Making Aviation Better: Our key strategies strategic plan APR16 v2.pdf · Making Aviation Better: Our key strategies CAP 1360 . CAP 1360 April 2016 Page 2 Published by the Civil Aviation

Civil Aviation Authority

The CAA’s Strategic Plan 2016–2021

Making Aviation Better: Our key strategies

CAP 1360

CAP 1360

April 2016 Page 2

Published by the Civil Aviation Authority, 2015

Civil Aviation Authority

CAA House

45-59 Kingsway

London

WC2B 6TE

You can copy and use this text but please ensure you always use the most up to date version and use it in

context so as not to be misleading, and credit the CAA.

The latest version of this document is available in electronic format at www.caa.co.uk

http://www.caa.co.uk/

CAP 1360 Contents

April 2016 Page 3

Contents

Contents 3

Introduction 5

Chapter 1 7

Our key programmes: aviation safety 7

Better safety intelligence 7

Implement performance-based regulation 9

International regulatory relationships 10

Keeping pace with change 12

What matters to consumers and the public: being safe 13

Our high-level safety objective, outcomes and measures 13

Chapter 2 15

Our key programmes: aviation security 15

Providing regulatory expertise 15

Compliance monitoring 17

Security Management Systems 18

What matters to consumers and the public: being secure 20

Our high-level objective, outcomes and measures 20

Chapter 3 23

Our key programmes: choice, value and fair treatment 23

Regulating to get the most from infrastructure 24

Modernising holiday protection 27

Empowering consumers through information 28

Securing consumer redress and enforcement 29

What matters to consumers: receiving choice, value and fair treatment 31


Chapter 4 35

Our key programmes: environment 35

Aiding performance through information 35

CAP 1360 Contents

April 2016 Page 4

Generating new data for decision-makers 37

Helping us reach the right decisions 37

What matters to consumers and the public: the environment 39


Chapter 5 42

Our key programmes: better regulation 42

Promoting growth 42

Reducing burdens on businesses 44

Better decision-making 45

CAP 1360 Introduction

April 2016 Page 5

Introduction

This Strategic Plan sets out how we plan to fulfil our vision of making aviation better

for those who choose to fly and those who do not. The Plan covers the period 2016–

2021 and sets out what we want to achieve and how we plan to do it.

An introduction and overview of our vision, context and priorities for that period is available

as a series of webpages on our website at http://www.caa.co.uk/Our-work/Corporate-

reports/Strategic-Plan/Our-five-year-strategic-plan/

This document is best read alongside those pages.

A summary of our strategic approach:

http://www.caa.co.uk/Our-work/Corporate-reports/Strategic-Plan/Our-five-year-strategic-plan/

http://www.caa.co.uk/Our-work/Corporate-reports/Strategic-Plan/Our-five-year-strategic-plan/

CAP 1360 Introduction

April 2016 Page 6

This document focuses on the key strategies we are adopting during the five years of the

Plan, aligned to achievement of our consumer and public outcomes and how we intend to

measure sector performance in each area.

These programmes describe in more detail the work we intend to undertake. Our work

reflects our priorities and the other work that we are either committed to doing or that is

being targeted at an identified risk or opportunity in order to deliver our statutory duties.

We have defined a number of outcomes at both the consumer and public level and at the

level of individual strategies. Where possible we have used data to check that any

outcomes we establish are focused on what matters to consumers and the public.

CAP 1360 Chapter 1: Our key programmes: aviation safety

April 2016 Page 7

Chapter 1

Our key programmes: aviation safety

1.1 Our number one concern is the safety of the sector, and in particular consumers

and the public. This concern is also shared by those we regulate. The challenge

for us is in assisting the sector to continue to achieve excellent safety outcomes

and holding it to account for doing so. This starts with having the most accurate

picture of the risks that the sector faces.

1.2 As with all of our programmes, we place considerable weight on understanding

risk. A proper understanding of safety risks will drive the effective and

proportionate interventions listed in our safety programme and we will continue

to invest in our colleagues, processes and relationships that help us, our

international partners and those that we regulate to understand and respond to

risk in an effective way.

1.3 While our safety work will evolve, we anticipate that the outcomes of the seven

most common accidents we have identified will continue to provide an important

framework for our considerations around safety. We will increasingly focus on

complementary root cause ‘upstream’ risks. And we believe that we can best do

this by adopting the following strategic safety priorities, which will guide the way

we operate over the coming years.

Better safety intelligence

1.4 Our safety system is one where each individual entity has a unique perspective

on the risks they face and those they pose to others. In many cases, others’

understanding of risk will be better than ours. Where they are managing this risk,

this is entirely appropriate. A key part of our job as the regulator is in providing

an overall picture so that aggregated risks can be seen in their entirety and

management of risks improved. Pooling data and best practice from others

means that we are better placed to identify and manage risk.

1.5 The potential for everyone to make more of these perspectives is significant;

both in terms of the collection and analysis of that data, but also ensuring that it

is shared in a way that enables those best placed to act on it. As a regulator with

a network of relationships across the safety system, we see huge potential for

improving the way that information is managed and a strategic priority for the

coming years is managing safety information better to optimise safety outcomes

for consumers. For our decision-making, this means using data to better support

our own expert judgements.


April 2016 Page 8

Strategic priority

Key strategy

Key strategic outcomes

Activity

Risk-based regulation

Better safety intelligence

Intelligence is processed and exploited to best effect to create the risk picture necessary to effectively drive performance-based oversight (PBO) and other safety interventions.

Data and information sharing between regulators, the aviation community and other stakeholders enriches the total risk picture and knowledge in order to target safety risk management effectively.

Enable CAA direct access to the necessary sector and consumer data and information to support the risk-based regulatory and oversight activity.

Significant activity to generate data sets and implement access arrangements 2016-18, becoming routine activity 2019-21.

Share safety information internally and externally (where permitted by law) – with consumers and the aviation community – in a way that encourages and drives action.

Some information-sharing as capabilities are established 2016-18; increasing information-sharing both internally and externally 2018-21.

Use risk-based intelligence gathering to inform the risk picture in the areas of most concern where the most significant exposure to risk may lie. Work with limitations on available information where the exposure is less.

Ongoing 2016-21, maturing and improving in line with the evolution of performance-based regulation (PBR).

Build and enhance our capacity to collect and exploit data and information.

Significant activity 2016-17 improving in line with our maturing intelligence function; ongoing activity 2018-21.

Ensure that appropriate systems and tools, subject matter expertise and levels of resource are available to support the data interpretation effort necessary.

Significant activity 2016-17 improving in line with our maturing Intelligence function and ongoing activity 2018-21.

The total risk picture is designed and evolved to incorporate the contribution of new streams of data and information and its exploitation delivers focused activities to address risk.

Significant activity 2016-17 in line with our evolution of PBR and the establishment of our risk oversight domain; ongoing development of the total risk picture 2018-21.

Develop ways of using data to help consumers make informed choices.

Ongoing activity developing and maturing processes and systems 2016-21.


April 2016 Page 9

Implement performance-based regulation

1.6 Performance-based regulation (PBR) means developing a comprehensive risk

picture with the organisations we regulate and building our knowledge and data

to make sure we target our regulation in the areas where it will make the biggest

difference.

1.7 PBR has been the subject of a transformation programme for the business

focused on embedding PBR theory and practice within the organisation and

those that we regulate. Combining this transformation effort, the CAA will

strengthen its ability to assure that the major risks to UK aviation consumers are

being well managed. We are not alone in recognising that change is required.

PBR is central to the European Aviation Safety Agency’s (EASA) and the

International Civil Aviation Organisation’s (ICAO) future plans. The CAA is

working closely with our international colleagues to shape how PBR works in

practice. We have also sought the views of the aviation community. They have

fed back that PBR should make the CAA more proportionate and targeted, give

us a greater degree of commercial awareness and make us more transparent

about how money is spent.

1.8 Our decision to focus on PBR reflects the move from an approach based on

more prescriptive rules to one based on a much better appreciation by us and by

those we regulate of where the risks are occurring and the capability of individual

entities to manage them.

1.9 Part of ensuring that PBR works effectively is fostering a culture of transparency

and openness; it is important that everyone is transparent when things go well

and when they do not. Cultivating an atmosphere where people have

confidence to report safety concerns without fear of blame is key to this.

Employees must know that confidentiality will be maintained and that the

information they submit will be acted upon appropriately.

