JOINT COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORT díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 5 Apr 2006

Scrutiny of EU Proposals.

Chairman

We are discussing COM (2005) 602, concerning a proposal for a Council regulation on the establishment of a joint undertaking to develop the new generation European air traffic management system, SESAR. The proposal was referred to the committee for further scrutiny by the EU scrutiny sub-committee of the Joint Committee on European Affairs. I welcome Mr. Fintan Towey, principal officer, and Mr. Kevin Doyle, assistant principal officer, of the Department of Transport and Mr. Tom O'Sullivan of the technology division of the Irish Aviation Authority.

I draw the attention of witnesses to the fact that members of the committee have absolute privilege but this same privilege does not apply to witnesses appearing before the committee. Members are reminded of the parliamentary practice that members should not comment on, criticise or make charges against any person outside the House or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. Members are also reminded that civil servants, while giving evidence to the committee, may not question or express an opinion on the merits of any Government policy or policy objective, or produce or send to a committee any document in which a civil servant, a member of the Defence Forces or a member of the Garda Síochána questions or expresses an opinion on the merits of any Government policy or policy objectives.

An opening statement from the delegation has been circulated to members. Mr. Towey will now brief the committee on the proposals, followed by Mr. O'Sullivan.

Mr. Fintan Towey

SESAR is quite a technical proposal so I propose to set out some of the background and the general context. At the Chairman's discretion, my colleague, Mr. Tom O'Sullivan, from the Irish Aviation Authority can follow with a presentation on the detail. SESAR is a research and development project. The acronym derives from single European sky ATM research. It is part of a package of initiatives at European level which form part of the project that is generally referred to as the single European sky or single sky. I have listed in the slide some of the topics I wish to discuss. They include some of the objectives; how the objectives will be achieved with regard to the single sky; a brief outline of SESAR and the different phases of that project.

First, it is worthwhile clearing up some common confusion between the terms "single sky" and "open skies". Single sky is the initiative to tackle the need to expand the capacity of the European air traffic control system. Open skies, on the other hand, is the term that is loosely used to describe a liberal form of bilateral air transport agreement, for example, it is often used to describe the type of agreement that is now being negotiated between the EU and the US.

The single sky initiative was born in 1999 out of recognition of a number of facts. First, air traffic was forecast to grow steadily at approximately 6% or 7% per annum and some estimates suggested a doubling of volumes every 12 years or so. On the other hand, the capacity of the air traffic management system is finite and the inevitable consequence of this is that, in the absence of some form of action, there will be major congestion problems. Congestion problems have a number of undesirable consequences but, most significantly, they give rise to safety risks. Any safety system that is put under stress gives rise to increased risks. The Commission points to three major accidents in the last five years where air traffic control problems were a factor.

The other consequence, of course, is delays. Although air traffic control delays in Ireland are rare, we are victims of delays in Europe and we are all too familiar with the knock-on effect of the late arrival of incoming aircraft. In 2001, a quarter of all European flights were delayed and air traffic control was a factor in approximately half of those.

The single sky, therefore, is designed to tackle the underlying problem which stems mainly from fragmentation of air traffic control in Europe. There are 73 different air traffic control centres. This creates barriers to modernising the ATM system and to cohesive decision making.

On the next slide I have set out some of the objectives of the single European sky initiative. They include to improve and reinforce safety; to restructure air space to reflect traffic flow requirements at a supranational level; to create more capacity within the system and to increase efficiency.

Ms O. Mitchell

Is Mr. Towey referring to high or low flying air traffic?

Mr. Towey

Essentially, single European sky is a package of initiatives designed to tackle all issues relating to air traffic control. One of the first issues being tackled is the upper flight information region. That is essentially the cruising altitude for jets.

Ms O. Mitchell

Is that what the committee is discussing now?

Mr. Towey

That is part of it but the package applies more widely. The package of regulatory measures was adopted in March 2004 and the issues they deal with are set out in the proposal. The first is tackling different national approaches to air space classification and design, with immediate measures to harmonise the approach to classification of the upper air space, which is the cruising altitude for passenger jets.

