RESTRICTED
4478
INCLUDING BRINGING THEM UP TO LICENSING STANDARD FOR RESALE OR
LEASING, WE SEE A REAL CLASH OF INTERESTS AND ARE NOT (NOT)
SATISFIED THAT OMNI/ARCO ADVICE WOULD BE IMPARTIAL OR THAT THEY
WOULD HAVE AN INCENTIVE TO MAINTAIN PROPER STANDARDS. THESE WE
FEEL ARE OVERRIDING FACTORS.
5. IT IS NECESSARY FOR CAA STANDARDS TO BE SATISFIED ON THE
ABOVE COUNTS BECAUSE THE RESPONSIBILITIES FOR CIVIL AVIATION
IN A DEPENDENT TERRITORY, INCLUDING THE INTERNATIONAL ASPECTS,
REST WITH HMG. IT WOULD EG BE EMBARRASSING AND UNFORTUNATE IN
OUR RELATIONS WITH THIRD COUNTRIES IF AN AIRCRAFT REGISTERED
IN TCI WERE TO CRASH IN THE TERRITORY OF A THIRD COUNTRY, OR
WERE TO INVOLVE NATIONALS OF THAT COUNTRY, AND THE CAUSE COULD
BE ATTRIBUTED TO INADEQUATE SAFETY CHECKS BY THE RESPONSIBLE
AUTHORITY. IT IS ALSO IMPORTANT THAT REGULATORY FUNCTIONS
SHOULD BE CARRIED OUT IN A MANNER WHICH DOES NOT HAVE THE
APPEARANCE OF BEING MANIFESTLY OPEN TO ABUSE. WE CANNOT SEE
THAT THE OMNI/ARCO PROPOSAL CAN BE MODIFIED IN ANY WAY TO MEET
THESE FUNDAMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND THEREFORE SEE NO POINT IN
PROPOSED MEETING WITH OMNI REPRESENTATIVES. GRATEFUL IF AG
COULD CANCEL MEETING.
6. YOU MAY DRAW ON THE ABOVE IN EXPLAINING TO YOUR GOVERNMENT
WHY THE PROPOSALS ARE UNACCEPTABLE. FULLER EXPLANATION OF
CAA AND DOT VIEWS FOLLOWS BY BAG.
CARRINGTON
NNNN
MINIMAL
WIAD
MAED
LEGAL ADVISERS
(MR GARDINER)
C
COPIES TO:
MR VARNEY, MISS WHITE,
CAA.
MISS FREEDMAN, MR J.WALKER, DOT/CAIR.
2
RESTRICTED
Pare 9
Fage