PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Rumours & News (https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news-13/)
-   -   EC notice on BREXIT issued, licenses/certificates invalid (https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/607757-ec-notice-brexit-issued-licenses-certificates-invalid.html)

Bowmore 15th Apr 2018 12:17

Why could UK not be a member of EASA after Brexit? Norway, Iceland, Switzerland, Croatia are, and are not EU members.

The Ancient Geek 15th Apr 2018 13:00

Storm in a tea cup.
Britain can remain in EASA in the same way as several other non-EU nations.

This is just EASA telling the UK to get on with the negotiations and get it sorted, the politicians have neglected the task in favour of talking about other things such a trade and they needed a reminder.

Daysleeper 15th Apr 2018 13:12


Originally Posted by The Ancient Geek (Post 10119151)
Storm in a tea cup.

Britain can remain in EASA in the same way as several other non-EU nations.

All of which accept that Membership of EASA is contingent upon accepting the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the European Union, something Britain has ruled out.

This could probably be sorted out by mature rational discussion, alas this seems to be in short supply at the moment and we seem on path for a catastrophic Brexit with massive damage to all.

SteppenHerring 15th Apr 2018 15:13


Originally Posted by Bowmore (Post 10119111)
Why could UK not be a member of EASA after Brexit? Norway, Iceland, Switzerland, Croatia are, and are not EU members.

Why do people keep saying that Croatia isn't a member? It has been for 5 years.:ugh:

All the others are members of the EEA - something else that the UK government has ruled out.

Jetscream 32 15th Apr 2018 15:25

:eek: Well, there is only 622 people controlling the Brexit process on behalf of the UK Govt for the whole of the UK and all of its component parts, and I for one would like to know the credentials of the people whose task it is to sort out aviation? FOI anyone??

Bigpants 15th Apr 2018 15:33

"Licenses? I don't need no stinking licenses"

I do have a PPL signed off in 1976 and a whole bunch of time expired CAA ATPLs including signatures of nice people who are now mostly dead. I figure I will just keep flying after Brexit and await some form of license in the post.

infrequentflyer789 15th Apr 2018 15:48


Originally Posted by SteppenHerring (Post 10119238)
Why do people keep saying that Croatia isn't a member? It has been for 5 years.:ugh:

All the others are members of the EEA - something else that the UK government has ruled out.

As pointed out by the poster you quoted, Switzerland is a member of EASA. It is not a member of either the EU or the EEA (rejected by a referendum with even smaller margin than the Brexit one).

Why is it people keep saying Switzerland is a member (of EU or EEA) ? - it never has been. :ugh:

Journey Man 15th Apr 2018 16:36


Originally Posted by Icelanta (Post 10117340)
UK wanted out, now deal with the consequences.
No negociating or concessions by the EU/EASA.
Boohoo right...

The pettiness embodied in your post echoes that of the EU towards anyone who doesn't share the Utopian dream. As a major European market, try not to forget that mainland European businesses also have a lot to lose by your "no nogociating (sic) or concessions" sabre rattling.

EAM 15th Apr 2018 19:09


Originally Posted by infrequentflyer789 (Post 10119274)
Why is it people keep saying Switzerland is a member (of EU or EEA) ? - it never has been. :ugh:

No its not, but Switzerland has their own agreements with the EU and it took them about 8 years to negotiate and have them in force.

The UK can do the same and rejoin EASA in, lets say 2026 or 2027.

JammedStab 16th Apr 2018 02:39


Originally Posted by Mac the Knife (Post 10118160)
"…if you vote for something you do have to accept the risk that you might actually get it."

Yup, dead right. And all the folk who wanted out (Make Britain Great Again!) are now starting to realize what they are going to lose.

It ain't gonna be fun…

Mac

:cool:

Think of it as the price for not having uncontrolled mass migration(as determined by a leader of another country) of certain people who create unacceptable conditions in your own country. Certainly you must have figured that out by now. Ask all the relatives and injured victims of their experiences and then compare to this minor issue.

So get on with it and it’s minor inconveniences to life. After all... life for some is a minor side benefit of all this.

ExSp33db1rd 16th Apr 2018 03:57


I know most people don't usually get what they vote for, but if you vote for something you do have to accept the risk that you might actually get it.
Moral - be careful what you wish for.

triploss 16th Apr 2018 04:59


Originally Posted by infrequentflyer789 (Post 10119274)
As pointed out by the poster you quoted, Switzerland is a member of EASA. It is not a member of either the EU or the EEA (rejected by a referendum with even smaller margin than the Brexit one).

Why is it people keep saying Switzerland is a member (of EU or EEA) ? - it never has been. :ugh:

The Swiss do however have a lot more practice with referendums (moreover they are legally binding, plus they send out the voting papers to overseas voters a lot earlier than the UK did), so the result there is much more meaningful. They also have voted to keep various EU relationships alive, even without outright joining the EU.

