of the SES legislation
and report periodically on progress in the light of the original
objectives and with a view to future needs and in its Communication,
document (a), the Commission:
· rehearsed the justification
for, and the history of, the SES;
· asserted the need to accelerate
implementation of the SES and associated reform of the European
ATM system;
· discussed various aspects
of the two Regulations it was proposing — document (b),
to amend the Regulation establishing the European Aviation Safety
Agency (EASA), and document (c), to recast (consolidate and amend)
the four SES I Regulations; and
· discussed the changing role
of Eurocontrol (the European Organisation for the Safety of Air
Navigation).[19]
5.4 When we considered these documents
in July 2013 we recognised the value of the developing SES system
in providing better, more effective and reliable conditions for
air travel across EU airspace and noted the Government's nuanced
support for the present proposals. However, we said we would only
consider the proposals further when we had accounts in due course
of developments on the matters drawn to our attention, that is
the ICAO NAT Region, National Supervisory Authorities, definition
of core and non-core services, centralisation of services, FABs,
the Network Manager, the balance between Delegated Acts and Implementing
Acts, the EASA and the military, shortening of text on SES tools,
scope in relation to 'Air Traffic Management' and 'Air Traffic
Management and Air Navigation Services', EASA governance and any
issues arising from the Government's consultations and further
consideration of the financial implications and the impacts of
the proposals. Meanwhile the documents remained under scrutiny.
5.5 The Government has now updated us
on the documents and we heard first that:
· the proposals were considered
at the informal Transport Council on the SES on the 16 September
2013;
· at this meeting all Member
States supported the SES initiative and recognised the need to
make further progress;
· the vast majority said, however,
that the SESII+ proposals were too much too soon and that the
EU should not be adding more regulation before the current regulatory
framework is fully implemented and has had time to deliver; and
· no further Council working
group discussions have taken place since then, but they are expected
to commence during the Italian Presidency.
5.6 We learnt further that the European
Parliament has, however, been considering the proposals and completed
its first reading in March. We have been given a detailed explanation
of the European Parliament's key amendments to the recasting draft
Regulation, document (c) and the Government's view of them. We
heard also, in relation to the draft Regulation, document (b),
to amend the EASA Basic Regulation, that:
· it was less controversial
than the SES recast, dealing mainly with changes to incorporate
SES safety provisions removed from the SES legislation in order
to simplify and remove the current dual legal basis for ATM safety;
· the proposal would, however,
also introduce changes to governance arrangements and change a
number of Implementing Acts to Delegated Acts; and
· although the European Parliament
amendments make some improvements on the issue of governance,
they do not completely resolve the issue for the UK so the Government
will be seeking further improvements once Council discussions
commence.
5.7 We are grateful for this interim
report and look forward to hearing how negotiations in the Council
working group are developing, before we consider the documents
again. Meanwhile they remain under scrutiny.
Full details of the documents:
(a) Commission Communication: Accelerating the implementation
of the Single European Sky: (35071), 11490/13, COM(13) 408;
(b) Draft Regulation amending Regulation (EC) No. 216/2008 in
field of aerodromes, air traffic management and air navigation
services: (35072), 11496/13, COM(13) 409; (c) Draft Regulation
on the implementation of the Single European Sky (recast): (35073),
11501/13 + ADDs 1-2, COM(13) 410.
Background
5.8 The EU aviation safety regulatory
system is a partnership between a number of authorities —
the Commission, the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), the
Member States and their national aviation authorities (CAA in
the UK) and affected stakeholders. The EASA's primary objective
is to establish and maintain a high and uniform level of civil
aviation safety in the EU covering its areas of competence, which
are airworthiness, personnel licensing, aircraft operations, safety
of third country aircraft, aerodromes, air traffic management
and air navigation services.
