The CAA's Strategic Plan 2016-2021 - Making Aviation Better: Our key strategies
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Civil Aviation Authority The CAA’s Strategic Plan 2016–2021 Making Aviation Better: Our key strategies CAP 1360
CAP 1360
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
April 2016 Page 2CAP 1360 Contents
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
Our high-level objective, outcomes and measures 32
Chapter 4 35
Our key programmes: environment 35
Aiding performance through information 35
April 2016 Page 3CAP 1360 Contents
Generating new data for decision-makers 37
Helping us reach the right decisions 37
What matters to consumers and the public: the environment 39
Our high-level objective, outcomes and measures 39
Chapter 5 42
Our key programmes: better regulation 42
Promoting growth 42
Reducing burdens on businesses 44
Better decision-making 45
April 2016 Page 4CAP 1360 Introduction
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:
April 2016 Page 5CAP 1360 Introduction
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.
April 2016 Page 6CAP 1360 Chapter 1: Our key programmes: aviation safety
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 7CAP 1360 Chapter 1: Our key programmes: aviation safety
Strategic Key Key strategic Activity
priority strategy outcomes
Risk-based Better safety Intelligence is Enable CAA direct access to the necessary
regulation intelligence processed and sector and consumer data and information to
exploited to best support the risk-based regulatory and
effect to create the oversight activity.
risk picture necessary Significant activity to generate data sets and
to effectively drive implement access arrangements 2016-18,
performance-based becoming routine activity 2019-21.
oversight (PBO) and
other safety Share safety information internally and
interventions. externally (where permitted by law) – with
consumers and the aviation community – in a
way that encourages and drives action.
Data and information
Some information-sharing as capabilities are
sharing between
established 2016-18; increasing information-
regulators, the
sharing both internally and externally 2018-21.
aviation community
and other Use risk-based intelligence gathering to inform
stakeholders enriches the risk picture in the areas of most concern
the total risk picture where the most significant exposure to risk
and knowledge in may lie. Work with limitations on available
order to target safety information where the exposure is less.
risk management Ongoing 2016-21, maturing and improving in
effectively. 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 8CAP 1360 Chapter 1: Our key programmes: aviation safety
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 Key strategy Key strategic outcomes Activity
priority
Risk-based Implement Effective safety oversight Strengthen and standardise the
regulation performance-based coupled with aviation approach to oversight by
regulation community risk management completing the transformation to
provides confidence that PBO.
safety risk controls and Implementation activity in 2016-
accountability mechanisms 17; system evolution in 2018-21.
are in place and are effective.
Implement the Regulatory Safety
Management System (RSMS) to
PBR, through standardisation bring together all safety risk
of processes and tools and analysis, decision making,
the development of key prioritisation of resources and
management information tracking of safety improvement
delivers efficiency and projects under one governance
productivity benefits. structure.
Key aviation safety 2016-18 to develop and mature
April 2016 Page 9CAP 1360 Chapter 1: Our key programmes: aviation safety
Strategic Key strategy Key strategic outcomes Activity
priority
professionals and RSMS; ongoing routine activity
organisations reliably deliver 2018-21.
what is expected of them. Just Culture is an intrinsic
element of Safety Management
Contribution to Better Systems (SMS); consider the
Regulation outcomes, for inclusion of Just Culture as part
example through PBO, will of SMS oversight regime and tool
help deliver proportionality of kit.
the oversight regime. Ongoing activity 2016-21.
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.
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 10CAP 1360 Chapter 1: Our key programmes: aviation safety
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 International Emerging international Prioritise and resource our
regulation regulatory regulation is fit for purpose, engagement with EASA
relationships proportionate, and sustains and ICAO for best effect to
and improves safety achieve our strategic safety
standards. ambitions.
Significant activity
EASA, ICAO and the UK (particularly with EASA)
strategic priorities are 2016-17 with ongoing effort
aligned. 2018-21.
The CAA retains and
The UK is a partner of strengthens the necessary
choice for EASA and other core/essential capabilities
international stakeholders to support our strategic
in order to strengthen and ambitions and those of our
widen the impact of partners.
European safety Significant activity 2016-17
regulations. with ongoing effort to
nuance and align our
CAA is agile and flexible, capabilities 2018-21.
and is evolving to remain a The CAA initiates and acts
fully capable NAA within as a driver for cooperative
the EASA system. oversight.
Significant activity with
Effective regulatory EASA and through
oversight of new business bilaterals 2016-2018.
models in a transnational
aviation sector.