But perhaps more importantly, the Swiss have a lot more practice at diplomacy, and judging by the fact that they are part of the free movement area AND various further EU related organisations, they seem to be aware that having a close relationship with the EU can lead to significant economic benefits (even if they don't want to be a 100% member). Whereas, judging by current politics and news, the UK is doing its best to shut itself off to and alienate itself from the rest of Europe. Insulting and misleading your negotiating partners is an easy way to make the process last at least twice as long as negotiating with Switzerland ever took.

And Switzerland has the strategic advantage of being in the middle of large road and rail traffic flows between Northern and Southern EU countries. That gives the EU good reason to be friendlier since Switzerland could easily cause major disruption, whereas the UK isn't really that significant.

Jetscream 32 16th Apr 2018 06:32

28 different cultures, 28 different views and 28 interpretations of the process along with millions of industries relying on a good outcome.... from now on its poker!

Mr Mac 16th Apr 2018 07:18

Jetscream32
Well lets hope it is Poker as by judging by the endless gambling adverts seen on UK television it appears to be one of the UK few growth industries sad as it is.

Regards
Mr Mac

RLinSW4 16th Apr 2018 08:27


Originally Posted by triploss (Post 10119764)
judging by current politics and news, the UK is doing its best to shut itself off to and alienate itself from the rest of Europe. Insulting and misleading your negotiating partners is an easy way to make the process last at least twice as long as negotiating with Switzerland ever took.

It all arises from the EU's arrogance and bullying. Negotiating transitional trade terms need not be slow. I was involved in putting together the complex of agreements that covered the move of the UK, Denmark and the Irish Republic from membership of EFTA to membership of the European Communities in 1972, this also involved creating an agreement between the enlarged ECs and the remnants of EFTA. All was completed by the time we signed the treaty of accession - less than two years. If the EU really put their economic interests first they would be doing something similar now. Rather they are trying to punish the UK for not wanting to be part of their grand project.

ExXB 16th Apr 2018 10:33

Rather than trying to punish the excited kingdom, they have decided not to facilitate the process of leaving the union. And this for obvious reasons.

You made your bed, etc.

Consol 16th Apr 2018 10:42

It would be a lot simpler for everybody if the UK just decided not to leave....

falcon12 16th Apr 2018 13:04

I heard that the CAA at Gatwick closed their Brexit office at the end of last year. If they did, someone somewhere knew what the outcome is going to be. And that someone should have realised that being in EASA still means being beholding to the ECJ.

Additionally, so I read somewhere, there are some 65 Open Skies agreements to be renegotiated assuming we are leaving. That raises the questions of majority UK ownership of UK airlines which leaves some big names with big problems.

So, personally, I hope the KISS principal will be applied as regards aviation. The alternative is not appealing the way its going at the moment.

101917 16th Apr 2018 14:03

The disaster that is Brexit continues unabated and aviation is going to be no small part of it.

The UK aviation industry, which plays a major part in the economic success of the UK is posed to go one of two ways. Firstly, if the UK remains in EASA, albeit without the right to influence or vote on the ‘rules’ then it may well survive reasonably intact. However, in order for this to happen the UK Government and our aviation companies would be subject to the ECJ which is an anathema to the hard line, right wing Brexiteers as they want nothing to do with the ECJ.

If the UK aviation industry does not remain a member of EASA and is no longer a part of Open Skies, then any or all of the following could occur with unforeseen consequences for the industry.

• The UK retains sovereignty over its airspace and has no say in the EU’s airspace as is allowed now under EASA and open skies

• The UK would have very limited “freedoms” of the air

• Traffic rights would be given by bilateral agreements and not in line with open skies

• The EU and its members would protect their national airlines and aviation companies and limit/prohibit competition from the UK

• The EU would only allow the use of designated airports and not as occurs with open skies

• There could be single airline designation on certain routes from the UK

• There could be limited frequencies / capacity

• A requirement for double approval for fares between the UK and the EU

• A requirement for pooling agreements between airlines flying between the UK and the EU countries

• Prior to open skies most airlines were state-owned. It would be a tragedy if this ever returned.

None of the above would help the UK economy or consumer, including those who voted for Brexit.

It is no surprise that both easyJet and Thomas Cook are setting up headquarters in Europe. Other airlines are looking at ways of protecting themselves.

birmingham 16th Apr 2018 14:32

This notification is simply a statement of fact. The UK government plans a bill to retain EU law for the transition period. The ECJ retains authority over certain matters in the transition period and any transition from EU oversight takes place gradually after that.

BUT ... none of this has been agreed yet. Both the EU and the UK would lose out significantly unless these matters are settled. The assumption is they will be settled. After all, disruption on this scale is unthinkable to both parties.

BUT ... they aren't settled yet (or even remotely close to being settled) and we really need to get on with this to avoid chaos.

In my personal opinion it will be impossible to do anything other than accept EASA for now. Our pre-EASA bi-lateral agreements no longer apply. Bi-lateral negotiations, open skies agreements etc. will take a long time - there is nothing we can do about other countries parliamentary timescales - and that assumes the political will is there.

I think EASA in some shape or form with ECJ involvement in some shape or form is pretty much inevitable.


All times are GMT. The time now is 00:18.


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