In a strongly worded 'Note to the attention of the EASA's management board members', the Deputy Director General of the European Commission's Directorate-General for Energy and Transport writes:
..............................the Commission believes that the time has come to take clear decisions to steer the Agency in a different direction. In this respect it is essential to carefully consider the alternative of going back to the original structure, and wording (whenever possible) of JARs and ICAO requirements which should be transposed into Community law. This would certainly ensure a smooth transition and allow EASA to work calmly in the future on the ambitious improvements and shifts which have raised general concern and misunderstandings both from Member States and stakeholders alike.
The Commission strongly believes that the time has come to give a clear signal in this direction. This will allow first and foremost to ensure safety (since the present system gives enough guarantees), it would also allow to respect the legal and institutional deadlines laid down by the Member States and the European Parliament while at the same time paving the way toward a smooth improvement of the system in the coming years, in full cooperation with the Member States and all the stakeholders.
In any event, the Commission reserves the right, in order to comply with the legal and institutional obligations imposed on it by the basic Regulation, to proceed along the line described above.
The Commission draws the attention of the Management Board of the Agency in relation to this important matter, where time has come to steer the work of the Agency in a clearer and more effective direction in order to allow the Community discharge itself of its obligations in full compliance with Community law.
Best Regards,
Zoltan Kazatsay
'Going back to the original structure and wording (whenever possible) of JARs and ICAO requirements which should be transposed into Community law'. Hang on a minute - isn't that what EASA was supposed to have been doing in the first place?
That would be very welcome indeed - it would mean no more meddling and tinkering with current requirements and no interference with sub-ICAO / non-JAR matters such as UK BCPL, NPPL - and, of course, the UK IMCR!!