It also provides for the establishment of functional air space blocks. This is probably the most challenging element of the package. This entails asking member states to collaborate on new approaches to defining air space blocks for air traffic purposes and, essentially, to move away from traditional national boundaries to boundaries that reflect more appropriately the actual traffic flows in Europe. Similarly, it provides for the development of new measures towards flexible use of air space. That is essentially to overcome the under-utilisation of some 500 discrete blocks of airspace that are exclusively reserved for military use. This is a major issue in some member states but not in Ireland.

There are also provisions concerning improvements in flow management which is essentially about getting more use out of a given block of airspace. This brings me to the SESAR proposal. SESAR is a technical research and development project. The proposed regulation is based on article 171 of the treaty. It is part of the research and development chapter which gives the Community power to establish new collaborative structures for research purposes. It mirrors the approach that was taken for the development of the Galileo satellite navigation system.

In summary, SESAR is about developing new equipment and associated procedures for ATC. It is born out of a number of facts. First, the basic technology of air traffic control has not changed in over 20 years. Second, full use is not being made of new technologies, notably satellite navigation. Third, there are wide differences between national systems which are adapted to local needs. As a result, there are very few off-the-shelf product lines and this has implications in terms of untapped economies of scale in equipment supply. The underlying thesis, therefore, on SESAR is that the system capacity and efficiency can be improved significantly by the development of new and better ATC systems.

There is another dimension which is important. The US is facing the same kind of issues and has launched a project called the Next Generation Air Transport project, or NGAT. There is therefore an issue of global trading competition in positioning European industry to supply to growing world market for air traffic control equipment.

I wish to describe briefly the different phases of the SESAR project. It is a project in three phases. The definition phase is now under way and will be completed by the end of 2007 at a total cost of €60 million, which is split 50-50 between the European Community and Eurocontrol. The development phase will cover the period 2008-2013 at a cost of €300 million per annum. Some €100 million of this will be for the account of the European Union, €100 million will be provided by Eurocontrol and €100 million per year by industry. The deployment phase is forecast to take place in the period 2013-2020. That is when the new system will be rolled out across Europe.

Chairman

At the moment, the functional air space blocks are run on a national basis, is that correct? What will the block changes entail? Do we have any details of which areas will be covered? For example, will Ireland and the United Kingdom be covered as one block? Which blocks will be which in mainland Europe?

Mr. Towey

I will ask my colleague to add a comment on this matter. In the first instance it is a matter for air traffic control providers and member states to collaborate and define a better way of doing it. They can then seek to achieve agreement on the provision of services on a joint venture basis in those new blocks.

Mr. Tom O’Sullivan

Under the single European skies proposals we have already commenced discussions with UK NATS on implementing a functional air space block between Ireland and the UK. The technical side of the discussions is practically complete. The institutional issues are still being discussed. I am not too sure what the timescale is but I believe we should have the institutional issues finished in two or three months and then we will be in a position to announce what the functional air space block will be. I have some information on my last slide on this matter to show what we are doing.

Chairman

What will happen with regard to revenues? At the moment, the Irish Aviation Authority is receiving revenues.

Mr. O’Sullivan

Yes.

Chairman

Will there be a revenue cost to the airline industry over and above what it is currently paying, as a result of this?

Mr. O’Sullivan

Not that I am aware of but that is one of the institutional issues which is being discussed at the moment, including the whole framework of how the airspace will be managed and what charges will be collected where. The aim is that it should not cost the airlines anything extra.

Mr. Towey

The entire thrust underlying the creation of functional airspace blocks is that they will deliver benefits to airlines. There are two aspects by which benefits can be achieved. First, through collaborative working arrangements, cost savings should be achievable between the air navigation service providers. This should feed through to air navigation service charges which will ultimately be lower. The second dimension is that through the provision of more efficient services there is a reduction in delays and all their cost consequences for airlines. Therefore, there is a two-fold benefit for airlines.

Deputy O. Mitchell

I have a related question that I do not think was answered. Is the cruising altitude of jets currently controlled from Shannon when they are passing through Irish airspace?

Mr. Towey

Shannon, yes.

Deputy O. Mitchell

Is it envisaged that Shannon will be the centre of this block or will it move to northern England? Has that been decided yet?

Mr. Towey

No.

Deputy O. Mitchell

What are the implications, if any, in terms of manpower in Ireland?