Strategic priority

Key strategy Key strategic outcomes Activity


Implement performance-based regulation

Effective safety oversight coupled with aviation community risk management provides confidence that safety risk controls and accountability mechanisms are in place and are effective.

PBR, through standardisation of processes and tools and the development of key management information delivers efficiency and productivity benefits.

Key aviation safety

Strengthen and standardise the approach to oversight by completing the transformation to PBO.

Implementation activity in 2016-17; system evolution in 2018-21.

Implement the Regulatory Safety Management System (RSMS) to bring together all safety risk analysis, decision making, prioritisation of resources and tracking of safety improvement projects under one governance structure.

2016-18 to develop and mature


April 2016 Page 10

Strategic priority


professionals and organisations reliably deliver what is expected of them.

Contribution to Better Regulation outcomes, for example through PBO, will help deliver proportionality of the oversight regime.

CAA achieves the best safety outcomes for the consumer with the resources available.

Robust safety decision-making to inform resource allocation.

Future oversight plans are tailored based on the latest assessment of an entity’s safety risks and performance to help plans be proportionate and targeted.

Contribution to Better Regulation outcomes, for example RSMS means regulation is effectively targeted.

A Just Culture has been completely embedded as a fundamental of aviation SMS.

RSMS; ongoing routine activity 2018-21.

Just Culture is an intrinsic element of Safety Management Systems (SMS); consider the inclusion of Just Culture as part of SMS oversight regime and tool kit.

Ongoing activity 2016-21.

International regulatory relationships

1.10 As a national regulator, we are part of a bigger safety system. Aviation has

always been international and never more so than today. Many of the risks UK

consumers face can only be addressed in this context. More than ever, rules and

regulations that are implemented in the UK are developed in the European

Commission, EASA or ICAO. The CAA has always sought influence beyond the

UK because it delivers benefit, and we intend to continue to be a significant and

constructive international partner of these bodies.

1.11 The success of the European aviation safety system depends on all parties

discharging their respective functions effectively. But since these functions are

closely related, in some cases with complex interfaces, there has to be close

collaboration at many different levels. We are one of the biggest National


April 2016 Page 11

Aviation Authorities (NAAs) in Europe and have established relationships with

EASA and ICAO.

1.12 We believe that the European safety system will require greater central

coordination and direction of activities along with a more flexible approach to

allow new responsibilities and collaborative working. EASA is the only

organisation that holds the bigger picture for European safety and we are

supportive of EASA and the NAAs working more closely together in partnership,

accepting that there are some tasks that are simply better off being conducted by

EASA than by the NAAs using a non-uniform approach.

1.13 In supporting the development of the European safety system, the CAA’s current

strategic model for this is a ‘planetary system’ with EASA at the centre orbited by

the NAAs as planets linked to EASA by the Basic Regulation; the larger NAAs

being able to support their own State activities and supporting EASA in

discharging their responsibilities both inside and outside the EU. We will adopt

this position in response to current and future proposals from the European

Commission and EASA including the European Safety Strategy and revisions to

the Basic Regulation on safety.

Strategic priority Key strategy Key strategic outcomes Activity

Risk based regulation

International regulatory relationships

Emerging international regulation is fit for purpose, proportionate, and sustains and improves safety standards.

EASA, ICAO and the UK strategic priorities are aligned.

The UK is a partner of choice for EASA and other international stakeholders in order to strengthen and widen the impact of European safety regulations.

CAA is agile and flexible, and is evolving to remain a fully capable NAA within the EASA system.

Effective regulatory oversight of new business models in a transnational aviation sector.

Prioritise and resource our engagement with EASA and ICAO for best effect to achieve our strategic safety ambitions.

Significant activity (particularly with EASA) 2016-17 with ongoing effort 2018-21.

The CAA retains and strengthens the necessary core/essential capabilities to support our strategic ambitions and those of our partners.

Significant activity 2016-17 with ongoing effort to nuance and align our capabilities 2018-21.

The CAA initiates and acts as a driver for cooperative oversight.

Significant activity with EASA and through bilaterals 2016-2018.


April 2016 Page 12

Keeping pace with change

1.14 We have the potential to impact positively or negatively the way that the aviation

community evolves to serve consumers, either because well-intended but poorly

designed regulation gets in the way of innovation, or we fail to step in to facilitate

positive developments when opportunities arise. We plan to position ourselves

as supporters of consumer-friendly innovation. We will do this by focusing on

outcomes not inputs, and leaving the the aviation community to innovate. In

doing so, we will be careful in understanding the limits of what we or others are

able to predict about the path of change.

Strategic priority

Key strategy Key strategic outcomes

Activity


Infrastructure optimisation

Technological innovation

Keeping pace with change

Effective regulatory oversight of new business models in a transnational aviation sector.

New oversight models/methods are in place to support the roll-out of new technology and systems.

The UK has a more flexible and integrated airspace system aligned with European developments and technological changes, which improves safety, capacity and efficiency and balances the requirements of all airspace users.

The CAA proactively develops regulatory frameworks to enable government and other innovation strategies.

The CAA initiates and acts as a driver for cooperative oversight and other enabling arrangements.

Significant activity with EASA and through bilateral trials 2016-18; becoming increasingly routine activity 2019-21.

Develop regulatory frameworks and influence internationally to support

technological innovation such as spaceplanes and drones

2016-2021

The CAA proactively develops and deploys oversight models and methodologies in order to enable the exploitation of new technologies and complex systems.

Ongoing activity 2016-21.

The CAA retains an appropriate role in the Future Airspace Strategy (FAS) deployment and evolution, primarily making regulatory decisions as airspace and safety regulator.

Ongoing activity 2016-21 supporting peaks in activity in line with FAS deployment plans.

Support or facilitate UK Government strategies and initiatives in aviation and other areas where a contribution from aviation is beneficial.

Ongoing activity 2016-21 supporting peaks in activity, for example on drones, spaceplanes and spectrum release.


April 2016 Page 13

What matters to consumers and the public: being safe

1.15 The UK performs very well in the safe performance of its aviation sector. The

CAA’s consumer research suggests that consumers value the safety of aviation

above everything else, although some do not want more information about

safety. There is a high level of confidence in safety standards and the majority

consider that air travel is safer than other modes of transport.

1.16 In addition to the consumer dimension to safety, there are wider societal benefits

in ensuring that the consumer feels safe when travelling by air – confidence in

the sector facilitates the ability to travel and trade, creating social and economic

effects that benefit the UK.

Our high-level safety objective, outcomes and measures

1.17 The following table sets out our high-level objectives and related consumer and

public outcomes for safety, as well as how we intend to measure progress.

1.18 In the area of safety, measuring performance is complex. Although there is a

significant amount of data, past actions have meant that the UK’s aviation safety

performance is such that accidents are relatively rare.

1.19 Objective measures of the safety of the sector therefore focus instead on some

of the secondary indicators that help us to determine how well we and the

aviation community entities within the sector are managing safety performance,

for example, through our Regulatory Safety Management System (RSMS).

SAFETY OBJECTIVE

To sustain and, where appropriate, enhance aviation safety performance.

Key high-level risks to the consumer and the public that we are addressing through

this objective:

Commercial air transport (including offshore helicopters) accident in the UK General aviation accident in the UK Commercial air transport accident involving UK Air Operator’s Certificate (AOC)

anywhere in the world Commercial air transport accident anywhere in the world involving UK passengers. Consumers believe that safety is inadequate, arising from actual or perceived

failings Disproportionate safety regime imposed


April 2016 Page 14

SAFETY OUTCOME

What success looks like

MONITOR

What we look for to measure progress towards success

DATA

Information that makes monitor meaningful

DATA SOURCE

Where we get the data

1. Aviation safety for the UK consumer and the UK public is assured.

(1. a) Whether injuries or fatalities occur as a result of aviation activities.

Whether the appropriate regulatory measures are in place and are being enforced in order to protect the UK consumer and UK public.

Fatal accident rates (outright and comparison to the EU average).

Mandatory Occurrence Reporting (MOR) database, European Coordination Centre for Accident and Incident Reporting Systems (ECCAIRS), Flightglobal accident datafeed, the Department for Transport (DfT) safety related statistics for other transport modes, CAA Investigations & Enforcement Team data.

Moving average fatal accident rate (to show an improving trend).

MOR rates (high severity (A & B) and low severity (C & D) MORs total and by sector).

Comparison of fatal accident (and serious incident, where available) rates for aviation with other modes of transport.

Ground injuries sustained as a result of aviation activity (broken down by type of activity).

