UK MPs have been discussing the failures of FTA and Tayside, the inactivity of the CAA and the implications for those who lost their money. The record in
Hansard is worth reading in full, and there is a You tube snippet below. In particular Tim Loughton, the MP for Shoreham, calls out the CAA's approach to regulation which ignores its responsibility for financial oversight.
BALPA contends that the CAA has a statutory responsibility, under retained EU law, to operate an ongoing oversight programme for UK-approved flight schools, which includes requiring “evidence of sufficient funding”. BALPA does not believe that, to date, the CAA has discharged that responsibility diligently or at all, and I agree. There is a financial oversight aspect of the CAA’s regulatory role. Clearly, demanding fees up front to keep operations afloat does not smack of flying schools having sufficient funding. The CAA needs to step up and step in.
They also press for funding support along the lines of other further education.