Mr. Towey

I understand the question. The approach underlying the existing exchanges between the Irish Aviation Authority and NATS is that it should be possible to find a new way of dividing the responsibilities for the provision of air traffic control services that allocates those responsibilities to where the resources are at present. In other words, the role of Shannon and Prestwick may change but the resources that are operating at those centres will not change as a direct consequence of this.

Deputy O. Mitchell

It sounds like the perfect solution to all our problems, does it not? Why do I doubt it? I must say, generally, that SESAR is a wonderful European initiative and makes absolute sense. Europe is good for some things.

Deputy Shortall

Is Mr. Towey absolutely confident that this will happen and, if so, what is the timescale involved? What are the implications for staff in the IAA at the moment?

Mr. Towey

It is a long-term project in the sense that the operational roll out is scheduled to start from 2013, so the definition and development phases run until that period. It is closely following the kind of model that was used for the Galileo satellite navigation project. In that case, the definition and development phases are working. We are now at the point where deployment is about to start, so the model it is following has worked. I think it can follow that.

As regards the future implications for the IAA, it depends to a large extent on what is ultimately determined concerning new functional air space blocks. The approach is to seek to allocate new responsibilities to the existing air traffic control centres so that there will be no major change to the existing arrangements for staffing and the location of air traffic control centres. However, there will be a change in terms of what they are doing and the responsibilities they have.

Deputy Shortall

But the IAA would no longer exist then, would it?

Mr. Towey

The IAA would continue to exist in the context of the type of arrangements we are working towards. At a theoretical level over the long term, one could potentially have a European organisation providing air traffic control. One could theoretically have a single organisation providing air traffic control in two or more member states, but that is a long way from where we are now.

Deputy Shortall

When are those issues likely to arise?

Mr. Towey

The first issues concern what is envisaged within the scope of the existing regulations, which is collaborative work by the existing air navigation service providers. Whether or not we move on to a more ambitious phase, looking towards those theoretical possibilities I spoke about, is an issue for future political consideration at European level.

Chairman

I wish to ask a question concerning recognition of the Irish Aviation Authority in this context. Could the Irish Aviation Authority be subsumed into the European operation? What is the standing of people's qualifications? Are the qualifications recognised throughout Europe or are they only recognised nationally, as in other sectors?

Mr. Towey

It cannot be subsumed into anything else without the agreement of Ireland as a member state that it wants to move in that direction and I do not foresee that in the short term. With regard to the expertise in service provision, it is a dimension of the single European sky package that has been addressed by Europe. A directive has passed the first stage of political agreement at Council and it is before the European Parliament. It is designed to lead to greater harmonisation of the training and qualifications of air traffic control providers.

Chairman

Is an Irish qualification recognised by the aviation authorities in the UK or Italy, for example?

Mr. Towey

It is potentially recognisable in the sense that the existing qualifications are based on requirements laid down by ICAO, the International Civil Aviation Organisation, and Eurocontrol. The recognition of the qualification is not automatic. Agreement is required by service providers so that they are satisfied with the respective qualifications but, under the new directive, there will be a more streamlined approach to automatic recognition. Issues relating to language will arise in some instances.

Chairman

The reason I ask is a number of aviation licences issued in Europe are not acceptable in Ireland and they are queried. I am wondering whether the reverse is the case if somebody attained air traffic control requirements in Ireland. For example, UK pilot instructor qualifications are not recognised in Ireland. I wonder whether the reverse will take place.

Mr. O’Sullivan

Yes, it will. A joint European controller licence is being designed and all our controllers meet the standards and requirements to have that licence. Similarly, all our engineers are governed by European engineering requirements and they meet those standards. Perhaps, the Chairman may be referring to airworthiness and the licensing of aircraft.

Chairman

That is part of it but there is also the question of the licensing of instructors. The qualification of instructors to train in the UK may not satisfy Irish standards, despite the belief that it is a higher standard.

Mr. O’Sullivan

Generally, the instructors must have experience or knowledge of the system on which they are providing instruction. For example, if an instructor provided a course for Dublin Airport, he would have to be licensed to operate there prior to giving the course. The same applies in Europe. A high level instructor, for example, in the Maastricht area would have to have high level ratings for Shannon Airport to train somebody there and vice versa. Apart from that, there is no difference.

