The UK Civil Aviation Authority is not adequately resourced for its post-Brexit role as a standalone regulator, especially in regard to new rules for emerging technologies, argues the chief executive of UK aerospace trade association ADS. Speaking at a media briefing in London on 16 May, Kevin Craven said that that policymakers have yet to ensure regulatory certainty for all aerospace areas since the CAA became independent from the European Union Aviation Safety Agency in 2020. Public debate about a "bonfire" of EU laws – a term coined by UK politicians supporting the abolishment of retained European laws since Brexit – "was not helpful" in the process of creating regulatory certainty, Craven says, adding: "I think there is more work to be done in that particular area." Craven doubts the UK regulator is in a position to fulfil all its requirements: "I don't think the CAA is adequately resourced for all of the demands, not necessarily just from a Brexit perspective, but rather from a whole new world of innovation." Citing electric air taxis, drones and new ways of using airspace as examples, he recalls previous suggestions that the CAA's new independence could represent an opportunity to carve a niche as a trailblazer for new regulations governing emerging technology. But he asserts: "We generally don't feel that the CAA is perhaps adequately resourced to address those new opportunities. They are kind of resourced for yesterday's world, but the world is moving on." In 2022, the UK government launched an independent review of the CAA to ensure that it can provide "world-leading regulation and public services for decades to come". Overall, Craven says aerospace business, especially larger ones, have adapted to the UK's post-Brexit conditions and moved on "as much as we can". He does note increased bureaucracy and paperwork for businesses and that some smaller companies, especially in Northern Ireland, have found it harder to adapt to the new trading environment. He credits the current UK government for having improved relations with EU institutions since Brexit. "There is no question that this particular administration has done a great deal to improve the tone of the conversation." The Windsor Framework agreed by UK prime minister Rishi Sunak and European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen in February regulating the transport of goods in Northern Ireland represents a example of a recent improvement, with Craven stating. "All of these things are doing wonders for some of the relationships." He highlights, however, that the pandemic had a bigger impact on the UK aerospace sector than Brexit – "by a large factor". He adds: "Brexit, it's a fact of our life. Businesses have learned how to cope with it. Is there more that could be done? Of course. [But] in terms of anyone making bold political statements like freedom of movement coming back? I don't expect it any time soon." Craven voices concern about continued access for UK aerospace players to the EU's Horizon research and innovation programme. In 2021, the UK government said it would seek an associate role in the scheme, and UK players have been able to continue applying for Horizon funding. The programme has a €95 billion ($103 billion) budget and runs until 2027.
However, the UK's associate role has not been finalised since, while a deadline for UK applications has been set for 30 June 2023. UK Research and Innovation states on its website that successful UK-based Horizon applicants will receive funding regardless of the outcome of the government's efforts to associate with the EU scheme. Craven says he is "not confident at all" about the prospect of an accord for continued UK participation in Horizon. "Access to Horizon is unquestionably a price worth having, no question whatsoever about that. The relationships, collaborative networks, the freedom of intellectual movement around R&D… is enormously helpful. Being outside of that is a challenge." He is a doubtful that an alternative, national R&D support scheme would provide adequate replacement for Horizon. "It would take many years and to reach the same level of effectiveness would require substantially more money. So, in my view that is not the same as access to Horizon, and we should continue to fight for that as hard as we possibly can."