Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

EC notice on BREXIT issued, licenses/certificates invalid

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

EC notice on BREXIT issued, licenses/certificates invalid

Old 30th Jul 2018, 15:08
  #321 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 42
The view and opinions expressed in the article are, I consider, to be a fair description of the current state of play.

The UK aviation industry has always wanted to remain a member of EASA, although the EU has said that EASA certification would no longer apply if the UK left without a deal. Nonetheless, it is probable that EASA directions and legislation will remain in force during any transition period. This will be a matter for our government to negotiate and agree. The UK would likely remain subject to the ECJ with no say or influence within EASA during the transition period. This may be tough for the hard Brexiteers to swallow. It is to be hoped that the CAA is making contingency plans.

Although there hasn't been much by the way of 'public' progress on the aviation aspects relating to Brexit it is probable that behind the scenes progress has been made with the US on an 'open skies' policy. This could be in place by March 2019 and, if correct is good news. Let us hope nothing interferes with these negotiations.

Another area that needs to be addressed is the continuous recognition of manufacturing and service aspects of the UK aviation industry. It is hoped that common sense from all parties will prevail. The difficulty will be that EASA does not have the authorised ability and legal knowhow to negotiate with a non-member aviation authority which the CAA may become.

It is to be hoped that a transition period extending into 2020 can be agreed. This will certainly be advantageous for the whole of the UK aviation industry and the EU. Even so existing EU Law will continue to apply, subject to other agreements such as an arrangement on the Irish boarder issue and a deal on trade.

A resolution of the issues is needed and it is, I believe, imperative that a transition period is agreed to prevent the UK from crashing out of the EU. The no deal scenario is seriously worrying to not only aviation, but many other industries.

Progress needs to be made, and quickly, to avoid a potentially catastrophic state of affairs occurring on 19 March 2019.

Last edited by 101917; 30th Jul 2018 at 15:20.
101917 is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2018, 15:19
  #322 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 1,494
Originally Posted by homonculus View Post
If you look at the rest of the link and the other articles from this newspaper you will see that editorially it has a certain view on Brexit, as indeed do UK newspapers. Sadly so do most people posting here. Added to that few are conversant with law so the chance of getting an objective opinion is very small.
yeah it's a shame that most of the UK press has been rabidly pro-brexit rather than helping inform people of the advantages and disadvantages of Brexit and the possible consequences.
Daysleeper is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2018, 16:01
  #323 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Away from home Rat
Posts: 1
Originally Posted by BAengineer View Post
Is it a better place though? Yes the increased competition has led to lower fares but it has also led to terms and conditions for those in the industry being screwed to the floor. Without Open Skies we wouldn't have companies like Ryanair and the subsequent reduction in wages and conditions. I doubt that many in the industry would claim it is better now than it was during the golden age of Bermuda 2.
Try the Regionals like Eastern Airways, BMIR and others that do want to expand into Europe and do/have operated EU routes outside the UK for the answer to your question of British carriers operating within the EU. As for T&Cs, I hear the same bleating from other ex BCAR guys that saw approval pay being screwed by the licence changes. Was not the fault of the EU IMHO, try the British managers that pulled the stunt. Ryan Air soon had to change their tune when Jet 2 popped up at STN.
Alber Ratman is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2018, 16:19
  #324 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,445
Originally Posted by Daysleeper View Post
yeah it's a shame that most of the UK press has been rabidly pro-brexit rather than helping inform people of the advantages and disadvantages of Brexit and the possible consequences.
Even the mildest attempt that has tried to inform people of the possible disadvantages of Brexit has been branded 'Project Fear'.
cats_five is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2018, 16:27
  #325 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 838
Originally Posted by The Old Fat One View Post
I'm seriously not. Leaving aside whether or not this or any other newspaper headlines are ever factually perfect or completely sincere (interesting though that discussion might be) I was merely hoping if somebody with a better legal knowledge of the system could critique the article and indicate if it is reasonably accurate or whatever.

I'm still hoping.
Anyone with "better legal knowledge of the system" is probably making good money off that knowledge elsewhere - if nothing else is certain, we can be sure lawyers will do very well out of brexit.

