EC notice on BREXIT issued, licenses/certificates invalid

[The Old Fat One]

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.

[highcirrus]

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.

[Denti]

Originally Posted by BAengineer

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.

[highcirrus]

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.

[BAengineer]

Originally Posted by highcirrus

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.

[highcirrus]

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.

[infrequentflyer789]

Originally Posted by highcirrus

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

[BAengineer]

Originally Posted by highcirrus

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.

[highcirrus]

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]

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".

[BAengineer]

Originally Posted by highcirrus

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.

[The Old Fat One]

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.

[infrequentflyer789]

Originally Posted by The Old Fat One

All of this increasing attention to aviation is completely in line with expectation. IF ticket sales start to fall,

IF? Already happening, also from BBC: ( https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44949992 ) "Ryanair blamed a downturn in forward bookings and airfares in the Republic of Ireland"

That fall in bookings would appear to have happened around time of Brexit clause going in, would be interesting to know on which routes / dates the fall is. Of course there are many variables, it could also be due to the strikes, or some other cause - in so far as it is possible to tell we will probably never know because it suits people with various agendas to present one cause or another.

the pressure on the UK government will rise exponentially.

Would be wrong target - UK govt has, I believe, already stated it wants UK to stay in EASA. Of course that is not something within the UK's power to grant, would be more sensible to pressure those who can grant it.

[Denti]

Originally Posted by infrequentflyer789

Would be wrong target - UK govt has, I believe, already stated it wants UK to stay in EASA. Of course that is not something within the UK's power to grant, would be more sensible to pressure those who can grant it.

Well, the UK government knows the ways to be a member of EASA obviously, and that the EU does not want a bespoke agreement or cherry picking. So by choosing which aims to follow they implicitly have the power to get that or not. But of course, you are right as well, that the other side could do it out of the goodness of its heart if they want to, which however is not in the guidelines the negotiator was given by the european council (minus the UK obviously).

[BAengineer]

Originally Posted by infrequentflyer789

IF? Already happening, also from BBC: ( https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44949992 ) "Ryanair blamed a downturn in forward bookings and airfares in the Republic of Ireland"

That fall in bookings would appear to have happened around time of Brexit clause going in, would be interesting to know on which routes / dates the fall is. Of course there are many variables, it could also be due to the strikes, or some other cause - in so far as it is possible to tell we will probably never know because it suits people with various agendas to present one cause or another.

Your link doesnt mention Brexit, it only cites the pilot strikes in Dublin. If the cause were anything to do with Brexit what would be gained by moving aircraft from Dublin to Warsaw?

[BAengineer]

Originally Posted by Denti

Well, the UK government knows the ways to be a member of EASA obviously, and that the EU does not want a bespoke agreement or cherry picking. So by choosing which aims to follow they implicitly have the power to get that or not. But of course, you are right as well, that the other side could do it out of the goodness of its heart if they want to, which however is not in the guidelines the negotiator was given by the european council (minus the UK obviously).

I have been looking at the EASA website but cant find anything about restricting membership to only countries in the EU or EEA. Can anyone find anything definitive.

The only comment on membership I have found from the European Comission is that if the UK remains in EASA it will have to accept the jurisdiction of the ECJ, which the UK Government has already accepted they will do.

[The Old Fat One]

Would be wrong target - UK govt has, I believe, already stated it wants UK to stay in EASA. Of course that is not something within the UK's power to grant, would be more sensible to pressure those who can grant it.

Sorry, I didn't mean "pressure" in the sense of solving a specific issue. I meant pressure in the sense that as actual (as in really happening) material consequences of approaching brexit, be it aviation or anything else, the pressure on the government to do something - anything - will pile on inexorably. I agree, in this issue, as in others, solutions may lie outside the government's hands, but never in a million years will the voting public accept that. If this all goes petong (and I am not saying it will; I'm saying it damn sure might) the sitting government will be held responsible and there will be some sort of reckoning at the ballot box...although as in so much else, nobody knows what the outcome of that would be.

[Denti]

Originally Posted by BAengineer

I have been looking at the EASA website but cant find anything about restricting membership to only countries in the EU or EEA. Can anyone find anything definitive.

The only comment on membership I have found from the European Comission is that if the UK remains in EASA it will have to accept the jurisdiction of the ECJ, which the UK Government has already accepted they will do.

Indeed, the EASA is just an agency of the EU, not in itself able to negotiate any membership, that is up the commission and parliament. However, the UK government proposed some fudged thing in their white paper where the ECJ is not the final and sole arbiter of the law, which would be required by the EU, but rather that the UK would take those judgements into consideration. Which in the end is simply not the same thing.

[Heathrow Harry]

Originally Posted by Denti

Indeed, the EASA is just an agency of the EU, not in itself able to negotiate any membership, that is up the commission and parliament. However, the UK government proposed some fudged thing in their white paper where the ECJ is not the final and sole arbiter of the law, which would be required by the EU, but rather that the UK would take those judgements into consideration. Which in the end is simply not the same thing.

I'd like to try that argument in the Magistrates Court... "i'll take your sentence into consideration..."

[Skyjob]

Originally Posted by BAengineer

Your link doesnt mention Brexit, it only cites the pilot strikes in Dublin. If the cause were anything to do with Brexit what would be gained by moving aircraft from Dublin to Warsaw?

You are right, however it may indirectly have to do with Brexit, where flying rights may not be guaranteed anymore, bookings drop, and the airline prefers to use the UK-route aircraft in other markets, rather than having them sit idle at Dublin in future. How many aircraft does Ryanair use daily for its Dublin-UK flights?