April 2016 Page 11CAP 1360 Chapter 1: Our key programmes: aviation safety
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 Key strategy Key strategic Activity
priority outcomes
Risk-based Keeping pace Effective regulatory The CAA initiates and acts as a driver
regulation with change oversight of new for cooperative oversight and other
business models in a enabling arrangements.
Infrastructure transnational aviation Significant activity with EASA and
optimisation sector. through bilateral trials 2016-18;
becoming increasingly routine activity
New oversight 2019-21.
Technological
innovation models/methods are in Develop regulatory frameworks and
place to support the influence internationally to support
roll-out of new technological innovation such as
technology and spaceplanes and drones
systems. 2016-2021
The CAA proactively develops and
The UK has a more deploys oversight models and
flexible and integrated methodologies in order to enable the
airspace system exploitation of new technologies and
aligned with European complex systems.
developments and
Ongoing activity 2016-21.
technological changes,
which improves safety, The CAA retains an appropriate role in
capacity and efficiency the Future Airspace Strategy (FAS)
and balances the deployment and evolution, primarily
requirements of all making regulatory decisions as
airspace users. airspace and safety regulator.
Ongoing activity 2016-21 supporting
The CAA proactively peaks in activity in line with FAS
develops regulatory deployment plans.
frameworks to enable Support or facilitate UK Government
government and other strategies and initiatives in aviation and
innovation strategies. 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 12CAP 1360 Chapter 1: Our key programmes: aviation safety
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 13CAP 1360 Chapter 1: Our key programmes: aviation safety
SAFETY OUTCOME MONITOR DATA DATA SOURCE
What success looks What we look for to Information that Where we get the data
like measure progress makes monitor
towards success meaningful
1. Aviation safety for (1. a) Whether injuries Fatal accident rates Mandatory Occurrence
the UK consumer and or fatalities occur as a (outright and Reporting (MOR)
the UK public is result of aviation comparison to the EU database, European
assured. activities. average). Coordination Centre for
Whether the Moving average fatal Accident and Incident
appropriate regulatory accident rate (to show Reporting Systems
measures are in place an improving trend). (ECCAIRS), Flightglobal
and are being enforced accident datafeed, the
in order to protect the MOR rates (high Department for
severity (A & B) and low Transport (DfT) safety
UK consumer and UK
severity (C & D) MORs related statistics for
public.
total and by sector). other transport modes,
Comparison of fatal CAA Investigations &
accident (and serious Enforcement Team
incident, where data.
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 (2. a) Whether the Average fleet age UK aircraft register
the UK public benefit aviation consumer and (highlighting a reducing database.
from sector UK public experience is trend as a positive
modernisation and improved as a result of indicator). Future Airspace
technological new technologies and Levels of aircraft Strategy Industry
development and a modernised aviation equipage/equipment Implementation Group
innovation. environment. serviceability. scheme of activity.
Assessment of future
airspace initiatives to
quantify air traffic
system benefits
delivered.
3. The UK consumers (3. a) Whether the Perception of aviation Consumer tracker
and the UK public, public and consumers safety through tracker survey.
wherever they fly, have are confident that survey.
confidence in aviation aviation is safe and
safety. they are not deterred
from flying anywhere in
the world.
4. The cost to (4. a) Whether Evidence of impact Regulatory impact
consumers and the consumers and public assessments conducted assessments.
public of the safety receive safety benefits that show net safety Business engagement
regime is kept proportionate with the benefit (relative to cost). assessments.
proportionate to the cost of regulation.
benefit attained.
April 2016 Page 14CAP 1360 Chapter 2: Our key programmes: aviation security
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 15CAP 1360 Chapter 2: Our key programmes: aviation security
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 Activity
outcomes
Risk-based Providing regulatory An aviation security Single consolidated
regulation expertise regulatory framework direction regular
that reflects European updates.
baseline requirements Periodic
and particular threats to
Continual review of the
aviation in the UK.
UK More Stringent
Measures (MSMs).
CAA expertise allows Annually, 2016-21
the DfT to make
informed, evidence- Security vetting and
based decisions in training.
developing aviation Ongoing
security policy. Support and advice to
April 2016 Page 16CAP 1360 Chapter 2: Our key programmes: aviation security
Strategic priority Key strategy Key strategic Activity
outcomes
the DfT including
Entities are clear about international work,
the aviation security including Crown
requirements and Dependencies and
receive robust, Gibraltar (CD and Gib).
evidence-based Ongoing
judgements in response Processing applications
to their requests for for new (and review of
alleviations and existing) ACC3 (air
derogations. cargo or mail carrier
operating into the EU
Security of cargo and from a third country
mail flown into the EU on airport) designations.
routes from certain Ongoing
states and airports
beyond Europe is Cargo transfer screening
exemptions.
assured.