The article is accurate as far as I can see / know, but not sure what they were getting at with pointing out that article 1 of chicago states airspace is sovereign - pretty sure that is the default position without the agreement, I think clause 1 is just there to avoid any possible doubt that the rest of the agreement changes that. If the implication is that we still might get into tit-for-tat airspace closure then Ireland-EU routes are going to be pretty damned limited (and don't mention Shanwick OCA), but the article only refers to impact on UK airlines. Also might have been worth pointing out that airspace is sovereign only to the extent you can police / defend it (think Crimea for instance) - but then an Irish newspaper probably doesn't want to point out who provides air intercept capability for Irish airspace (not the Irish airforce)... :-)

Not entirely sure about the accuracy of the RIchard North quote and where they/he get "30 days before the inteding start of operation" from, or how it is applicable - because logically that cannot be done in the case of operations that are already started now and want to continue. It is possible there are other procedures that may apply, or possibly there are none - not sure an EASA member has ever left before, but maybe an operator has changed from EASA to TCO before due to corporate changes. It is my understanding that in general the EU are saying the UK cannot do anything (like negotiations with anyone else) before we leave but has to have everything in place at the moment we do, I am not sure how much of that is bluster (to sell the transition deal) and how much is genuine legal obstacles, but I think that for example a BASA is a legal problem before exit.
infrequentflyer789 is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2018, 20:23
  #326 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,516
101917 & if789, thank you for your insights. My gut feeling was the article was a reasonable summary, largely devoid of bias & agenda, but I don't have the knowledge to properly evaluate it. I hope the discussion on PPRuNe can steer towards genuine information and away from the brexit/bremain dialogue which becomes increasingly irrelevant with every day that passes. I believe there will be people on here that are genuinely concerned about their future as this unfolds and as I have said many times on here...whatever happens, happens to aviation first.
The Old Fat One is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2018, 03:43
  #327 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: London/Fort Worth
Posts: 0
Originally Posted by infrequentflyer789 View Post
Not entirely sure about the accuracy of the RIchard North quote and where they/he get "30 days before the inteding start of operation" from, or how it is applicable - because logically that cannot be done in the case of operations that are already started now and want to continue. It is possible there are other procedures that may apply, or possibly there are none - not sure an EASA member has ever left before, but maybe an operator has changed from EASA to TCO before due to corporate changes. It is my understanding that in general the EU are saying the UK cannot do anything (like negotiations with anyone else) before we leave but has to have everything in place at the moment we do, I am not sure how much of that is bluster (to sell the transition deal) and how much is genuine legal obstacles, but I think that for example a BASA is a legal problem before exit.
I wouldn't take a lot of notice of Richard North, on his blog he claims that the UK cannot be a member of EASA as membership is only open to EU members - which must come as a bit of a shock to Iceland.

The other thing that struck me from the article was the claim that Licences, permits to fly etc will no longer be valid for UK aircraft wanting to fly into the EU - well without a deal it will be exactly the same for EU airlines who want to fly into the UK, they will also be banned. The costs to everyone will be so astronomical that some deal is going to get agreed.
BAengineer is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2018, 04:00
  #328 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 395
infrequentflyer789

Not entirely sure about the accuracy of the RIchard North quote and where they/he get "30 days before the intending start of operation" from, or how it is applicable
Maybe checkout: COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 452/2014 where you'll find reference to the relevant required Third Country Operator notice at TCO.300 Application for an authorisation on Page 6 of the document.

For those serious students of the effects of Brexit on UK Aerospace/Air Transport and the applicable law, I could do no better than recommend Richard North's blog, EU Referendum and in particular, his Brexit Impact Assessments

The Assessment in respect of Third Country Operators is contained here and of note, he writes:

Listening to Walsh exude confidence, though, I didn't get the impression that he – or any of his colleagues – really understood what they were up against. At the midnight on 29 March 2019 (Brussels time), all UK registered airlines will cease to be "community air carriers", as defined by Regulation (EC) 1008/2008, and thus will cease to enjoy the degree of access to the aviation facilities of the Member States that they currently enjoy.

Just to regularise the position in the UK, though, we are going to need hefty amendments toThe Operation of Air Services in the Community Regulations 2009.