2. UK consumers and the UK public benefit from sector modernisation and technological development and innovation.

(2. a) Whether the aviation consumer and UK public experience is improved as a result of new technologies and a modernised aviation environment.

Average fleet age (highlighting a reducing trend as a positive indicator).

UK aircraft register database.

Future Airspace Strategy Industry Implementation Group scheme of activity.

Levels of aircraft equipage/equipment serviceability.

Assessment of future airspace initiatives to quantify air traffic system benefits delivered.

3. The UK consumers and the UK public, wherever they fly, have confidence in aviation safety.

(3. a) Whether the public and consumers are confident that aviation is safe and they are not deterred from flying anywhere in the world.

Perception of aviation safety through tracker survey.

Consumer tracker survey.

4. The cost to consumers and the public of the safety regime is kept proportionate to the benefit attained.

(4. a) Whether consumers and public receive safety benefits proportionate with the cost of regulation.

Evidence of impact assessments conducted that show net safety benefit (relative to cost).

Regulatory impact assessments.

Business engagement assessments.

CAP 1360 Chapter 2: Our key programmes: aviation security

April 2016 Page 15

Chapter 2

Our key programmes: aviation security

2.1 The security of the aviation sector is a key focus for the CAA, for our

stakeholders, and for those using aviation services. In our work on aviation

security, the CAA’s main role is to advise and support the Secretary of State for

Transport in the regulation of aviation security in the UK.

2.2 Responsibility for regulation and overseeing aviation security passed to the CAA

from the DfT in 2014. We work to achieve our strategic objective to ensure that

civil aviation entities operating in the UK maintain security arrangements

which address the risk to their operations and the public.

2.3 In line with the CAA’s strategic priorities, we are investing in our infrastructure to

improve collection and analysis of performance data; establishing the Security

Management System (SeMS) approach to quality assurance, as a move towards

risk-based regulation; regulating responsively to the aviation community’s

technological and commercial innovation, and to consumers’ expectations of

proportionate and targeted rule-making; and pursuing excellence in service

delivery across all of our work.

2.4 Our work covers three priority activities:

1. Providing regulatory expertise: supporting the DfT in the development of

policy advice to the Secretary of State, framing and issuing regulations to

deliver policy decisions, and providing advice and guidance to the sector on

their implementation.

2. Compliance monitoring: monitoring the implementation of security

regulations, through observations, inspections, tests and audits, and, where

necessary, enforcement.

3. Security Management Systems: supporting the aviation sector in adopting

and implementing SeMS. This will both reinforce security and facilitate a future

move, European legislation permitting, to a performance-based form of

regulation.

Providing regulatory expertise

2.5 The overarching function within our regulation activity is to provide expert

support, advice and guidance on aviation security – to the DfT on its own policy

making, and that undertaken in Brussels; on the development and interpretation

of aviation security regulations; and to the public in response to queries or

complaints about how those regulations are implemented.


April 2016 Page 16

2.6 We also keep under review those UK security requirements which, reflecting the

higher assessed threat to aviation in this country, are more demanding than

those in the EU baseline regime (the UK “More Stringent Measures”, or MSMs).

This involves stakeholders identifying MSMs which are particularly burdensome

and/or appear to be no longer proportionate, and subjecting these to fresh risk

and impact assessments. The final decision on whether any given MSM should

be retained, adjusted or removed rests with the DfT.

2.7 Building on this proportionate approach to security regulation, we also consider

requests from the aviation community for derogations or urgent temporary

alleviations of security requirements. Once again, the final decision lies with the

DfT.

2.8 We provide a National Security Vetting function for those undertaking security

activities to apply for the relevant clearance. In the majority of cases, this work is

undertaken by the CAA’s appointed contractor, Defence Business Services.

However, if a case raises a concern, it is returned to CAA for consideration and a

final decision on whether clearance should be granted. We also consider

appeals in respect of failed applications, and offer regulatory and system-

technical advice to the aviation community on the subject of vetting and use of

Defence Business Services’ online portal.

2.9 The CAA develops and manages the UK’s aviation security training programme,

under the DfT’s arm’s-length oversight.

2.10 Finally, an important and relatively recent role is the security of cargo and mail

which is to be flown into the UK and the wider EU, on routes from certain states

and airports outside Europe. This is an EU-wide programme with states and

airports for which the UK is responsible allocated by the European Commission.

Key to the activity is the independent validation of the security applied to cargo

and mail. The CAA is responsible for recommending to the DfT whether an

airline may be approved.

Strategic priority Key strategy Key strategic outcomes

Activity


Providing regulatory expertise

An aviation security regulatory framework that reflects European baseline requirements and particular threats to aviation in the UK.

CAA expertise allows the DfT to make informed, evidence-based decisions in developing aviation security policy.

Single consolidated direction regular updates.

Periodic

Continual review of the UK More Stringent Measures (MSMs).

Annually, 2016-21

Security vetting and training.

Ongoing

Support and advice to


April 2016 Page 17


Activity

Entities are clear about the aviation security requirements and receive robust, evidence-based judgements in response to their requests for alleviations and derogations.

Security of cargo and mail flown into the EU on routes from certain states and airports beyond Europe is assured.

the DfT including international work, including Crown Dependencies and Gibraltar (CD and Gib).

Ongoing

Processing applications for new (and review of existing) ACC3 (air cargo or mail carrier operating into the EU from a third country airport) designations.

Ongoing

Cargo transfer screening exemptions.

Ongoing

Cargo transfer screening exemptions policy.

2016 and 2019 to support the DfT reviews.

Compliance monitoring

2.11 Compliance monitoring activity covers UK airports, UK and non-UK airlines,

regulated cargo agents, and regulated suppliers of in-flight supplies. Save for full

audits, monitoring activity is generally unannounced. In conducting observations,

inspections, audits and (overt and covert) tests, auditors are tasked based on the

entity’s past compliance records and internal quality control arrangements,

alongside other targeting factors.

2.12 We follow a stepped approach in rectifying any issues identified by our

compliance monitoring. In the first instance, this is working in partnership and

changing practices through advice and influencing. This generally proves

sufficient, but where necessary we are able to escalate matters proportionately.

If difficulties still persist we may choose to issue either an Enforcement Notice or

a Compliance Direction, instruments with legal force. Ultimately, we are able to

refer cases for prosecution.

2.13 The CAA facilitates and assists regular European Commission audits of both the

discharge of the Secretary of State’s responsibilities as the UK’s appropriate

authority for aviation security and UK airports’ implementation of EU security

requirements. We also offer assistance and advice in connection with the DfT’s

obligations in respect of aviation security in Gibraltar, Jersey, Guernsey and the

Isle of Man.


April 2016 Page 18


Activity


Compliance monitoring Instances of non-compliance with EU and UK security requirements by airports, air carriers, cargo operators and in-flight suppliers are swiftly detected and rectified.

The UK’s reputation and credibility as an aviation security regulator is maintained and enhanced.

Sound advice is provided to the DfT in relation to the robustness of aviation security in Gibraltar, Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man.

Audit, inspection and broader observation activity as part of ongoing oversight.

Ongoing

Support to EU appropriate authority and airport inspections.

2017 and 2020

Annual reporting process to the European Commission.

Annual.

Security Management Systems

2.14 The third priority activity is the continued roll-out of the SeMS approach to the

operator’s quality assurance of its security performance.

2.15 As the security threat to civil aviation evolves and grows in sophistication,

delivery of robust security becomes more demanding and complex. SeMS is

about managing that complexity through the adoption of a systematic approach

to aviation security, in ways which embed it in the daily operations and culture of

the organisation. An effective SeMS provides the operator with assurance that its

security risks are fully understood and managed pro-actively and effectively,

within clear lines of accountability and sound governance. It also enables an

operator to satisfy EU quality control requirements.

2.16 This concept is not unique to the UK, but its voluntary adoption by operators is a

DfT goal, and responsibility for its promotion and for supporting its roll-out across

the sector lies with the CAA. A risk-driven SeMS framework informed by the

experience gained by the CAA and the sector in developing Safety Management

Systems has been produced by the DfT and the CAA, working closely with the

aviation community.

