But the UK's Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) disagrees, saying the changes will keep passengers as safe as before.
Note that they don't (can't) elaborate on why they "disagree". We wait in the forlorn hope that someone in the media actually has the ability to understand this point and is able to follow it up to the natural conclusion which is 'conflict of interest'.
"We welcome EASA's final proposals which the CAA is satisfied provide a level of safety broadly equivalent to those already in place in the UK."
Again, how many of those in the media have sufficient IQ to challenge the regulator and ask the simple question... is "broadly equivalent" the same as "equal to" or "better than"?