The interesting thing here is that the Civil Aviation Authority currently issues airline operating licences not under the aegis of UK law but by virtue of EU law, under Council Regulation (EEC) No 2407/92, which are given effect in UK law by the 2009 UK Regulations.

On the face of it, before it can go anywhere with the EU – and all the other third countries – the UK government must completely rebuild its own system for licencing UK airline operators. Only then can it ask other countries to recognise them, presumably on a mutual recognition basis. However, things are never that simple.

Assuming that the UK is able swiftly to negotiate an air service agreement with the EU, that is only the start of it. The UK will, by then, be a third country. This means that Regulation (EC) 1008/2008 will no longer apply. Instead, UK airlines will have to conform with Commission Regulation (EU) No 453/2014.

This, as Willie Walsh will undoubtedly know, lays down "technical requirements and administrative procedures related to air operations of third country operators pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council". This requires them to apply to the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) in order to gain approval as Third Country Operators (TCOs), in accordance with the procedure sketched out here.

And, in accordance with the six-page application guidelines, the intended operator must "demonstrate a credible intention to conduct commercial operations into within or out of the territory subject to the provisions of the Treaty of the European Union".

Of this, Mr Walsh will no doubt be fully aware, as he will most probably have to substantiate his airline's intention by submitting its planned schedule for commercial air transport operations or by making a statement that operations to the European Union are planned.

Given the complexity of the application procedure, one very much suspects that neither British Airways nor any other UK licenced airline will be seeing its TCO approval in the small hours of Saturday 30 March 2019, or even in the days thereafter.

The complication here is that the application must be submitted at least 30 days before the intended starting date of operation – but it cannot be made until the UK has left the EU and become a third country. And once he's sorted that out, there is the small matter of lodging proof of insurance in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 785/2004.
To end on a note of light relief, Ppruners might like the Independent's take on "What could day one of a no-deal Brexit look like"?
highcirrus is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2018, 05:23
  #329 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,516
Good post (aviation wise)

I don't think the Independent article is meant to be taken that seriously...?? Not least because it's not all going to kick off exactly on leaving day. If no deal is reached, political change in the UK will be in play before the end of this year for a start off. And the effects on aviation will be far more advanced and insidious. If no deal is reached by Christmas, only a moron (or a very rich person) will be booking flights into the EU (or perhaps anywhere) in April onwards, so there will be far fewer flights to cancel in the first place.
The Old Fat One is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2018, 05:58
  #330 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 395
The Old Fat One

Re: The Independent article. Probably an irony alert might have helped, though, given continuation of current "government" ineptitude, Channel Ro/Ro ports could become choked with corollary lead-in motorway congestion on either side (due newly required Customs, Sanitary (animal) and Phytosanitary (plant) inspections on the French side of the newly instituted EU external border) . As discussed, Air Transport could cease and, often overlooked, Chunnel train service licences (operator/driver) could no longer be valid, along with UK HGV and private driver licences. Result? Uk completely isolated until such time as the "government" wakes from its slumbers, quits squabbling amongst itself, at last considers the National interest and addresses these urgent matters properly. However, interim, no need to worry, as, in a time of peace and plenty, the current set of "leaders" are fixing for rationing and army support of the Civil Powers, post Brexit, so no real problem (irony alert!).

Agree your post and indeed political change hopefully will be in process by the end of the year if a no-deal Brexit looks inevitable. I've already counselled family, friends and colleagues not to lay money out on travel to/from UK after 29 March 2019.
highcirrus is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2018, 10:23
  #331 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,128
Originally Posted by BAengineer View Post
The other thing that struck me from the article was the claim that Licences, permits to fly etc will no longer be valid for UK aircraft wanting to fly into the EU - well without a deal it will be exactly the same for EU airlines who want to fly into the UK, they will also be banned. The costs to everyone will be so astronomical that some deal is going to get agreed.
Actually, that is only partly true. For EU registered aircraft, companies and crew (both on the ground and in the air) nothing will change with BREXIT. They will still be licensed and airworthy under EASA rules, as they are still part of the EU and its organisations and regulations. For the UK however, and that is only if there is no deal, there will be no continued membership in the EU or its organisations and regulations. So everything issued in the UK based on those regulations and organisations will be no longer valid, in fact each and every license and airworthiness certificate will have scrap paper value only.

