• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Cont: Brexit: Now What? Part 5

Status
Not open for further replies.
Doesn't really matter - I don't believe that this has been sorted out yet

https://www.balpa.org/Media-Centre/Press-Releases/Pilots-repeat-EU-flights-concern

Pilots repeat concerns following European Commission announcement that EU flights could cease to operate from UK
Release date: 12/12/2017


The statement from the EU commission on the ability for UK flights to operate in Europe should no deal be reached is cause for great concern, says the UK pilots’ association.

The British Airline Pilots’ Association (BALPA) has repeatedly called for clarity on how flights will operate post-Brexit and says that a no deal is “not an option”.

This notice from the EU Commission’s Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport states: Air carriers of the United Kingdom will no longer enjoy traffic rights under any air transport agreement to which the Union is a party, be it to or from the territory of the United Kingdom, be it to or from the territory of any of the EU Member States.

BALPA general secretary, Brian Strutton, said:

“Here it is in black and white from the EU Commission – UK flights to the EU will be grounded in March 2019 should no agreement be reached.

“We need the UK Government to sort air traffic rights now. Once again, no deal is not an option."

Notes: Find the full EU statement here

There are a plethora of similar arrangements that might be easy in principle but actually need doing and agreeing by both parties if utter chaos isn't to happen.

And Her Majesty's Government has been pissing the time up the wall
 
The UK hasn't made any decision to stop flying anywhere after Brexit. If it is stopped from flying anywhere that will be the result of decisions made by other countries and imposed on the UK.
But it's a fantasy of Remainers that any such decisions will be made. It's in everyone's interest to keep planes flying as they currently do.


I would agree - this video is very good. It would be easy for the UK to sign up to this, even on the 30th March 2019.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thqbjA2DC-E
 
The UK hasn't made any decision to stop flying anywhere after Brexit. If it is stopped from flying anywhere that will be the result of decisions made by other countries and imposed on the UK.
But it's a fantasy of Remainers that any such decisions will be made. It's in everyone's interest to keep planes flying as they currently do.

So much for this being about sovereignty.
 
Doesn't really matter - I don't believe that this has been sorted out yet

https://www.balpa.org/Media-Centre/Press-Releases/Pilots-repeat-EU-flights-concern



There are a plethora of similar arrangements that might be easy in principle but actually need doing and agreeing by both parties if utter chaos isn't to happen.

And Her Majesty's Government has been pissing the time up the wall

And this excellent thread describing the problems in detail:

https://twitter.com/brianmlucey/status/1020603084806840320
 
Of course, it's slightly odd that the EU is refusing to talk about future arrangements (EXCEPT in the case of the Irish border), while complaining about UK cherry-picking. ;)

I don't think that the EU is refusing to talk about future arrangements but will only talk about it once the UK has settled on the type of relationship that it wants (and which is compatible with what the EU can and is prepared to offer). Further, any future relations are informed by how the ending of the current relationship is handled.

So to me, this refusal to talk about future arrangements is not in the slightest bit odd.
 
The UK was willing to stay in EASA and anxious to urgently negotiate alternatives if that wasn't possible. But all negotiations have been blocked by the EU negotiator Barnier. It's just one example of the EU refusing to negotiate in good faith. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jun/18/aviation-industry-eu-blocks-talks-to-avert-no-deal-brexit-crisis
UK = red lines
EU = bad faith.
:rolleyes:

When the UK decides it want to leave the EU it loses the privileges of membership.
It is not bad faith for a membership organisation to have benifits that are available only to members. The UK is trying to render the 'European Union' as meaningless, turning it into a pick and mix counter.

Imagine going to a garage and saying I don't want to buy a car but I want to buy the car's wheels, passenger seat, rear window, front right headlight and the roof. It is not 'bad faith' for the garage to turn down that offer.
 