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 17CAP 1360 Chapter 2: Our key programmes: aviation security
Strategic priority Key strategy Key strategic Activity
outcomes
Risk-based Compliance monitoring Instances of non- Audit, inspection and
regulation compliance with EU and broader observation
UK security activity as part of
requirements by airports, ongoing oversight.
air carriers, cargo Ongoing
operators and in-flight
Support to EU
suppliers are swiftly
appropriate authority
detected and rectified.
and airport inspections.
2017 and 2020
The UK’s reputation and
credibility as an aviation Annual reporting
security regulator is process to the European
maintained and Commission.
enhanced. Annual.
Sound advice is provided
to the DfT in relation to the
robustness of aviation
security in Gibraltar,
Jersey, Guernsey and the
Isle of Man.
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 18CAP 1360 Chapter 2: Our key programmes: aviation security
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:
Today…
DIRECT
INSPECT
Policy set by DfT and DO
CAA Compliance
across the EU Operator “does what it
Team conducts
prescribes the actions is told to do”
inspections
required
After SeMS roll-out…
AUDIT
DIRECT ASSURE
Policy set by DfT and Operator self-assures CAA audits SeMS and
across the EU using SeMS, and the outputs shared
prescribes the actions shares results with with it, notably the Key
required CAA Performance
Indicators
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
April 2016 Page 19CAP 1360 Chapter 2: Our key programmes: aviation security
transformational change not only in the aviation community but also across our
own processes and systems.
Strategic Key Key strategic outcomes Activity
priorities strategy
Risk-based Security Air transport operators adopt an Pathfinder adopters and
regulation management effective SeMS, bringing additional oversight trial across the
systems assurance that all of the risks to their sectors.
(SeMS) operations have been identified and 2016-21
addressed.
SeMS adopters across the
sectors.
Compliance monitoring progressively 2018-21 (dependent on
incorporates a performance-based outcomes from pathfinders).
approach, alongside the aviation
community’s adoption of SeMS. Key Performance Indicators
(KPIs) derivation and
digitalisation of inputs.
Civil aviation in the UK is better
2016-17
positioned for a move to PBR, as and
when European legislation allows. 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 20CAP 1360 Chapter 2: Our key programmes: aviation security
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.
Key high-level risks to the consumer and the public that we are addressing through
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
What success looks What we look for to Information that Where we get the data
like measure progress makes monitor
towards success meaningful
1. To assure the n/a – sensitive. n/a – sensitive. n/a – sensitive.
security of all flights
departing from UK
airports.
2. To assure the n/a – sensitive. n/a – sensitive. n/a – sensitive.
physical security airside
at UK airports in order
to protect the travelling
public.
3. To assure that flights n/a – sensitive. n/a – sensitive. n/a – sensitive.
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 (4. a) Whether the (4. a. i) Time spent by Gatwick Airport website
aviation security traveller experiences travellers in queue for Heathrow Airport
regulation is any inconvenience. security screening. website
proportionate and
imposes no (4. b) Whether the (4. b. i) Aviation Feedback from CAA
unnecessary regulatory measures community feedback, tracker survey.
inconvenience on or imposed on the aviation individually and through
disruption to the community are stakeholder fora.
perceived to be
April 2016 Page 21CAP 1360 Chapter 2: Our key programmes: aviation security
SECURITY OUTCOME MONITOR DATA DATA SOURCE
What success looks What we look for to Information that Where we get the data
like measure progress makes monitor
towards success meaningful
traveller. reasonable and far
from burdensome.
5. To ensure that (5. a) Whether the (5. a. i) Perception of Feedback from CAA
people feel confident in public and consumers aviation safety through tracker survey.
the security of UK are confident that tracker survey.
aviation and are not aviation is safe and
deterred from taking they are not deterred
flights from UK airports from taking flights from
or aboard UK airlines. UK airports or aboard
UK airlines.
6. To assure the n/a – sensitive. n/a – sensitive. n/a – sensitive.
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).
April 2016 Page 22CAP 1360 Chapter 3: Our key programmes: choice, value and fair treatment
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 23CAP 1360 Chapter 3: Our key programmes: choice, value and fair treatment
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 24CAP 1360 Chapter 3: Our key programmes: choice, value and fair treatment
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 25CAP 1360 Chapter 3: Our key programmes: choice, value and fair treatment
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 Key Key strategic outcomes Activity
priority strategy
Infrastructure Regulating to Airports that we regulate Design an economic regulatory
optimisation get the most provide consumers with regime for any new runway capacity.
from facilities and services that meet 2016-2021
infrastructure their needs at an efficient price.