5.9 We have described the key aspects
of the Communication, document (a) earlier in this chapter. The
key aspects of the draft Regulation to recast (consolidate and
amend) the four SES I Regulations, document (c), which the Commission
terms "SES II+", are:
· extending the application
of the SES to airspace outside Europe, in the ICAO NAT (International
Civil Aviation Organisation North Atlantic) region where the UK
and Ireland are jointly responsible for air traffic services;
· a requirement for National
Supervisory Authorities to be legally distinct and independent
from air navigation service providers by 2020;
· a requirement for National
Supervisory Authorities to take part in an undefined collaborative
network to pool and share resources, knowledge and best practice
supported by the Commission and EASA. (There is a similar new
provision in the amending EASA Regulation, document (b));
· an existing requirement on
Member States to consult stakeholders, which in the UK is currently
exercised by the Department for Transport, would in future fall
on National Supervisory Authorities;
· the concept of support services
as non-core air navigation services[20]
is proposed, with requirements for core and non-core air navigation
services to be delivered through separate undertakings by 2020
— the objective being to allow a contestable market for
non-core services;
· a number of non-core air
navigation services currently being delivered at Member State
or FAB level would be delivered centrally at EU level, with the
Commission given power to expand the number of centralised services
by way of Delegated Acts;
· amendments to the SES Performance
Scheme with the objective of speeding up decision making;
· requirements for the SESAR
programme, including some aspects from the Implementing Regulation
for SESAR Common Projects and making clear the comitology role;
· the obligation to form FABs
would remain with Member States (the UK has formed one with Ireland)
and provision for the Commission to develop detailed rules for
FABs rather than just guidance material as now;
· Eurocontrol currently performs
the "Network Manager" role for the EU air traffic management
network. The Network Manager would be given additional functions
relating to centralised services. It is envisaged that the role
of Network Manager will be removed from Eurocontrol and designated
as a self-standing service provider on the basis of an industrial
partnership by 2020; and
· a new requirement for air
navigation service providers to consult with airspace users on
all major issues related to the services provided, with power
for the Commission to produce Implementing Regulations in this
area.
5.10 The key aspects of the EASA draft
amending Regulation, document (b), are:
· moving some elements of SES
legislation into the EASA Regulation to make the legislative framework
simpler and more consistent;
· changes in the naming and
governance of the EASA in line with an inter-institutional agreement
covering all EU Agencies — the new name would be the "European
Union Agency for Aviation";
· development and adoption
of new technical rules (on aircrew, operations, aerodromes and
air traffic management and air navigation services) would be under
Delegated Acts, with the Commission obliged to consult an expert
committee;
· a number of changes in relation
to applicability to the military bringing the EASA into line with
how SES addresses the military;
· transfer of the safety aspects
of the SES Regulations into the EASA system including interoperability
and flexible use of airspace concepts; and
· changes to the governance
of the EASA, including creation of an Executive Board, as a sub-group
of the Management Board.
5.11 When we considered these documents
in July 2013 we recognised the value of the developing SES system
in providing better, more effective and reliable conditions for
air travel across EU airspace and noted the Government's nuanced
support for the present proposals. However, we said we would only
consider the proposals further when we had accounts in due course
of developments on the matters drawn to our attention, that is
the ICAO NAT Region, National Supervisory Authorities, definition
of core and non-core services, centralisation of services, FABs,
the Network Manager, the balance between Delegated Acts and Implementing
Acts, the EASA and the military, shortening of text on SES tools,
scope in relation to 'Air Traffic Management' and 'Air Traffic
Management and Air Navigation Services', EASA governance and any
issues arising from the Government's consultations and further
consideration of the financial implications and the impacts of
the proposals. Meanwhile the documents remained under scrutiny.
The Minister's letter of 24 June 2014
5.12 The Parliamentary Under-Secretary
of State, Department for Transport (Mr Robert Goodwill) now updates
us on the documents, noting that his comments about the Government's
present views reflect further consultation with stakeholders.
He first tells us that:
· the proposals were considered
at the informal Transport Council on the SES on the 16 September
2013;
· at this meeting all Member
States supported the SES initiative and recognised the need to
make further progress;
· the vast majority said, however,
that the SESII+ proposals were too much too soon and that the
EU should not be adding more regulation before the current regulatory
framework is fully implemented and has had time to deliver; and
· no further Council working
group discussions have taken place since then, but they are expected
to commence during the Italian Presidency.