2.17 Designed to help the operator realise an effective security culture, the framework

comprises the following elements:

Management commitment


April 2016 Page 19

Threat and risk management

Accountability and responsibilities

Resource

Performance monitoring, assessment and reporting

Incident response

Management of change

Continuous improvement

Training and education

Communication

2.18 Moving towards a SeMS approach will deliver efficiencies for the CAA and

operators alike. While some security functions will always be monitored most

effectively through direct oversight, the SeMS approach is broadly summarised

below:

2.19 Looking further ahead, the sector-wide adoption of the SeMS framework is a

necessary precursor for a move from prescriptive aviation security regulation to

one which is performance-based. Here again, aviation security would be

following in the steps of aviation safety, and building on the CAA’s experience of

that journey. Performance-based regulation (PBR) of aviation security could not

be adopted by the UK alone, and so must satisfy not only UK but also EU

legislators that aviation security could be maintained and enhanced in a PBR

environment. PBR would afford an operator much greater flexibility than at

present, in the local design and configuration of aviation security measures, and

so allow their better fit with its overall operational model. It would call for

DIRECT

Policy set by DfT and across the EU

prescribes the actions required

DIRECT Policy set by DfT and

across the EU prescribes the actions

required

DO

Operator “does what it is told to do”

INSPECT CAA Compliance Team conducts

inspections

ASSURE Operator self-assures

using SeMS, and shares results with

CAA

AUDIT

CAA audits SeMS and the outputs shared

with it, notably the Key Performance

Indicators

Today…

After SeMS roll-out…


April 2016 Page 20

transformational change not only in the aviation community but also across our

own processes and systems.

Strategic priorities

Key strategy

Key strategic outcomes Activity


Security management systems (SeMS)

Air transport operators adopt an effective SeMS, bringing additional assurance that all of the risks to their operations have been identified and addressed.

Compliance monitoring progressively incorporates a performance-based approach, alongside the aviation community’s adoption of SeMS.

Civil aviation in the UK is better positioned for a move to PBR, as and when European legislation allows.

Pathfinder adopters and oversight trial across the sectors.

2016-21

SeMS adopters across the sectors.

2018-21 (dependent on outcomes from pathfinders).

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) derivation and digitalisation of inputs.

2016-17

Review of oversight manpower scheduling tool.

2017

What matters to consumers and the public: being secure

2.20 Our consumer research suggests that the majority of flyers with some previous

experience of security procedures feel that the right balance has been struck

between the effectiveness of screening and convenience to passengers.

However, some consumers perceive that a lack of consistency in security

procedures concerns them (either within the UK or overseas).

2.21 The dynamic threat to the UK’s aviation sector should be understood by the key

parties involved in decision-making and applying regulations, and countered

effectively to offer a secure environment for consumers.

Our high-level objective, outcomes and measures

2.22 The following table sets out our high-level objective and related consumer and

public outcomes for security, as well as how we intend to measure success.

2.23 Because of the sensitive nature of this area, publicising measures for our

aviation security work is difficult. However, in a number of areas we are able to

gain information, for example, to help with proportionate security regulation and

strengthen passenger confidence in the system.

2.24 The table below identifies where we are able to produce measures against the

outcomes we want to achieve and where it is not possible to do so.


April 2016 Page 21

SECURITY OBJECTIVE

To ensure that civil aviation entities operating in the UK maintain security

arrangements which fully address the risk to their operations and to the public,

complying with EU and UK requirements.


this objective:

Consumers Consumers believe that security is inadequate, arising from actual or perceived

security failing. Disproportionate security regime imposed on consumers.

Consumers and public Successful attack on UK airport, any aircraft departing a UK airport, or any aircraft

that is subject to UK ACC3 validation. Successful attack on any aircraft that is not subject to UK ACC3 validation inbound

to UK.

SECURITY OUTCOME


MONITOR


DATA


DATA SOURCE


1. To assure the security of all flights departing from UK airports.

n/a – sensitive. n/a – sensitive. n/a – sensitive.

2. To assure the physical security airside at UK airports in order to protect the travelling public.


3. To assure that flights departing from UK airports do not cause damage, injury or death to the overflown, as a consequence of a failure in security.


4. To ensure that aviation security regulation is proportionate and imposes no unnecessary inconvenience on or disruption to the

(4. a) Whether the traveller experiences any inconvenience.

(4. a. i) Time spent by travellers in queue for security screening.

Gatwick Airport website Heathrow Airport website

(4. b) Whether the regulatory measures imposed on the aviation community are perceived to be

(4. b. i) Aviation community feedback, individually and through stakeholder fora.

Feedback from CAA tracker survey.

http://www.gatwickairport.com/business-community/about-gatwick/our-performance/

http://www.heathrowairport.com/about-us/company-news-and-information/performance/airport-operations/service-quality-rebate-and-bonus-scheme

http://www.heathrowairport.com/about-us/company-news-and-information/performance/airport-operations/service-quality-rebate-and-bonus-scheme


April 2016 Page 22

SECURITY OUTCOME


MONITOR


DATA


DATA SOURCE


traveller. reasonable and far from burdensome.

5. To ensure that people feel confident in the security of UK aviation and are not deterred from taking flights from UK airports or aboard UK airlines.

(5. a) Whether the public and consumers are confident that aviation is safe and they are not deterred from taking flights from UK airports or aboard UK airlines.

(5. a. i) Perception of aviation safety through tracker survey.

Feedback from CAA tracker survey.

6. To assure the process governing the security of air cargo inbound to the UK from certain airports outside the EU (i.e. those assigned to the UK for compliance monitoring purposes under EU regulation).


CAP 1360 Chapter 3: Our key programmes: choice, value and fair treatment

April 2016 Page 23

Chapter 3

Our key programmes: choice, value and fair treatment

3.1 The CAA works to support the UK’s aviation markets so that they work well for

consumers and businesses. Where competition is not effective, we intervene to

promote and protect consumers’ interests. We also make sure consumers’

statutory rights are respected and that those passengers entitled to special help

receive it.

3.2 Our work on safety and security involves us intervening directly in the market to

impose particular requirements. We take a different approach to delivering

choice, value and fair treatment – here we want to see well-informed and

confident consumers driving vigorous competition between businesses to

provide what consumers want as efficiently and innovatively as possible.

3.3 The activities set out in this part of our strategy take place within a framework of

commercial relationships between businesses, such as airports and airlines, and

those who ultimately buy their products and services, such as passengers and

cargo shippers. So by “consumer”, we mean anyone who uses an aviation

service, but does not provide one.

3.4 Where we do decide to intervene in this process, we will base our activities on

sound information about what matters to consumers and evidence of significant

market failures.

3.5 If the market does not work effectively there are risks to consumers getting

choice, value and fair treatment. These risks may stem from market structure,

the nature of air travel as a consumer good, or the characteristics of consumers

themselves.

3.6 Some of these risks are due to the nature of the market and affect all consumers,

often in the form of higher prices or lower quality services.

3.7 In particular, anti-competitive behaviour by businesses may restrict choice or

artificially increase prices. In places, the aviation sector is quite concentrated

across its value chain, meaning a small number of businesses dominating the

provision of certain services. This may well be an efficient way for businesses to

operate, but it does mean that the potential for consumers to be harmed by anti-

competitive practices is increased.

3.8 In addition, there are other constraints to investment, which may prevent new

companies coming into the market, or existing providers expanding to meet

demand. In this regard, one of the biggest risks currently facing consumers

arises from the lack of airport and airspace capacity in South-East England.

Even given rapid political decisions, we will not see additional capacity during the


April 2016 Page 24

period of this Plan. Capacity constraints will continue to be a key factor in our

economic regulation of Heathrow and Gatwick airports over this period.

3.9 Other risks to consumers not getting what they want come from the nature of air

travel as a consumer good.

3.10 First, some consumers, especially those with a disability or reduced mobility,

may be at particular risk of detriment when travelling by air because businesses

see them as too expensive or inconvenient to serve in a competitive

environment. This is because they are low in number and have needs that differ

from the majority of consumers. As such, leaving the needs of such consumers

to the market risks exclusion of those consumers from the market altogether.

3.11 Second, consumers depend more on information provided by the seller when

buying an infrequently purchased service like air travel than when, for example,

doing their weekly supermarket shop. Such information may be misleading,

incomplete, difficult to compare with information from other sellers, or simply

unavailable. The internet has significantly improved the availability of information

and the ability of consumers to easily compare prices and other service

attributes, but regulators must continue to be alert to the risk of consumers

making poor decisions due to inadequate information, and competition suffering

as a result.

3.12 Third, the often considerable lag between buying and flying means consumers

are less able or willing to anticipate and protect themselves against the risk of

their journey being disrupted. Aviation consumers are therefore significantly

exposed to the risk of delays, or the possibility of not being able to travel at all.

The impact of these things may be magnified if people are stranded away from

home.