Last edited:
Of course, it's slightly odd that the EU is refusing to talk about future arrangements (EXCEPT in the case of the Irish border), while complaining about UK cherry-picking. ;)
That is because the Irish border answer limits severely the other options. If there is to be no hard border then absent future technology the UK and the EU needs to be part of the same customs area and we will have free movement of people and no control over our borders. If there is a hard border you don't need those things.

Once we have the Irish answer it saves time on the rest.
 
Last edited:
The UK was willing to stay in EASA and anxious to urgently negotiate alternatives if that wasn't possible. But all negotiations have been blocked by the EU negotiator Barnier. It's just one example of the EU refusing to negotiate in good faith. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jun/18/aviation-industry-eu-blocks-talks-to-avert-no-deal-brexit-crisis

Sign up to EFTA and you can remain a participant in EASA.

Anything more is just another example of the UK wanting special treatment.
 
Varadkar is not threatening to ban anyone from Irish airspace or to restrict access in any way. He does not have that power.

The EU has laws governing air travel. These laws were made with input from the UK. They were passed with consent of the UK.
They demand that third countries should be treated in certain ways. The UK has, exercising its sovereignty, decided to become a third country. It has deliberately decided that the EU should treat it as a third country. (Strictly speaking, it still has the option of going for EFTA membership. I'm just not seeing that happen.) It is, one hears, the will of the people.

The UK has consented to these laws and now decided to be treated according to these laws.

It is not a decision made by Ireland, the EU, or anyone but the UK.

The statement, "You can’t take back your waters and then expect to use other people’s sky." Seems to make an equivalence between fishing rights and over fly rights. Varadkar could do a 'Trump' and ban UK aircraft from Irish airspace, not easily enforceable given the lack of an Irish airforce, but unlikely to be challenged other than through the courts. It would probably be illegal as overfly rights are part of international (non EU treaties). Also of course UK air traffic control completely surrounds Ireland as they are responsible for Shanwick Oceanic area. As landing rights are not an EU competency but that of an individual nation, the Irish government could ban UK registered aircraft, but given the issue of mutuality this would probably have more of an issue with isolating Ireland than the UK. It would certainly make airports in NI busier.

I might think Brexit is foolish, this does not mean that I have to think that the EU is perfect, nor that the Irish government may be cutting off its nose to spite its face. If the Irish government vetos any politically acceptable to the UK government solution then they may force a hard Brexit which is likely to be very harmful to Ireland.
 
That is because the Irish border answer limits severely the other options. If there is to be no hard border then absent future technology the UK and the EU needs to be part of the same customs area and we will have free movement of people and no control over our borders. If there is a hard border you don't need those things.

Once we have the Irish answer it saves time on the rest.

Except the EU is putting a permanent position into a time-limited withdrawal and transition agreement. Which for some reason is not cherry-picking. :rolleyes:
 
Except the EU is putting a permanent position into a time-limited withdrawal and transition agreement. Which for some reason is not cherry-picking. :rolleyes:
Given there is no transition period in article 50, it is the grace of the EU that allows it. Look on the transition period as a bonus, not a right. If they want some permanent decisions in March, well that is what the UK faces anyway without an agreement.

As has been in the news this week. The EU have already been recruiting and training up Customs officers. They are ready for no deal, we on the other hand haven't recruited any new staff. Our ministers witter on about being hopeful for a deal, whilest doing what they can to prevent one.
 
Except the EU is putting a permanent position into a time-limited withdrawal and transition agreement. Which for some reason is not cherry-picking. :rolleyes:
It's only permanent if you assume that the EU would never agree to a solution. Why would you assume such a thing?

I suppose it's possible that the U.K. will never table a serious solution... but I assume that will not be the case.

Perhaps you are bothered by the fact that this temporary measure might run beyond the date when the transition ends? Well, better get cracking then and propose a workable solution. One that can be implemented before that date.

