Welcome to Citizen Space. This site will help you find and participate in consultations that interest you.
Recently updated consultations are displayed below. Alternatively, search for consultations by keyword, postcode, interest etc.
Events See All Events
No upcoming events at this time.
Open Consultations RSS Feed for open consultations
Closed Consultations RSS Feed for closed consultations
Title Date Closed H7 Consumer Challenge Forum 5 Aug 2016 CAA guidance for airports on providing assistance to people with hidden disabilities 15 Jul 2016 Access to the groundhandling market at UK airports: a review of the CAA's approach 28 Jun 2016 Proposals for a revised airspace change process 15 Jun 2016 Proposal to modify NATS’ planning and reporting requirements 3 Jun 2016
We Asked, You Said, We Did
Below are some of the issues we have recently consulted on and their outcomes.
- We Asked:
Whether NERL should be required to produce detailed technology and airspace programmes for the remainder of RP2 by 31 March 2017 and an outline technology programme and airspace proposals for RP3 by 30 June 2018.
We also asked whether we should have the ability to appoint an Independent Reviewer to review the accuracy of NERL’s reporting on its technology and airspace programmes.
- You Said:
- You largely supported our proposals, although some of you commented on the detail. Some wanted the proposals amended to remove the ability of us and NERL to bilaterally agree later dates for the programmes and options, and some of you wanted additional requirements on NERL to report on noise and, possibly, air quality as well.You largely supported our proposal to appoint an independent reviewer. Although one of you did not have enough understanding of the proposal to support it. NERL said it would engage constructively and positively with an Independent Reviewer.
- We Did:
We modified NERL’s licence as proposed, but clarified that we would not agree later dates with NERL unless there were compelling reasons for reasons for doing so. In particular, we would not agree to later dates without first taking views from users. We considered that robust reporting on noise was important , but thought that this Licence modification, on the development of and reporting on airspace and technology programmes, was not the appropriate mechanism to introduce noise performance indicators.
We modified the licence to allow us to appoint an Independent Reviewer. As this is the first time that such a role has been envisaged in ATM, we said we would take a proportionate approach as all parties learn how such a role can add value to oversight of capital programme delivery. We said we intended to appoint the Reviewer initially for a one year period.
During the consultation process, we ask for your feedback, you tell us and then we make positive changes. Public participation is key to our work. See what happens with We Asked, You Said, We Did.