5.13 The Minister continues that the
European Parliament has, however, been considering the proposals
and completed its first reading in March. He says that the Government
has actively engaged with briefing MEPs and that the European
Parliament incorporated a number of the amendments that it suggested.
The Minister then explains the European Parliament's key amendments
to the recasting draft Regulation, document (c) and the Government's
view of them, as follows.
ICAO North Atlantic Region (NAT)
5.14 The Minister says that:
· the Government believes that
it is inappropriate to extend the scope of SES to cover the ICAO
NAT region, as this is high seas airspace outside of the scope
of the EU treaties,
· additionally, the airspace
is not complex, with services already provided in a cost efficient
manner, so it would be disproportionate to apply SES rules to
it; and
· a European Parliament amendment
helpfully excludes the NAT region.
National Supervisory Authorities
5.15 The Minister continues that:
· the Government believes that
it is appropriate to pursue the institutional independence of
National Supervisory Authorities from air navigation service providers
and to help them ensure they have sufficient resources;
· it considers, however, that
some of the Commission's provisions are excessive and could act
as an impediment to National Supervisory Authorities' ability
to bring in skills and experience from industry and vice versa,
which is beneficial to the entire ATM system;
· even those National Supervisory
Authorities that are already institutionally independent rely
heavily on the ability to recruit and second staff from industry
and need current industry experience to provide effective oversight;
· failure to address this might
make it even more difficult for National Supervisory Authorities
to recruit staff and could reduce their resources rather than
benefit them;
· an additional issue is that,
in trying to ensure National Supervisory Authority separation
from air navigation service providers, the Commission has also,
apparently unintentionally, restricted the ability of Member States
to have any input into the recruitment of senior National Supervisory
Authority staff;
· European Parliament amendments
make some improvements but do not fully address the Government's
concerns and in some respects increase them by substituting the
EASA term "National Aviation Authorities" in place of
"National Supervisory Authorities";
· the European Parliament intention
may be to ensure consistency between EASA and SES Regulations
but it would actually result in a number of changes to national
legislation and regulatory documents with no real benefit; and
· furthermore, the Government
does not support the amendment that staff from National "Aviation"
Authorities should not be seconded from air navigation service
providers or companies under their control.
Provision of support services
5.16 The Minister tells us that:
· the Government supports market
liberalisation where it can be demonstrated to be in the interests
of the users of airspace;
· the draft Regulation would,
however, force the unbundling of support services without setting
out a vision or a pathway for how these services should or could
be delivered;
· no evidence has been presented
to suggest the current bundled model of provision is inefficient
or presents harm to the users of airspace;
· the proposal would also preclude
the possibility of competition arising between integrated and
specialist providers of support services;
· there is a risk that the
mandating of unbundled support services may increase costs to
airspace users, create additional regulatory burdens, stifle innovation
and potentially have a safety impact;
· ultimately the Government
might be able to support some unbundling of services, but a lot
more work is needed to understand the market that could emerge;
· the European Parliament adopted
the amendment the Government proposed to MEPs, requiring an in-depth
study into the feasibility of a market for support services, including
an assessment of its likely impact on safety;
· this does not appear, however,
to preclude the Commission taking action before the study is complete
or require it to take the conclusions into account;
· the Government also suggested
amendments aimed at providing greater structure on unbundling
and greater understanding as to what the market might look like;
· the European Parliament amendments
have moved away from ensuring that provision of air traffic services
is separated from the provision of support services to requiring
air navigation service providers to call for offers from different
service providers, with a view to choosing the financially and
qualitatively beneficial provider; and
· this is an improvement on
the Commission's proposal, but the Government will need to work
further on this in Council working group negotiations to ensure
that there is a sound process and evidence base to proceed with
mandating unbundling.