3.13 Finally, a common problem for consumers across all sectors is getting redress

after problems have occurred. Consumers complaining to businesses –

particularly in a complex sector like aviation – typically suffer from an imbalance

in bargaining power, because the business dictates the complaint process and

often has more information and understanding about the problem and what may

have caused it than consumers do. Some consumers may not complain at all if

they feel they will not be treated fairly, diminishing a vital feedback loop for the

improvement of services in competitive markets.

Regulating to get the most from infrastructure

3.14 We will work closely with government and the airport sector so our regulation

works for passengers, in particular by supporting the delivery of new capacity.

3.15 In the event that the Government gives the green light to new runway capacity,

we will need to balance a range of considerations, including how the pre-

completion costs should be treated, how to incentivise delivery, and how to treat


April 2016 Page 25

the legitimate costs of surface access and mitigating environmental impact. On

the recovery of the main construction and implementation costs of runway

expansion, we can best meet our duties at this time by setting out a broad

framework of applicable regulatory principles rather than by specifying a detailed

regulatory regime. In 2015, we set out the following principles:

i) risk should be allocated to those parties who can best manage it;

ii) commercial negotiations should be encouraged, even where substantial

market power is present; and

iii) capacity can be paid for both before and/or after it opens.

3.16 We will continue to consult further on our plans when we believe it is in the users

interests to do so and when more specific information is available on the plans

for capacity expansion.

3.17 During this period, we will continue to economically regulate those companies

that have significant market power and where we think this is the best way to

protect the price and quality of services (this includes air traffic service providers

as well as Heathrow and Gatwick airports). Our next airport regulatory reviews

will be even more consumer-focused: based on good information with regulatory

incentives targeted at the outcomes that consumers value.

3.18 Because of the lead-times for developing new capacity, there will be little in the

way of usable new capacity over the period of this Plan, a period over which we

expect demand to increase. Therefore, the aviation community and consumers

will increasingly be facing a trade-off between capacity and delay.

3.19 The pressure on constrained existing capacity and the increasing demand for

travel will continue to place pressure on the performance of the sector as a

whole, including reliability and delay arising from congested airspace and

airports. Although the relationships governing “network resilience” are complex

and no simple solution is likely to exist, we plan to undertake work to assess the

costs and benefits to the consumer of increasingly intensive use of capacity with

the intent of helping to inform us how the balance should be struck in the

consumer interest and to identify regulatory responses.

3.20 We will use our competition and other sectoral powers to prevent unfair

discrimination and other abuses and to promote competition. Although such work

is largely reactive and driven by the complaints we receive, there are some

particular areas that we expect to focus on during the period of the Plan. First,

we want to make sure consumers not only get choice and value when it comes

to flights, but also in terms of how they get to the airport. This includes ensuring

that consumers using independent providers, such as off-airport parking

operators, are not discriminated against. Second, we consider that the terminal

air navigation services (TANS) sector is a contestable market, and we will be


April 2016 Page 26

working to make this sector more competitive. Finally, we will work closely with

other competition authorities to do our bit to strengthen effective end-to-end

oversight of competitive conditions for aviation services and take coordinated

action where there are features that prevent effective competition.

Strategic priority

Key strategy

Key strategic outcomes Activity


Regulating to get the most from infrastructure

Airports that we regulate provide consumers with facilities and services that meet their needs at an efficient price.

New airport capacity will be delivered on time and in a way that minimises disruption and provides value for money to the consumer.

Airports and providers of on-airport services (e.g. for parking or air traffic services) compete fairly and effectively, resulting in satisfaction and value for money for the consumer.

The CAA is well placed to prevent significant harm to consumers from anti-competitive behaviour wherever it arises in the (largely) liberalised airports market.

The CAA has a better understanding of the structure of the air travel retail market, the arrangements between parties in that market and the impact of those arrangements on consumers.

Air traffic control services provided by NATS minimise flight delays for consumers and enable significant savings in fuel, keeping prices as low as possible.

Consumers benefit from on-time departures and arrivals at regulated airports.

Design an economic regulatory regime for any new runway capacity.

2016-2021

Regulating existing capacity: conducting the next Heathrow price review

2016-2018

Mid-term review for Gatwick price review

2016-2017

Network resilience: reviewing the costs and benefits of airport and network capacity.

2016-2017

Market monitoring: Monitoring the overall performance of the aviation market for consumers, including:

- enforcement of competition law and associated sectoral regulation (Airport Charges Regulations and Groundhandling Regulations);

- issuing and maintaining guidance, encouraging compliance and investigating breaches as appropriate.

Ongoing

Review of surface access: undertaking a market review of surface access provision in the UK

2016

Market analysis: In support of the future framework for economic regulation at Heathrow and Gatwick.

2016-18

Terminal air navigation services (TANS): Consolidating market conditions in the terminal air navigation services sector.

2016-18


April 2016 Page 27

Modernising holiday protection

3.21 We will work closely with the DfT in developing the implementing legislation for

the new European Package Travel Directive to reduce complexity and increase

proportionality in our regulation results, maintaining an appropriate balance

between the interests of consumers, government and the aviation community. As

set out in the next section, we will work to raise awareness of holiday protection

arrangements among consumers, ahead of the fundamental changes that are

likely to result from implementation of the new Directive. We will continue to roll-

out the changes to ATOL financial tests so that the regulatory burdens that fall

on the aviation community are more reflective of underlying risk.

3.22 We are also investing in our ATOL and foreign carrier operating permits

application and renewal systems, moving them online and providing a less

burdensome and simpler service to licence and permit applicants and holders.

These new systems will be implemented in the first year of the strategy and are

expected to deliver benefits early on.

3.23 Key outcomes from this work:

Strategic priority



Modernising holiday protection

Well-run holiday companies enjoy a lower regulatory burden than poorly-run competitors.

Better and more efficient services for licence and permit applicants and holders.

Moving licence and permit applications online provides CAA with better information which allows market mechanisms to work more efficiently to the benefit of consumers.

More holiday companies use alternative ATOL compliance options, resulting in a better service for consumers in some cases.

Opportunity to change or add to plan to improve outcome.

Working with the DfT in developing a risk-based implementation of the new Package Travel Directive (PTD).

2016-2018.

Implementation of rebalanced ATOL regulatory model.

Roll out of changes to ATOL categories and financial tests – from April 2016.

Moving ATOL services online.

2016-17

Implementation of new ATOL arrangements as part of Package Travel Directive implementation and supporting consumers as new holiday protection arrangements are put in place.

Mid 2017 – Mid 2018

Review effectiveness of implementation of rebalanced ATOL regulatory model.

Q1 of 2018


April 2016 Page 28

Empowering consumers through information

3.24 Accurate and timely information about the things that matter to consumers is

essential in a well-functioning market. Consumers consistently highlight clear

information about prices as being most important to them. Having largely

stamped out misleading pricing, we will now accelerate our work to improve the

other relevant information available to passengers when they book. We will work

with airlines, travel agents and their representative associations to bring greater

clarity to their often complex and unclear standard contract terms. We will

continue to promote consumer awareness of holiday protection rights and the

ATOL Certificate.

3.25 We are also keen that we get better information on how consumers view the

services they receive when they fly and we understand their concerns and risks.

In support of this aim, we are committed to undertaking regular “tracker surveys”.


Strategic priority


Activity

Consumer empowerment

Empowering consumers through information

Passengers have accurate information about the things that are important to them at the right time.

Disabled passengers and those with mobility restrictions, including non-visible conditions, know that a good standard of help and assistance is available at the airport and on board and are confident to fly.

Consumers have a better understanding of the key terms and conditions of their contract and what to expect if circumstances change.

Consumers understand holiday protection arrangements and can make informed choices as these arrangements

We will report on airline compliance with Regulation 261/2004.

2016

We will report on airport performance in providing help and assistance to disabled passengers and those with mobility restrictions.

2016

Through our 'Right to Fly' campaign, we will encourage disabled people and those with mobility restrictions to travel by air.

2016

We will work with businesses, including airlines, so that consumers are informed of alternative dispute resolution and how to access it in the event they need to complain.

We will ourselves raise awareness of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and provide information to help consumers access ADR schemes.

2016

We will work with airlines, travel agents and their representative associations to bring clarity to their often complex and unclear standard contract terms.

2016-17

We will continue to promote ATOL and


April 2016 Page 29

Strategic priority


Activity

change.

holiday protection awareness through the ‘Pack Peace of Mind’ campaign.

Annual commission of a campaign dependent on assessment of current need and potential impact.

