Eurocrats Make A Muddle Of Air Safety

Air Safety Week, Dec 4, 2006

Despite Usurping The Powers Of The UK's CAA, EASA Appears Directionless

The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) has, since 2003, taken over responsibility for air safety in the European Union's 25 member bloc of national governments. Operating from its HQ tower on the Eau de Cologne, EASA nevertheless doesn't smell so good to some people involved in aviation safety.

Last week, the Chairman of the UK's House of Commons Transport Committee, Gwyneth Dunwoody, commenting on the performance of EASA thus far, described it as "an accident waiting to happen".

"It is with dismay," the MPs reported back to the House, "that we have learned of the chaotic state of the European Aviation Safety Agency which at this time is not able to fulfil its declared purpose. If its problems are left unchecked, we believe it has the potential to put air safety in the UK and the rest of Europe at risk."

MP's warned: "Transfer of competencies to EASA could lead to a shift towards lowest common denominator and therefore the dilution of the CAA's [Civil Aviation Authority] high standards of aviation safety."

In 2003, under the EU's Single European Sky policy, the certifying and rule-making powers of the UK's Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) were transferred to EASA. CAA head Sir Roy McNulty describes EASA as being "not fit for the purpose". The Commons MPs were appalled to hear that the morale of the CAA's staff had plummeted since the CAA was reduced to being a mere cipher and branch office of the EASA, and that many of its highly regarded experts had left.

Although the Commons Select Committee has no formal role in oversight of EASA, it nevertheless felt obliged to say a few words about the Euro-Operetta that is EASA. The timing of the Dunwoody scathe comes as the European Parliament and its member states are about to consider increasing the powers of the agency.

Like many EU entities, EASA has suffered from a lack of talent, politicization, bureaucratization and a sparse budget. "Its lamentable problems of governance, management and resources must not be allowed to compromise aviation safety in the UK in any way," Dunwoody warned the House. EASA has 300 employees, an annual Euro65m ($83m) budget, drafts all EU safety legislation, polices it and approves the design of aircraft, engines and parts.

Feeling charitable, Mrs. Dunwoody did not allude to any of Airbus's problems with and within it. But other firms have "gone bust", courtesy of EASA mode of just not doing business. The balloonist Per Lindstrand spent over two years trying to get one of his products certified and lost millions of pounds in the process.

In a response somewhere between denial and deceit, the European Commission brushed aside the report, saying it didn't present the facts and was outdated. The report "has a vision that does not reflect the true role of the agency," it tut-tutted. "It is fully resourced for the tasks it has been asked to do." EASA, it claimed, would only set standards for airline operations. "The approvals would be left to member states", the Commission said. "We know you cannot centralize everything."

However, seemingly flying in the face of that posturing, Brussels recently proposed soon giving the agency the power to license pilots and crews and to control foreign airlines, jobs now done by the factotums in individual national authorities. It would appear that there may be a little left hand, right hand chuggling happening within EASA itself.

Enforcing EASA's rules, including carrying out spot checks, will remain the job of Britain's CAA. It's not fully understood by anybody just where the regulatory line is drawn in the sand and what would be done to resolve the inevitable demarcation disputes that arise.

"The UK must not transfer any further powers from the CAA to the agency until the Government is assured that it is fit for purpose," Dunwoody said, "and the UK Government and the CAA should remain at the forefront of efforts to resolve the agency's issues. The brief history of the agency raises serious concerns about the ability of the European Commission to develop genuinely effective and efficient trans-national European agencies. The commission must examine closely the shambolic nature of the project to date, and apply the lessons learnt to future endeavors."

On a positive note, Airports Council International, which represents airport operators in Europe, came out strongly in support of EASA. In a single European aviation market, the "existence of 25 national civil aviation authorities is illogical to say the least", it said. It acknowledged that "ongoing issues relating to resourcing - both financial and human - must be addressed urgently in a realistic and constructive manner."

Without complicating matters further, we would also like to remind readers that 40 members of the EU's 42 member European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC) also belong to the JAA (Joint Aviation Authority). Some clue as to the complex interrelationship of the JAA with EASA and the sharing, dilution, dissolution and devolution of their powers can be gleaned at this October 2006 dated link (and further certified as never to be read on an empty stomach): http://tinyurl.com/y2ur93