Chairman

Does Mr. O'Sullivan wish to go through his presentation?

Mr. O’Sullivan

The first six or seven slides have been covered by Mr. Towey. I refer to the Irish Aviation Authority's strategy and what we have been doing to enable us to take part in both a functional air space block and in single European sky initiatives. The authority's technology strategy is based on drivers, which include our customers, the International Air Transport Association, airlines, ICAO, which lays down standards and Eurocontrol, which lays down EU standards and the EU. We have been in discussions with the UK on a functional air space block. This is a high level block which does not deal with approach. We are discussing a transition area between Oceanic operations and European air space. We have agreed the transfer of radar data between the two countries. It is laid out on a yearly basis. Under surveillance, we will take feeds from UK radars in 2009. We provide the UK with a feed from our Mount Gabriel radar, which is also fed to France. We are taking a feed from the Tiree radar in Scotland. We will feed the Dublin radars to NATS in 2009.

With regard to navigation and communications, our systems are being or have been replaced and they are all fully capable of meeting both the SESAR and FAB requirements. Ireland has an up-to-date and good system in place. ADSB, automatic dependent surveillance broadcast is the only area in which we are doing work on research and development with Eurocontrol. The aircraft sends out its position every ten seconds without being asked for it. We have put receivers in place for testing to see if they will work in addition to our radars.

Chairman

The authority is, therefore, up to speed on technology.

Mr. O’Sullivan

Ireland is well up to speed.

Chairman

That is important. At least human error will be eliminated in the not too distant future.

Having considered the proposal the committee would like to be kept informed by the Department of developments on the proposal. Is that agreed? Agreed. The committee has completed its consideration of COM (2005) 602. In accordance with Standing Order 81(4), a report will be laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas and a copy of the report will be sent to the Sub-committee on European Scrutiny and the Department of Transport. On behalf of the committee, I thank Mr. Towey, Mr. Doyle and Mr. O'Sullivan for their attendance and their comprehensive replies to our questions.

The committee will now discuss COM (2005) 579 concerning a proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and the Council on common rules in the field of civil aviation and establishing a European Aviation Safety Agency. The proposal was referred to the committee for further scrutiny by the EU scrutiny sub-committee of the Joint Committee on European Affairs.

I welcome Mr. Robin McKay, Principal Officer, Department of Transport. I draw the witness's attention to the fact that members of the committee have absolute privilege but the same privilege does not apply to witnesses appearing before the committee. I will again remind members of the parliamentary practice that members should not comment on, criticise or make charges against any person outside the House or of an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. An opening statement has been circulated to members by Mr. McKay who will now brief the committee on the proposals.

Mr. Robin McKay

I circulated a short note to members but, unfortunately, I did not bring a slide show.

Chairman

That is not a problem.

Mr. McKay

The purpose of the proposal which is the subject of discussion today is to extend the responsibility of the European Aviation Safety Agency into the areas of flight operations, flight crew licensing and regulation of third country aircraft. This expansion of the agency was envisaged in the regulation in 2002 which established the agency.

In order to connect with the previous item, I should mention that even after this proposal goes through the legislative process, there will still be two areas which the European Aviation Safety Agency will not have competence for regulating air traffic control and aerodromes. It is intended to bring these into EASA's competence sometime in the future, but there is not a timeframe at the moment. When EASA was established, the member states gave the Community competence in the areas of aircraft design and maintenance. This is the area in which EASA operates from a start-up position in 2002. While the agency is still not up to its full strength, it is growing steadily and gathering competence.

The aviation safety regulation generally takes place in the framework of the Chicago Convention, which was agreed in 1944 and embraces 180 member states. The Joint Aviation Authorities was established within Europe in 1990. It was designed to provide a harmonised set of regulations for implementing the ICAO more high level proposals. The Joint Aviation Authorities was never a statutory body. It was a matter of choice for the member countries of the authorities whether and how quickly they implemented the Joint Aviation Authorities' rules. It was from that point of view that Europe decided to legislate to make the rules mandatory under European law, which gave rise to the establishment of the European Aviation Safety Agency.