Sent from my SM-J700F using Tapatalk
 
The statement, "You can’t take back your waters and then expect to use other people’s sky." Seems to make an equivalence between fishing rights and over fly rights. Varadkar could do a 'Trump' and ban UK aircraft from Irish airspace, not easily enforceable given the lack of an Irish airforce, but unlikely to be challenged other than through the courts. It would probably be illegal as overfly rights are part of international (non EU treaties). Also of course UK air traffic control completely surrounds Ireland as they are responsible for Shanwick Oceanic area. As landing rights are not an EU competency but that of an individual nation, the Irish government could ban UK registered aircraft, but given the issue of mutuality this would probably have more of an issue with isolating Ireland than the UK. It would certainly make airports in NI busier.

I might think Brexit is foolish, this does not mean that I have to think that the EU is perfect, nor that the Irish government may be cutting off its nose to spite its face. If the Irish government vetos any politically acceptable to the UK government solution then they may force a hard Brexit which is likely to be very harmful to Ireland.
But see my links.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1020603084806840320.html

1/ Thread. Lets talk about aviation and Brexit . There is an excellent thread on the Property Pin website on Brexit. See thepropertypin.com/viewtopic.php?…
2/ One exceptional post , from which I have lifted and extracted discusses aviation post brexit. In light of the @campaignforleo comments and the usual temperate response of the S*N and so on, here we go. Quotes on....
3/ Chicago convention on freedoms of Air Travel. This is a treaty that dates from the forties. This means that neither the EU nor the UK can prevent the other from traveling in each other's...air space.
4/ All nations have the right to make flights across another state's territories and to make stops without obtaining prior permission. To prevent another nation from operating flights in your air space is an act of war. Not rhetorical war, actual war.
5/ Based on this one can say that air travel will have a legal basis to continue after Brexit, right?
6/ Well here is where it starts to fall apart. There is no such thing as unconstrained freedom. All rights are limited. Saying that yes, ok, you have a right to fly planes through our air space does not mean that one can fly any plane at all flown by any old clown.
7/ All pilots and all air frames that fly in the EU airspace must be certified as trained and airworthy by the relevant part of the EU, the European Aviation and Safety Agency, the EASA. All Pilot's licenses are issued under the umbrella of the EASA.
8/ All aviation maintenance worker are certified as qualified by the EASA. No one even so much as changes a light bulb on an airplane without being certified as being qualified to do so by the EASA. Once Brexit happens no British Pilots have a license to fly anymore.
9/ No maintenance staff are qualified to do routine work. No planes are certified as air worth. They all expire on date of Brexit.
10/ No licenses or air worth certificates means that planes can not fly. There are many different legal reasons why planes can't fly. It has nothing to do with retaliation or any crap like that. Airlines and insurance companies simply can not allow them to fly.
11/ Can you imagine what would happen in the scenario that there was an air crash and the plane or pilot didn't have a license?
12/ Then there is a little known about agency called Eurocontrol. It's not little, it's actually massive but largely unknown. Eurocontrol predates the entire European project and manages air traffic control throughout continental Europe.
13/ Without EU membership British access to Eurocontrol goes into a legal quagmire. The UK de-facto no longer has access to Eurocontrol.
14/ This means it is not clear if British airplanes will be able to route international flights through Eurocontrol's air traffic control.
15/ Then there is international flights to the US for example. EASA has a cross agreement with America about standards. After Brexit these cross agreements come to an end and need to be replaced with something else. There is nothing else to fall back on.
16/ Brexit means that all of the legal infrastructure comes to an end. There are those that think the EU will cave in at the last minute and allow access to air space. It doesn't work like that, there is no legal frame work to do so.
17/ Quotes off. It strikes me that this is a nice succinct summary of the issue. Thoughts?

Without an agreement on certification - most UK commercial flights will be illegal once Brexit happens. It is probably a straightforward agreement - but there doesn't seem to have been any work done on that. Without that, there is no legal framework. It is also unclear whether UK-US flights will also be legal.

and the original tweeter's reply to his thread
https://twitter.com/brianmlucey/status/1020962240667750400
overflights are not the issue. Landing, takeoff, maintenance, these are. And, given how imbecilic the UK positions are , I would rule nothing out.