2016-2021

We will undertake a consumer tracker survey to monitor satisfaction (in line with many of the measures of success in this Plan), behaviour, preferences and information that is important to consumers.

Initiate survey in 2016, create benchmarks, and continue to 2021.

We will continue to publish punctuality and cancellation data, and further develop our response to our information duty based on analysis of the consumer tracker survey.

Securing consumer redress and enforcement

3.27 When things go wrong for individual consumers, we expect businesses to

respond promptly and in accordance with their legal obligations. When they fail

to resolve the matter to consumers’ satisfaction, we want consumers to have

access to alternative dispute resolution (ADR) arrangements, such as

ombudsmen. These bodies are independent, impartial, and provide a quicker,

cheaper and more attractive option than court action for consumers to enforce

their statutory and contractual rights. Where businesses systematically fail to

respect passengers’ statutory rights we will use our enforcement powers against

them. We will seek opportunities to encourage revision of the EU Regulation

261/2004 on denied boarding compensation, so that it balances appropriately the

costs borne by passengers against the value to passengers of resilience and

redress.


April 2016 Page 30

Strategic priority

Key strategy Key activity outcomes

Activity


Securing consumer redress and enforcement

Airlines will routinely pay compensation when due for delays and cancellations and honour their other obligations under Regulation 261/2004, ensuring they have strong incentives to improve their operational resilience.

All consumers have access to ADR if they are unable to resolve a dispute directly with an aviation business.

Passengers with a disability and those with mobility restrictions, including non-visible conditions, will receive a consistently high standard of assistance.

The rights and obligations of consumers and businesses arising under standard contract terms will be fair and balanced and consumers will not be penalised by unfair contract terms.

Development of ADR: facilitating the voluntary development of ADR in the UK aviation sector by using the withdrawal of our Passenger Advice and Complaints Team (PACT) (and reduction in CAA charges) and provision of consumer information to incentivise uptake of private ADR, which will be more efficient, equitable and effective.

2016-17

Voluntary vs mandatory ADR: making the case to the DfT for compulsory ADR if voluntary uptake does not materialise or does not progress beyond a certain proportion of the market following a review in late 2016.

2016-17

Enforcement of Regulation 261/2004: we will build on our new approach to compliance with Regulation 261/2004, expanding the process to cover care and assistance and re-routing, naming and shaming airlines that fall below minimum standards.

We will continue to vigorously enforce against systematic breaches of Regulation 261/2004.

2016-2017

Passengers with reduced mobility: we will work with UK airports on appropriately high quality standards for assisting passengers with a disability and those with mobility restrictions, including non-visible conditions, and that they monitor and report publicly and to the CAA on their performance.

We will actively check that the views of organisations representing passengers with a disability and passengers with mobility restrictions, including local access and disability groups, are taken into account by UK airports in setting performance standards.

We will report on how well UK airports are performing in meeting the assistance needs of passengers with a disability and those


April 2016 Page 31

Strategic priority

Key strategy Key activity outcomes

Activity

with mobility restrictions, including non-visible conditions.

Ongoing: continue publishing agreed data; review what new information consumers want once tracker survey is initiated.

Regulation of unfair contract terms: we will monitor businesses and passenger feedback to check whether the rights and obligations of consumers and businesses arising under standard contract terms are fair and balanced and consumers are not being penalised by unfair contract terms.

Ongoing

What matters to consumers: receiving choice, value and fair

treatment

3.28 Consumers in general expect choice, value and to be treated fairly when they

purchase services or products, and consumers of aviation services are no

exception. In a perfect market, these expectations would always be met. A

number of risks exist which can mean that these expectations are not always

met.

3.29 Some of these risks include anti-competitive behaviour by businesses that

restrict choice, and a lack of capacity that prevents the market from expanding to

meet demand. Some airports are increasingly dominated by a single airline,

meaning that competition in some markets can be threatened.

3.30 Consumers travel relatively infrequently by air and are therefore very dependent

on information to make informed purchases. Our research suggests that

consumers are not always provided with clear information that may be important

to them before, during and after their journey, leading to poor decisions. In

addition, seeking redress for problems in service sectors like aviation can be

challenging.

3.31 Our research suggests that around a quarter of consumers were dissatisfied with

the information and assistance provided when problems occurred before or

during their journey; and that a significant proportion (around 40 percent) have

difficulties seeking redress when things go wrong, reporting high levels of

dissatisfaction with complaints handling.

3.32 Some consumers, especially those with a disability or mobility restrictions, may

be at particular risk of detriment because businesses see them as too expensive

or inconvenient to serve. This can lead to significant barriers or exclusion from

aviation activities altogether.


April 2016 Page 32



public outcomes for consumer choice, value and fair treatment. It also sets out

how we intend to measure success.

CVFT OBJECTIVE

To improve choice, value and fair treatment for aviation consumers

now and in the future.


this objective:

Consumers are participating in a market where competition is insufficient to send effective market signals about investment and discipline on pricing or quality of service

Consumers are not provided with clear information that may be important to them before, during and after their journey

Consumers are not provided with air transport services that perform as they have been led to expect

Consumers are unfairly discriminated against Consumers have inadequate care and assistance when problems occur before or

during their journey Consumers have difficulties seeking redress when things go wrong

CVFT OUTCOME


MONITOR


DATA


DATA SOURCE


1. Consumers are well informed about the price and other aspects of air transport services, including their legal rights, and find it easy to shop around.

(1. a) Whether consumers feel they have access to clear and useful information about the things that are important to them when buying air travel.

(1. a. i) Proportion of consumers that report access to information they need and expect when purchasing air travel.

Consumer tracker survey

(1. a. ii) Consumer perceptions of degree of choice for core aspects of most recent journey.


(1. b) How easy consumers find it to understand and compare offers from different providers.

(1. b. i) Proportion of consumers who find it easy to compare offers in the relevant market.


(1. b. ii) Proportion of consumers confident



April 2016 Page 33

CVFT OUTCOME


MONITOR


DATA


DATA SOURCE


that they made “the right choice for me” when buying services in the relevant market.

(1. c) Whether consumers are well informed about their legal rights and financial protection.

(1. c. i) Proportion of consumers confident they understand their legal rights.


(1. c. ii) Proportion of consumers correctly answering ‘test questions’ on their rights.


(1. c. iii) Proportion of consumers feeling informed about insolvency protection.

Annual ATOL passenger survey

(1. c. iv) Proportion of consumers receiving ATOL Certificates when they should.


(1. c. v) Proportion of consumers aware of what insolvency protection they have.


2. Consumers are not unfairly discriminated against in terms of their ability to participate in the air travel market.

(2. a) Whether Passengers with Reduced Mobility (PRM) report similar levels of satisfaction and confidence compared with non-PRM consumers.

(2. a. i) Difference between results for all other relevant monitors for PRM consumer sub-group and non-PRM consumers.

All other monitor data analysed at PRM sub-group level (including

3. a. i)

(2. b) Whether PRM consumer concerns about being looked after appropriately have affected choice.

(2. b. i) Proportion of PRMs reporting concerns affect their choices.


(2. c) Whether the proportion of disabled people and PRM population who travel by air compares to the proportion of non-PRM population who travel by air.

(2. c. i) Difference between the proportion of PRM and non-PRM population travelling by air or number of PRMs travelling by air.


Consumer enforcement data gathered from airports

3. Consumers choose air (3. a) Proportion of (3. a. i) Proportion of Consumer tracker


April 2016 Page 34

CVFT OUTCOME


MONITOR


DATA


DATA SOURCE


travel services that meet their needs and are looked after appropriately when their needs are not met.

consumers satisfied with the air travel experience.

consumers reporting overall satisfaction/

value for money.

survey

Selected Service Quality Regime measure (SQR) for economically regulated airports.

(3. b) Number of consumers experiencing problems where they had genuine cause for complaint, and satisfaction with how they were looked after.

(3. b. i) Number of consumers reporting problems where they had genuine cause for complaint.


PACT and ADR complaint data

(3. b. ii) Consumer experience of timeliness of refunds/

repatriation following insolvency.


(3. c) Proportion of consumers who can access independent and effective ADR mechanisms.

(3. c. i) Proportion of flights in/out of UK operated by airlines signed up to an ADR scheme meeting standards in CAP 1286.

Combination of CAA market share data and airline notifications to CAA of ADR intentions.

(3. d) Flight reliability at UK airports.

(3. d. i) Proportion of flights cancelled or significantly delayed at UK airports.