Regulating existing capacity:
conducting the next Heathrow price
New airport capacity will be review
delivered on time and in a way 2016-2018
that minimises disruption and
Mid-term review for Gatwick price
provides value for money to the
review
consumer.
2016-2017
Airports and providers of on- Network resilience: reviewing the
airport services (e.g. for parking costs and benefits of airport and
or air traffic services) compete network capacity.
fairly and effectively, resulting in 2016-2017
satisfaction and value for Market monitoring: Monitoring the
money for the consumer. overall performance of the aviation
market for consumers, including:
The CAA is well placed to - enforcement of competition law
prevent significant harm to and associated sectoral regulation
consumers from anti- (Airport Charges Regulations and
competitive behaviour wherever Groundhandling Regulations);
it arises in the (largely) - issuing and maintaining guidance,
liberalised airports market. encouraging compliance and
investigating breaches as
The CAA has a better appropriate.
understanding of the structure Ongoing
of the air travel retail market,
Review of surface access:
the arrangements between
undertaking a market review of
parties in that market and the
surface access provision in the UK
impact of those arrangements
on consumers. 2016
Market analysis: In support of the
Air traffic control services future framework for economic
provided by NATS minimise regulation at Heathrow and Gatwick.
flight delays for consumers and 2016-18
enable significant savings in
fuel, keeping prices as low as Terminal air navigation services
possible. (TANS): Consolidating market
conditions in the terminal air
navigation services sector.
Consumers benefit from on-time
2016-18
departures and arrivals at
regulated airports.
April 2016 Page 26CAP 1360 Chapter 3: Our key programmes: choice, value and fair treatment
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 Key strategy Key strategic outcomes Activity
priority
Risk-based Modernising Well-run holiday Working with the DfT in developing
regulation holiday companies enjoy a lower a risk-based implementation of the
protection regulatory burden than new Package Travel Directive
poorly-run competitors. (PTD).
2016-2018.
Better and more efficient Implementation of rebalanced
services for licence and ATOL regulatory model.
permit applicants and Roll out of changes to ATOL
holders. categories and financial tests –
from April 2016.
Moving licence and permit Moving ATOL services online.
applications online
2016-17
provides CAA with better
information which allows Implementation of new ATOL
market mechanisms to arrangements as part of Package
work more efficiently to Travel Directive implementation
the benefit of consumers. and supporting consumers as new
holiday protection arrangements
More holiday companies are put in place.
use alternative ATOL Mid 2017 – Mid 2018
compliance options, Review effectiveness of
resulting in a better implementation of rebalanced
service for consumers in ATOL regulatory model.
some cases. Q1 of 2018
Opportunity to change or
add to plan to improve
outcome.
April 2016 Page 27CAP 1360 Chapter 3: Our key programmes: choice, value and fair treatment
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”.
3.26 Key outcomes from this work:
Strategic Key strategy Key strategic Activity
priority outcomes
Consumer Empowering Passengers have We will report on airline compliance
empowerment consumers accurate information with Regulation 261/2004.
through about the things that 2016
information are important to them
at the right time. We will report on airport performance in
providing help and assistance to
disabled passengers and those with
Disabled passengers
mobility restrictions.
and those with mobility
restrictions, including 2016
non-visible conditions, Through our 'Right to Fly' campaign,
know that a good we will encourage disabled people and
standard of help and those with mobility restrictions to travel
assistance is available by air.
at the airport and on 2016
board and are
We will work with businesses, including
confident to fly.
airlines, so that consumers are
informed of alternative dispute
Consumers have a resolution and how to access it in the
better understanding of event they need to complain.
the key terms and We will ourselves raise awareness of
conditions of their alternative dispute resolution (ADR)
contract and what to and provide information to help
expect if circumstances consumers access ADR schemes.
change.
2016
We will work with airlines, travel agents
Consumers understand
and their representative associations to
holiday protection
bring clarity to their often complex and
arrangements and can
unclear standard contract terms.
make informed choices
as these arrangements 2016-17
We will continue to promote ATOL and
April 2016 Page 28CAP 1360 Chapter 3: Our key programmes: choice, value and fair treatment
Strategic Key strategy Key strategic Activity
priority outcomes
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 29You can also read
