The Air Transport Infrastructure: Airports and Air Navigation

Through the year the entire CAA organization kept well abreast of the situation. It saw how serious was the trend at the beginning of the year, understood the signifi cance of being in a multi-sector industry, especially as regards the new airport services (security inspections) and sought savings in those areas where an infrastructure provider may hope for somewhat better times. Clearly, the importance of profi tability for the future of a company and its staff is better understood in leaner times than fat ones. The creation of a correct and collective understanding and the engendering of broad fi nancial responsibility throughout an organization follows its own laws.

3 The safety of Finnish airports and air navigation remained good. No single truly serious, uncontrollable situation occurred. In six cases, inadequate action by the CAA resulted in fl ight paths falling below regulation stacking minimums. There was an elevated level of risk in one case but none involved any danger of collision. Controllers were on hand and abreast of the situation, and the regulation aviation safety margin worked as it should.

CAA safety management offi cials carefully studied each reported anomaly and learned from it. The reporting culture is good. A separate investigation body (OTK) under the Ministry of Justice studied the most serious reports independently. In 2003 it initiated six investigations into reports concerning CAA operations. No signifi cant recommendations for improvements were made in these cases. An essential feature of the safety culture in aviation is that when we study anomalous and hazardous situations we look for causes, not guilt, in order to make improvements.

The standard of service at CAA airports in 2003 was good. Delays resulting from Finnish air navigation services and other airport operations were non-existent, as in the previous year.

CAA charges for airport and air navigation services are low by European standards and conform with the network principle which supports Finnish regional development. Earnings from airport commercial services are channelled into lowering the charges for the services of an intrinsic monopoly, i.e. runway and terminal fees.

Again it is worth noting that all offi cial aviation functions in Finland are funded mainly out of airport traffi c charges. As a commercial enterprise providing security services, the CAA wants to see a strong, highly qualifi ed aviation authority with powerful resources operating in Finland, whether of the kind it is now, a section of the CAA but detached from commercial activities and able to take independent decisions, or an entirely separate authority in keeping with the spirit of the times. The commercial enterprise, however, cannot fi nance a separate authority.