You are right of course, same as the UK has no longer access to the EU under the open sky agreement, all EU airlines will no longer have access to the UK under the same agreement. However, the EU is losing access to a 60 odd million people market, the UK to a 460 odd million people market.
Denti is online now  
Old 31st Jul 2018, 11:40
  #332 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 395
BAengineer

I wouldn't take a lot of notice of Richard North, on his blog he claims that the UK cannot be a member of EASA as membership is only open to EU members - which must come as a bit of a shock to Iceland.
Perhaps you could provide a link to Richard North indicating that EASA membership is only open to EU members? A careful reading of his blog posts will reveal that Dr. North is well aware that EASA membership is open to both EU and EFTA states (of which Iceland is one) and indeed, he makes this clear in the next paragraph from my quoted piece from his blog post at ♯ 333

The complication here is that the application must be submitted at least 30 days before the intended starting date of operation – but it cannot be made until the UK has left the EU and become a third country. And once he's sorted that out, there is the small matter of lodging proof of insurance in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 785/2004.

There would also seem to be some slight complications for foreign aircraft. The EU (EASA) has in the past dealt with foreign airlines and issued their TCO approvals, permitting them to operate in the territory of EU Member States (and the Efta States).

But once the UK leaves the EU, these airlines will no longer have authority to operate in the UK. Thus, the British authorities (presumably the CAA) will have to set up its own approval programme, and invite all the foreign carriers (including EU/Efta carriers) to apply.
highcirrus is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2018, 12:49
  #333 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: London/Fort Worth
Posts: 0
Originally Posted by highcirrus View Post
BAengineer Perhaps you could provide a link to Richard North indicating that EASA membership is only open to EU members? A careful reading of his blog posts will reveal that Dr. North is well aware that EASA membership is open to both EU and EFTA states (of which Iceland is one) and indeed, he makes this clear in the next paragraph from my quoted piece from his post at ♯ 333
I am not allowed to post links for some reason but if you look at his post from the 29/4/2018 he states:

"But the commission immediately pointed out that we cannot remain in EASA because, as the rules make clear, this is open only to EU members."

Well the Commission did nothing of the sort - all they pointed out was that EASA was still going to have the ECJ jurisdiction, a point the UK Government accepted when they changed the definition of their red-line on the ECJ from 'direct' jurisdiction to 'indirect' jurisdiction. SKY news did a much better job of explaining the state of play than Richard North.

Again sorry that I am unable to post a link but if you do a search for: 'Govt to stay in EU air safety body in blurring of Brexit red line' you should find the article.
BAengineer is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2018, 20:06
  #334 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 395
BAengineer

Thanks for your reply and the link to Dr. North's post on 29 April 2018 is here.

Perhaps you are referring to paragraph 10 of his piece where he quotes the Commission's words?

The only clue Mrs May has given as to how she thinks this chaos can be avoided, as she said at the Mansion House, is that we should be allowed to remain in EASA. This was echoed by our own Civil Aviation Authority, which knows it would take years for us to create our own system. But the commission immediately pointed out that we cannot remain in EASA because, as the rules make clear, this is open only to EU members.
However, Dr. North does write at paragraph 17:

In fact, the risk is very much more than "theoretical". Outside the EEA there is no possibility of the UK gaining associate membership of EASA and, as I wrote in this piece, the best we can hope for is a "Working Arrangement". This will, of course, require full regulatory alignment but that is the least of our problems.
As I'm sure you know and most certainly Dr. North knows, the EEA states comprise the 28 EU states plus the EFTA states of Iceland, Norway and Liechtenstein. Special case Switzerland is an EFTA member, outside both EU and EEA but still an EASA member.

If you follow his link "in this piece", you will note that paragraph 4 provides a link from his words "a public website" and using which link he makes quite clear which states comprise the total EASA membership (EEA states and Switzerland).

So, I'm not entirely sure why:

I wouldn't take a lot of notice of Richard North, on his blog he claims that the UK cannot be a member of EASA as membership is only open to EU members - which must come as a bit of a shock to Iceland.
highcirrus is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2018, 22:16
  #335 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 838
Originally Posted by highcirrus View Post
BAengineer

Thanks for your reply and the link to Dr. North's post on 29 April 2018 is here.