CAA punctuality data

4. Consumers are protected where a lack of effective competition may create significant detriment.

(4. a) Performance of economically regulated airports and services compared with others.

(4. a. i) Difference between results for all other relevant monitors for regulated service providers and other service providers.

All other monitor data analysed at the regulated service provider sub-group level.

CAP 1360 Chapter 4: Our key programmes: environment

April 2016 Page 35

Chapter 4

Our key programmes: environment

4.1 Aviation creates significant benefits but also has negative impacts on those

affected by noise, air quality and greenhouse gases (GHG). We care about these

impacts and believe that the sector should address these issues appropriately. In

setting out our priorities for the environment, we have had to balance our belief in

the importance of these issues with constraints we face in taking action to tackle

the problem. On airspace decisions, we operate within Government policy and

on the basis of the law, which requires us to balance the interests of different

stakeholders. On other aspects of aviation, we have relatively narrow statutory

powers to act.

4.2 Where we have expertise and regulatory power and where we believe we can

assist in the management of risk is in the provision of information. The

importance of information in driving better decision-making is a recurring theme

for this strategy, and environment is no different. We believe that we can make a

real difference to outcomes by ensuring that decision-makers, be they

consumers, aviation community players or policy-makers, have access to

objective, accurate, timely and relevant information.

4.3 One of the risk principles driving this strategy is that we will only act to protect

the consumer and public from harm where there is a clear justification for CAA

involvement. Other than on airspace decisions, the reality is that we have few

formal powers in relation to the environment, with policy direction set by

government. Our ability to make a difference unilaterally can also be limited by

the international nature of the problem (for example GHGs) or the potential

solutions (for instance low emissions engine design is now largely driven by

international standards).

Aiding performance through information

4.4 One of the most effective approaches to empowering consumers and ensuring

our regulation is risk-based is to make information widely available. The Civil

Aviation Act 2012 gave the CAA duties to publish, or arrange for others to

publish, information and advice on the UK air travel market to help consumers

compare services (Section 83) and information on UK air travel’s environmental

effects, their impact, and mitigations (Section 84)1.

1 You can read about the information duty and the CAA’s policy on it here:

http://www.caa.co.uk/News/CAA-sets-out-approach-to-providing-better-information-to-passengers-and-

the-public/

http://www.caa.co.uk/News/CAA-sets-out-approach-to-providing-better-information-to-passengers-and-the-public/

http://www.caa.co.uk/News/CAA-sets-out-approach-to-providing-better-information-to-passengers-and-the-public/


April 2016 Page 36

4.5 Accurate information about environmental impacts will help consumers compare

services if they want to choose less carbon-intensive flight options, and help the

public understand how the CAA, government and the aviation community seek to

manage noise and how residents can have a say in decisions that affect noise. It

will also assist the CAA in deciding whether intervention is necessary to help

reduce environmental impacts or whether the aviation community is meeting

targets of its own accord.

Strategic priority



Aiding performance through information

The public and consumers have access to comprehensible information about aviation noise, how it is interpreted and measured, the responsibilities of the CAA and the aviation community, and how they can engage in local and national decisions.

The public and consumers have access to comprehensible information about aviation carbon emissions and air quality, how emissions are managed, and the responsibilities of the CAA and the aviation community.

Consumers can access comparable information about the carbon emissions of UK flights online, should they want to take it into account when choosing flights.

The CAA engages the aviation community effectively to assess and share information about how they are working to reduce environmental impacts.

Information provision duty – noise: explain aviation noise and engagement opportunities to public audience.

2016-2018

Information provision duty – carbon: publish guidance requiring carbon reporting from airlines and consider options for monitoring and implementation.

2016-2018

Information provision duty – environmental portal: informative web pages. Next objective is to promote and monitor use.

Ongoing

Environment Panel: amend this external expert panel to

a) enable two-way conversation and consultation/influence; and

b) gather information on the following areas rather than developing CAA-produced reports:

- Aviation progress in meeting carbon targets

- Cleaner operational procedures

- Cleaner fuels

2016-21.


April 2016 Page 37

Generating new data for decision-makers

4.6 Government Directions establish a number of roles for the CAA in noise

monitoring, research and management in particular. The CAA’s research and

expertise, particularly in our Environmental Research and Consultancy

Department (ERCD), continues to remain important to our strategy. Through

providing expert and objective advice and noise modelling services to

government and the aviation community, we have a role to play in helping to

improve the understanding of noise by those affected and public policy-makers.

Strategic priority Key Strategy Key strategic outcomes

Activity

Empowering consumers

Generating new data for decision-makers

The CAA assists the government and other relevant national and international organisations (such as ICAO) in understanding and addressing the environmental impacts of aviation, as requested.

The CAA develops up-to-date research and evidence to inform relevant organisations and the CAA’s own regulatory activities.

All consultancy work, including:

- Improved noise modelling

- Impact of noise (technology)

- Impact of noise (operations)

- Night noise restrictions

- Environmental impacts of spaceplanes

- Health effects of aviation noise.

Ongoing

Helping us reach the right decisions

4.7 Many of the CAA’s responsibilities and activities impact on the environment. This

means there is an opportunity to make regulatory decisions that properly take

into account environmental effects. For example, in regulating airspace, the CAA

makes decisions about airspace changes that take into account safety, efficient

use of airspace, economic impacts – and also the environmental impacts of the

proposal, including carbon emissions from flight routes and the noise they

create.

4.8 Public concerns about noise should be taken into account when airspace is

being designed, and noise must be mitigated as far as possible while achieving

other local and national objectives.

4.9 In March 2016, the CAA launched a consultation on some key proposals to

revise the way we make decisions on changes to the airspace structure. These

will make the airspace change process more transparent and more engaging for


April 2016 Page 38

all stakeholders, including improvements around how local communities and

airspace users should be consulted; adding new stages of evidence gathering,

scrutiny and validation; and introducing a new online portal to provide a single

access point for anyone to view, comment on and access documents for every

UK airspace change proposal.

4.10 The Government also has decisions to make, for example after the Airports

Commission review of aviation capacity recommended a national Independent

Aviation Noise Authority, which could have a role in the CAA’s decision-making

process for airspace.

4.11 We also recognise that there may be potential to do more to address noise within

the policy framework set by Government. We plan to comprehensively review the

CAA’s overall approach to how aviation noise is managed. This will examine

what opportunities we have to limit or where possible reduce the impact of noise

within our existing powers and activities.

4.12 The CAA has to make balanced decisions that use evidence to consider

environmental impacts alongside other potential risks and benefits. This applies

to our own business decisions and how we run our organisation, as well as our

regulatory decisions.

Strategic priority


Activity


Helping us reach the right decisions

The CAA makes balanced regulatory decisions on airspace and other areas of responsibility based on environmental evidence alongside other priorities, in accordance with government policy.

Changes to the airspace change process (ACP): consult on and implement changes to the way that airspace changes are conducted

2016-2018

Optimising airspace design: continue to understand and build upon the environmental benefits (CO2 reduction) of FAS.

2016-2021

Noise modelling and local impacts: continue to understand and reflect environmental concerns (noise management) of airspace change


April 2016 Page 39

Strategic priority


Activity

process through CAP 725 review.

2016-2017

Noise management review: an internal review of opportunities to influence noise management that are within existing powers and activities.

2016

What matters to consumers and the public: the environment

4.13 For aviation to develop sustainably it must serve our current needs and those of

future generations of consumers and the public. This means balancing its

positive impacts, such as economic growth, with its negative impacts, such as its

effect on the environment.

4.14 Aviation is a significant source of CO2, which is emitted by the fuel burned by

aircraft, and aircraft generate noise that creates disturbance to those who live

nearby. There are also other local impacts to take into account, such as waste

and air quality. If the aviation sector fails to tackle and reduce its environmental

impact, there will be consequences for consumers. If national and international

carbon reduction targets are not met, or local concerns about noise are not

managed and resolved, aviation capacity could be constrained leading to a

reduction in choice and affordability for consumers.



public outcomes for the environment. It also sets out how we intend to measure

success.

ENVIRONMENTAL OBJECTIVE

To help others take account of aviation’s environmental impacts

in their decision-making.

Key high-level risks to the consumer and the public that we are addressing through this

objective:

Consumers Consumers are adversely affected by decisions involving environmental issues


April 2016 Page 40

Consumers and public Consumers and the public make uninformed choices relating to their journey or

living conditions Local communities are not aware of proposed changes to the airspace change

process and cannot engage meaningfully in the process

Public The public and communities are adversely affected by noise from aviation activities The public are adversely affected by climate change from aviation activities

ENVIRONMENT OUTCOME


MONITOR


DATA


DATA SOURCE


1. Consumers and the public are aware of, and have opportunities to engage with and influence, the environmental aspects of air transport services important to them.