SES Performance Scheme
5.17 The Minister says that:
· the Government has a number
of concerns about the proposed amendments to the Performance Scheme,
some of which have been addressed by the European Parliament;
· the European Parliament has
not amended the Commission's proposal to make local targets in
national performance plans compliant with EU targets, rather than
consistent with them, as is the case in current legislation;
· the Government does not support
this because the term 'compliance' could be interpreted as taking
any local control out of the process;
· it supports the aim of making
the Performance Review Body (PRB) more independent, but thinks
it is important to introduce some criteria for the appointment
of members to ensure they have the appropriate expertise and independence;
· this was not addressed by
the European Parliament, although it did adopt the Government's
suggested amendment to ensure that the PRB has the opportunity
to give some input into national plans ahead of the single formal
assessment process;
· the Government is also concerned
about the extensive use of Delegated Acts in this part of the
draft Regulation, which could impact on the input Member States
have into key decisions in the Performance Scheme — the
European Parliament has not addressed this;
· finally, the Performance
Scheme focuses mainly on service providers as the main actors
in the ATM system — however, other actors within the system
have the capability to affect performance outcomes across the
European ATM network, for example airports and airspace users;
and
· the Government is pleased,
therefore, that the European Parliament adopted its suggested
amendment that the Commission, supported by the PRB, should conduct
a study to understand how other ATM actors' impact on network
performance with a view to developing additional Key Performance
Indicators and Performance Indicators for those actors for implementation
in future Reference Periods of the Performance Scheme.
Functional Airspace Blocks (FABs)
5.18 The Minister continues that:
· the Government supports the
Commission's aim for a strategic redirection of FABs towards air
navigation service provider led cooperative entities focused on
performance outcomes;
· however, the regulatory requirements
in the draft Directive could act as a disincentive to air navigation
service providers to drive improvements through FABs;
· the proposals need to be
reconsidered and scaled appropriately, depending on the nature
of the FAB;
· the Government will also
seek more clarity on what must be demonstrated and by when to
ensure that the requirements can be implemented at all;
· if the outcomes are made
clear, it should be for the air navigation service providers to
decide how they achieve them, thus enabling FABs to become more
performance orientated on a geographical and/or industrial partnership
basis;
· some of the European Parliament
amendments address some of the Government's concerns, but it has
introduced new provisions on industrial partnerships which the
Government will need to consider further in liaison with stakeholders
to ensure they are not too prescriptive and limiting; and
· in addition, it will need
to stress the importance of the overall supervisory arrangements
by NSAs, which risk becoming more complex and fragmented with
flexible service provision.
Use of Delegated Acts
5.19 The Minister tells us that:
· the Government believes that
the proposed use of Delegated Acts in some areas needs further
consideration and might be inappropriate;
· the European Parliament has
extended the scope of the proposed Delegated Acts to include the
adoption of EU-wide performance targets; and
· the Government does not consider
this appropriate and believes Member States are unlikely to support
giving the Commission greater powers in this particular area.
Gibraltar
5.20 Finally on this draft Regulation,
the Minister says that the Commission included Gibraltar within
the scope of the SES II+ proposals, but the European Parliament
has voted to replace the existing text, so suspending the application
of the Regulation to Gibraltar airport until the arrangements
set out in the Joint Declaration made by the Foreign Ministers
of the Kingdom of Spain and the United Kingdom on 2 December 1987
are applied. He comments that retaining the inclusion of Gibraltar
within the scope of the SES legislation will be a key objective
when the proposals are considered by the Council.
5.21 Turning to the draft Regulation,
document (b), to amend Regulation (EC) No. 216/2008, the EASA
Basic Regulation, the Minister says that:
· it was less controversial
than the SES recast, dealing mainly with changes to incorporate
SES safety provisions removed from the SES legislation in order
to simplify and remove the current dual legal basis for ATM safety;
· the proposal would, however,
also introduce changes to governance arrangements and change a
number of Implementing Acts to Delegated Acts; and
· although the European Parliament
amendments make some improvements on the issue of governance,
they do not completely resolve the issue for the UK so the Government
will be seeking further improvements once Council discussions
commence.
Previous Committee Reports
Ninth Report HC 83-ix (2013-14), chapter
5 (10 July 2013).
18 For SESAR see http://www.sesarju.eu/about. Back
19
For Eurocontrol see http://www.eurocontrol.int/about-eurocontrol. Back
20
The proposal refers to "the provision of communication, navigation
and surveillance services, as well as meteorological and aeronautical
information services". Back
| 
