-
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their assessment of
the warning from the United States Federal Aviation
Administration that British aviation manufacturers may have
to pay the United States to be able to export their products
to the United States if Her Majesty’s Government do not
negotiate a continuing role in the European Aviation Safety
Agency or set up a British aviation safety regime before
leaving the European Union.
-
(LD)
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name
on the Order Paper and I declare an interest as a companion
of the Royal Aeronautical Society.
-
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for
Transport (Baroness Sugg) (Con)
My Lords, we have a very close and constructive relationship
with the Federal Aviation Administration and have been
working with them since early last year on arrangements to
replace the EU-US bilateral aviation safety agreement when
the UK leaves the European Union. We are working to ensure
that as far as possible, existing arrangements for the
recognition of safety certification between the UK and US
continue to apply.
-
I thank the Minister for that comforting reply but I wish to
stress some points. We should not forget that the UK
aerospace industry is a global leader, after the US, with a
turnover of more than £32 billion. We have led the
development of international safety regulations, under the
European Aviation Safety Agency, EASA, and they are fully
compliant with the American Federal Aviation Administration.
If, on Brexit, we leave EASA, all bets will be off unless we
negotiate continued membership of the agency. The
alternative, which has been mentioned, of creating a whole
new system is not supported by the Civil Aviation Authority,
the aerospace industry, the maintenance facilities or the
airlines. These are hugely important issues. The Government
are on notice. Will they commit, therefore, to establishing a
working group with the industry to maintain the regulatory
alignment and ease the concerns of EASA?
-
My Lords, we work closely with the aerospace industry and are
very aware of their views on both what is needed for the
sector and the desire for a speedy agreement. We will be
representing these views in our negotiations with the EU and
will continue to keep the sector updated as negotiations
progress. There is a precedent for non-EU states such as
Switzerland and Norway to participate in the EASA system and
we continue to examine the suitability of such an
arrangement. We have been clear that we seek a close and
collaborative relationship with the EU on a range of issues,
including aviation safety.
-
(Con)
My Lords, before we were taken into the present European
arrangements, principally by the noble Lord, , a number of years
ago when he was Transport Commissioner, were not the Civil
Aviation Authority, supported by the Air Registration Board,
the finest airworthiness organisations in the world? Can that
situation not now be restored?
-
My Lords, the CAA is still one of the finest aerospace
organisations in the world. It is highly regarded, not just
in Europe but around the world for its expertise in safety
regulation. As part of the EASA system, the CAA has been the
specialist regulator for aviation safety and issues
certificates and approvals. The competence to issue such
safety certificates will stay as we leave the EU: none the
less, the CAA is making prudent preparations for whatever
scenario we are in.
-
(Lab)
My Lords, does the Minister recognise that if the UK does not
remain a member of the European Aviation Safety Agency or
establish an equivalent recognised regulatory UK agency by
the end of March next year, UK aviation operators and
manufacturers will not be able to fly in the airspace or sell
in the markets of the United States of America? This was
confirmed by Mr Michael Huerta, head of the Federal Aviation
Administration. Does she accept the view of Mr Andrew Haines,
chief executive, as she will know, of the UK Civil Aviation
Authority, which is worthy of the praise she has just
offered, that:
“I’m yet to meet anyone of substance that supports that
approach”,
of withdrawal from the European Aviation Safety Agency? Does
she agree that only continuing membership of EASA will
prevent huge cost, disruption and damage to UK operators,
manufacturers and passengers?
-
My Lords, of course we are aware of the important
relationship we have with the USA regarding our aerospace
industry. Last year we exported more than £2 billion-worth of
aerospace products to the USA and imported £4.5
billion-worth. As I said, we are fully aware of the
industry’s views on this and we will be presenting those as
we go forward in our negotiations. I should also mention that
Administrator Huerta made it clear that from his standpoint,
we can make any scenario that might be negotiated work, and
we are working very closely with the Americans.
-
(Con)
My Lords, as my noble friend may be aware, there is a very
significant aerospace industrial hub at Prestwick in
Ayrshire, based around BAE Systems’ work on existing aircraft
and Spirit AeroSystems’ work on the Airbus wings. Both these
companies rely heavily on the American industrial supply
chain. What are the Government going to do to support jobs
and business at these two Scottish companies?
-
My noble friend is absolutely right. The UK has been very
successful in securing a leading supply chain role globally,
particularly with Airbus. The industry supports 128,000
direct jobs and 153,000 indirect jobs across the country. Of
course, we must do all we can to ensure that we protect these
jobs, and the industry. Globally integrated supply chains are
mutually beneficial to us and our import and export partners,
and it is in all our interests to ensure that trade
continues.
-
(LD)
Does the Minister accept that the creation of any additional
regulatory barrier or dual regulations would undermine UK
competitiveness, as well as the continuous improvement in
safety? Does she agree that continued membership of EASA is
by far the simplest way of achieving this?
-
My Lords, I agree that we need to keep regulation as low as
possible. Continued membership of EASA is a possibility and
we are actively considering it. The UK has a proud record in
the aerospace sector and a number of distinct advantages, and
will continue to do so after we leave the European Union.
-
Lord (Lab)
My Lords, when Mr Michael Huerta, the outgoing boss of the
Federal Aviation Administration, visited in December, he had
a sense of urgency. He said:
“We need to know by next month because if we do not have a
clear picture it leaves us little choice but to embrace a
much more costly strategy of working on multiple potential
scenarios”.
“Next month” is January, and he was implying that the FAA
needs to know by the end of this month what we are going to
do. What answer did he get at that meeting? If he did not get
a straightforward answer, when will his successor get one?
-
My Lords, regardless of our future relationship with EASA,
there will be an aviation safety agreement in place between
the UK and the USA. The precise form and exact terms of that
agreement will of course be influenced by our relationship
with EASA. As I said, we are working with the FAA. We are
updating our technical annexes to the 1995 UK-US aviation
safety agreement, which predates and has a wider scope than
the EU-level agreement, and will continue to do so. We look
forward to welcoming the new boss of the FAA in the coming
months and having constructive meetings with him.