(1. a) Whether consumers feel environmental information to be important to them, and that they can access it if so.

(1. a. i) Proportion of consumers stating that information about the environmental impact of aviation is important to them.


(1. a. ii) Number of airlines reporting carbon emissions in the CAA-advised, comparable format (or proportion of consumers flying with them).

CAA Environment Panel

(1. b) Whether consumers and the public have access to environmental information that affects them.

(1. b. i) Number of airports with public engagement about noise in their noise action plans.

CAA Environment Panel

(1. b. ii) Number of people in communities potentially affected by airspace change proposals having clear and transparent information available to them, and directly able to participate in the process either through scheme sponsors or directly with the CAA.

Internal reporting

(1. b. iii) Number of people accessing CAA environmental information pages.

CAA website statistics

2. Regulatory and national policy decisions that affect consumers are based on sound environmental information.

(2. a) Noise research and airport-specific noise monitoring is undertaken by the CAA in accordance with government requirements.

(2. a. i) That 100% of environmental reports requested by the Government are delivered.

ERCD work programme delivered


April 2016 Page 41

ENVIRONMENT OUTCOME


MONITOR


DATA


DATA SOURCE


(2. b) Airspace and other relevant regulatory decisions take environmental effects into account in accordance with government policy.

(2. b. i) That 100% of airspace changes approved include environmental information (including carbon emission data, noise data and public consultation data from sponsor) requested, received and reviewed by CAA.

Airspace change process delivered

CAP 1360 Chapter 5: Our key programmes: better regulation

April 2016 Page 42

Chapter 5

Our key programmes: better regulation

5.1 Protecting and promoting the interests of UK aviation consumers is at the heart

of all that we do. In pursuing this purpose, we balance these aims with facilitating

a regulatory environment which supports growth in the aviation sector and the

economy overall. We endeavour to make our regulatory framework fair and

effective and avoid imposing any unnecessary burdens on the aviation

community.

5.2 Our drive to be a balanced, effective and better regulator is reflected in ongoing

work to streamline our processes and become much more risk focused. This

approach is embedded in the key themes and programmes outlined in this Plan,

and our better regulation programme will provide an even stronger structure for

ensuring our activities are well thought out and evidence based.

5.3 As with all UK regulators, the CAA has to comply with the Regulators’ Code,

which reinforces our commitment to regulate in line with the principles of better

regulation:

Proportionality – We should intervene only when necessary. Remedies

should be appropriate to the risk posed, and costs identified and minimised.

Accountability – We should be able to justify decisions and be subject to

public scrutiny.

Consistency – Rules and standards must be joined up and implemented

fairly.

Transparency – We should be open, and keep regulations simple and user-

friendly.

Targeting – Regulation should be focused on the problem and minimise side

effects

Promoting growth

5.4 Our decisions and actions can have a significant impact on businesses in the

aviation sector and how they operate. This impact can involve costs, but it can

also enable aviation to develop and exploit new technologies. We will give regard

to economic growth whenever we act, so that this is an important factor in our

decision-making process. This regard for growth will become a statutory duty,

reinforcing our consideration of the economic impact that our actions are likely to

have.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/300126/14-705-regulators-code.pdf


April 2016 Page 43

5.5 We will also continue to look for possibilities for streamlining our regulation or

deregulating where consistent with our objectives. We will continue to drive

implementation of the general aviation (GA) programme, which covers all of our

work to improve the regulatory framework for the GA community. A more

proportionate and balanced regulatory framework will help the sector to flourish.

The GA programme is underpinned by our commitment to only regulating when

necessary, deregulating where we can, delegating where appropriate and to

remove gold-plating.

5.6 We recognise that one of the keys to successfully growing the economy is

creating the right conditions for innovation. Technological innovation is one of our

key priorities and we plan to examine what changes we can make to legislative

and enforcement frameworks to encourage adoption of new technologies and

disruptive business models to encourage growth. Through our internal change

programme we are also promoting internal efficiency and effectiveness in the

CAA through investment in modern technology and processes.

Strategic priority Key Strategy Key strategic outcomes Activity


Promoting growth We will have considered the economic impact that our actions are likely to have on business.

Any action we take will be proportionate and taken only when needed.

Businesses will be able to challenge us if they believe we have failed to consider economic growth when regulating.

We will report annually on our compliance with the duty.

Implementing the growth duty and reporting on compliance.

Duty will be implemented in mid/end-2016.

Technological innovation

Promoting growth The CAA proactively develops regulatory frameworks to enable government and other innovation strategies.

Develop regulatory frameworks and influence internationally to support

technological innovation such as spaceplanes and drones

2016-2021


April 2016 Page 44

Reducing burdens on businesses

5.7 There are costs associated with complying with our rules and following our

processes. We must therefore continue to consider ways in which we can cut the

cost to business of complying with our requirements. We have already carried

out several exercises to identify and remove burdens (for instance the GA red-

tape challenge, and our ATOL reforms), and we will continue to deregulate

wherever possible. This includes any burdens imposed by our broader activities,

such as data collection and enforcement. The Government has set a target of

achieving £10bn in deregulatory savings over the next five years, and we are

committed to reducing burdens on business where appropriate in order to

contribute to this target.

5.8 When considering burdens on business, a large proportion of regulation is

established in partnership with the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) and

the European Commission. In supporting the UK Government in its international

negotiations, we will continue to play our role by providing technical advice and

seeking solutions that avoid unnecessary or disproportionate regulation. Where

we have discretion over implementation and enforcement of regulations, we will

also seek to apply those regulations consistent with better regulation principles

and our legal obligations.

5.9 In those areas where we retain large amounts of national discretion over

regulation we will build on the progress already made to deregulate. For GA, for

example, this means reducing burden in order to pursue a more dynamic sector.

This will be achieved by:

only regulating directly when necessary and doing so proportionately, for

example in the area of air displays;

deregulating where justified;

delegating where appropriate;

not gold-plating and removing unnecessary regulation where it exists.




Reducing burdens on business

Businesses benefit from a proportionate regulatory framework where compliance costs are minimised.

Any key European legislation we have implemented will be free from gold-plating, unless

Carry out systematic review of regulatory guidance, to streamline the safety information we provide to the aviation community.

At the relevant review point for each major guidance document. First tranche by the end of 2016.

Consult on our priorities and


April 2016 Page 45


this adversely affects the UK aviation sector.

programme for burden reduction for GA.

2016

Actively contribute to the DfT’s planned review of deregulation opportunities in the aviation sector.

Summer 2016

Better decision-making

5.11 We already have a robust process in place to assess the costs and benefits of

any significant new proposals. We will reinforce this so that we assess the

impact on business of all our changes to policies and processes, including new

or amended guidance, requests for information or new or revised enforcement

practices. This will give us a much better overview of the economic impact that

our activities have on the aviation sector, giving us a much stronger analytical

base to inform our decisions. Our figures will be subject to independent

verification by the Regulatory Policy Committee to support the accuracy of our

reporting, and we commit to publishing all of our assessments on our website.

5.12 To check our actions continue to achieve their desired outcomes, new

regulations or major policies will include commitments to review their impact at

an appropriate point in time.

5.13 The DfT will appoint a Small Business Appeals Champion (SBAC) to scrutinise

and report on our appeals and complaints processes. Following consultation with

aviation stakeholders, the SBAC will publish annual reports with

recommendations as to how we could improve our processes, which we will

publicly respond to.


Strategic priority


Activity


Better decision-making

Every decision we make will take account of the costs and benefits to business.

The analysis which underpins our decisions will be subject to independent and public scrutiny.

New regulations and policies will only remain

Implementation of new impact assessment process.

Legislation and framework expected to be in place by autumn 2016.

Verification of cost/benefit analysis.

Legislation and framework expected to be in place by autumn 2016.

Appointment of Small Business Appeals Champion.

By end 2016


April 2016 Page 46

Strategic priority


Activity

in place if they are achieving their objectives.

Businesses will have an impartial and clearly explained route to appeal against our regulatory decisions.

Documents

Making Aviation Better: Our key strategies strategic plan APR16 v2.pdf · Making Aviation Better: Our key strategies CAP 1360 . CAP 1360 April 2016 Page 2 Published by the Civil Aviation