The regulations that are currently applied by EASA for aircraft design and maintenance are effectively the same as the Joint Aviation Authorities' rules that immediately preceded the European Aviation Safety Agency. It is intended that the same will happen to the rules for flight crew licensing and flight operations. There will be no net effect in the short-term for the airlines. They will continue to operate under the current rules. The difference is that the rules will become mandatory and common across the community. It is important to mention that the Irish Aviation Authority has been very vigilant in keeping Irish rules up-to-date with the most recent version of the Joint Aviation Authorities rules. As EASA takes over, there will be very little obvious change for Ireland and airlines operating in Ireland.

Under the existing EASA competence in aircraft design and maintenance, EASA has been deliberately taking active responsibility in Cologne. In other words, it is gathering together a technical team which is capable of delivering the aircraft certification and the certification of modifications and so on which are a day-to-day part of operating an aircraft fleet. Following the new extension, it is not intended to operate like that. It is intended that EASA will devise the rules but the member state authorities, such as the Irish Aviation Authority, will be responsible for implementing them. As there is very little involvement in Ireland in aircraft design, it is the next phase of EASA that will have the bigger impact on the Irish Aviation Authority. However, it is not intended to transfer on-the-ground activities from the Irish Aviation Authority to EASA headquarters in Cologne.

The practicalities of establishing EASA have had an impact on staffing and the availability of competence, both in the national authorities that regulate aircraft design and in the Joint Aviation Authorities. People have been either applying for and moving to work with EASA or, alternatively, taking personal life choices and deciding that, as they will not have a future in the national authorities, they should seek out a future for themselves in the aviation industry. As a consequence, it is proving difficult to maintain the previous level of competence in the Joint Aviation Authorities. The plan is that the Joint Aviation Authorities should be wound up at the end of the year and that EASA should carry out the functions that were previously undertaken by the Joint Aviation Authorities. The expectation at the moment is that this legislative proposal will be acted on fairly quickly.

Chairman

Other than the owners, who has the right to ground an aircraft that is considered unsafe?

Mr. McKay

There are two slightly different answers to that question. If the Irish Aviation Authority were to discover an aircraft on the ground in Ireland with serious problems, it could ground it immediately.

Chairman

How regularly are they checked?

Mr. McKay

There are two different aspects. There are the aircraft which are the responsibility of the Irish Aviation Authority, namely, the ones that are registered in Ireland, which are subject to an extensive ongoing checking process.

Chairman

A manual check.

Mr. McKay

Yes.

Chairman

I am not worried about these aircraft.

Mr. McKay

A percentage of the foreign aircraft that come into Ireland are subject to a certain amount of random checks by the Irish Aviation Authority. Obviously the focus would be on aircraft about which it may have concerns. It is probably fair to say that we in Ireland do not have so many aircraft from African countries, for example, where there has been a lot of concern about safety. It is probably not as big an issue in Ireland as it is in other member countries. However, if the Irish Aviation Authority found an aircraft with serious deficiencies, including unqualified crew and so on, it has the authority to ground the aircraft.

Chairman

Mr. McKay might find out what percentage of them are checked.

Mr. McKay

Certainly. Last year the European Union passed a law which entitles Europe to effectively ban airlines which fail to meet safety standards. The list of approximately 70 airlines was published recently.

Chairman

None was recognisable, bar one or two.

Mr. McKay

No. The difficulty is that, even if one identifies them, the names change. This is a substantial step forward in terms of having a harmonised European approach to that problem. However, it does not cut across the entitlement of the Irish Aviation Authority to step in immediately if a serious flaw is discovered.

Chairman

What are the penalties for non-compliance?

Mr. McKay

The basic penalty for non-compliance is that they are not allowed to operate. Bearing in mind the cost of aircraft, it is a major economic penalty.

Deputy O. Mitchell

Am I right in saying there are no significant implications for us because we have kept up with the standard and that it is really about harmonisation and ensuring that the standard is raised in parts of Europe where it may not be as high?

Mr. McKay

Yes.

Chairman

I thank Mr. McKay for briefing us on this matter. The Joint Committee on Transport has completed its consideration of EU proposal COM (2005) 579 in accordance with Standing Order 81(4). A report will be laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas and a copy of it will be sent to the EU scrutiny sub-committee of European Affairs and to the Department of Transport.

Sitting suspended at 3.01 p.m. and resumed at 3.02 p.m.