Perhaps you are referring to paragraph 10 of his piece where he quotes the Commission's words?
Regardless of whether those were the Commission's words or his, in this ( Brexit: leading in the amateur stakes ) piece he doesn't appear to be quoting anyone when he states: "EASA membership is limited to EU countries". Yet this is the very same piece where he links to the EASA membership page to deduce "that Turkey is not a member" - obviously his fact checking was a little selective as it is equally easy to deduce from the same source that Switzerland is a member. I have noticed a number of contradictions in Dr. North's posts, maybe it's accidental, he does write a lot, but it's sloppy, it makes me distrust his statements of fact. Many of his opinions on the Brexit process and the politicians on the other hand are spot on - well, in the sense that they agree with mine
infrequentflyer789 is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2018, 22:18
  #336 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: London/Fort Worth
Posts: 0
Originally Posted by highcirrus View Post
BAengineer

Perhaps you are referring to paragraph 10 of his piece where he quotes the Commission's words?
Thanks for the link - but I doubt that the Commission is unaware of the make up of EASA. Do you really think the Commission wouldn't know that it is not only EU Members states that are members of EASA?

Perhaps Mr North was just scratching around for something to support his ideas and made a mistake.
BAengineer is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2018, 22:42
  #337 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 395
BAengineer

Your reply seems to lack any kind of logic as I have laid out in excruciating detail how Dr. North (not Mr - perhaps some attention to detail is required) is and always has been aware of the states comprising EASA.

I'm sure if you properly read even a sample of his prodigious output, wherein lies plain to see, an unflinching commitment to truth, fact, logic and reason you will conclude his command of the actulalité and the utter fatuousness of the idea that "he was just scratching around for something to support his ideas and made a mistake".
highcirrus is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2018, 23:09
  #338 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 395
infrequentflyer789

Yes, his wording EASA membership is limited to EU countries was taken to task by a number of his commentators and he made the point that this is strictly true as EU EASA members have full voting rights, whilst EFTA EASA members (including special case Switzerland) do not.

His reference to Turkey is to make the following point. I think you need to read his post a little more carefully.

As far as this "participation" goes, EASA membership is limited to EU countries. Other European countries enter into agreements with the EU and adopt the Union's civil aviation rules. But they do not have voting rights and any specific areas of cooperation have to be specifically negotiated. Third countries, therefore, "have raised the question of why they should implement decisions over which they have had no influence".

It is not known quite what the CBI were thinking about when they cited Turkey's "participation" in EASA as an example which the UK could follow, but if they are serious in proposing this arrangement as a model, then we have serious problems.
I'm therefore not convinced that "his fact checking was a little selective".
highcirrus is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2018, 23:21
  #339 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: London/Fort Worth
Posts: 0
Originally Posted by highcirrus View Post
BAengineer

Your reply seems to lack any kind of logic as I have laid out in excruciating detail how Dr. North (not Mr - perhaps some attention to detail is required) is and always has been aware of the states comprising EASA.

I'm sure if you properly read even a sample of his prodigious output, wherein lies plain to see, an unflinching commitment to truth, fact, logic and reason you will conclude his command of the actulalité and the utter fatuousness of the idea that "he was just scratching around for something to support his ideas and made a mistake".
Hey - I simply pointed out that it would be very unlikely that the European Commission were unaware of the rules for membership of EASA. You seem intent on blaming the European Commission, for which we notice there was no citation given by Mr North, we simply have to take his word that is what they said.

My view is that it is far more likely that Mr North simply made a mistake in pushing his agenda. Personally I dont see how it really matters.
BAengineer is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2018, 06:20
  #340 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,516
On the BBC today

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-45019603

Much of the same, but beginning to place the emphasis on ticket contingency (my initial interpretation of the Ryan Air ticket position was slightly wrong...where they appear to be heading with it - auto refund if no fly due brexit - makes more sense from a marketing perspective). And I like the addition of new buzzwords ..."project complexity".

All of this increasing attention to aviation is completely in line with expectation. IF ticket sales start to fall, the pressure on the UK government will rise exponentially.
The Old Fat One is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.