This can be expanded to other sectors. Road Freight Transport, for example

https://fta.co.uk/media/press-releases/2018/june/brexit-britain-on-the-road-to-nowhere-says-fta

International Trade
Home Media Press Releases 2018 June Brexit Britain on the road to nowhere, says FTA
Brexit Britain on the road to nowhere, says FTA
Tuesday 05 June 2018

With three weeks to go until crunch Brexit talks in Brussels, the UK’s leading logistics trade body says that its confidence in Government’s ability to deliver a ‘frictionless’ Brexit that will ‘Keep Britain Trading’ with the EU is fast collapsing. The Freight Transport Association (FTA) is one of the UK’s largest and most influential industry groups, and speaks for the whole of the logistics industry.

As James Hookham, the organisation’s Deputy Chief Executive explains, the lack of progress on the industry’s key demands of government for a trade agreement, means that those in the industry charged with maintaining the country’s supply chain after Brexit are left with no means by which to operate effectively:

“Of the eight demands made in FTA’s list of essentials to ‘Keep Britain Trading’ issued at the beginning of the year, not a single one has been progressed,” he says. “Details of whether or not the country will have a Transition/Implementation Period are still unclear, there is still no decision on what Customs arrangements we will have from March 2019 onwards.

Basically, unless the UK government does something the UK logistics chain by road, sea and air will be utterly borked until they fix it.

Even when* they fix it, it will add costs to UK exporters, and manufacturers... and importers. And the other certification costs mean that service suppliers will also be hit. This is why I can't see how the Brexiteers can keep a straight face when saying that it will provide economic opportunities.


*It will get fixed quite quickly but would involve a lot of work.
 
A Belgian newspaper announces that Dominic Raab has stated that the UK would not pay its debts toward the EU in there is no commercial agreement between the EU and the UK.
 
Last edited:
It's only permanent if you assume that the EU would never agree to a solution. Why would you assume such a thing?

Because the EU draft of the withdrawal agreement gives them everything that they want in the backstop eg no hard border, permanent alignment of the North with EU regulations etc

Why give up the backstop position for something less favourable?
 
Because the EU draft of the withdrawal agreement gives them everything that they want in the backstop eg no hard border, permanent alignment of the North with EU regulations etc

Why give up the backstop position for something less favourable?

The UK agreed that the GFA needed to be respected. *That* should be one of the real red lines for both parties.

Just because the UK government wants to backtrack on its previously-agreed position and that its red lines are mutually contradictory, doesn't mean that the EU should fold on the one aspect that is preventing bloodshed.
 
The statement, "You can’t take back your waters and then expect to use other people’s sky." Seems to make an equivalence between fishing rights and over fly rights.
I'm not sure I understand what the UK's interest in fishing rights is. The UK quota has been mostly privatized and sold abroad.

Anyways. The UK has decided to leave the European single sky as well as the common fisheries policy. Can the UK expect to regulate fishing in its waters unilaterally in its favor while staying in the single sky?
No, you can't have your cake and eat it, too


Varadkar could do a 'Trump' and ban UK aircraft from Irish airspace, not easily enforceable given the lack of an Irish airforce, but unlikely to be challenged other than through the courts. It would probably be illegal as overfly rights are part of international (non EU treaties).
I do not understand why you suggest that Varadkar would do such a thing. Is there any indication that he is prone to breaking international treaties? Does he even have the constitutional power to do so?

Also of course UK air traffic control completely surrounds Ireland as they are responsible for Shanwick Oceanic area. As landing rights are not an EU competency but that of an individual nation, the Irish government could ban UK registered aircraft, but given the issue of mutuality this would probably have more of an issue with isolating Ireland than the UK. It would certainly make airports in NI busier.
Again I refer you to the EU preparedness notices.
https://ec.europa.eu/info/brexit/brexit-preparedness/preparedness-notices_en

If the Irish government vetos any politically acceptable to the UK government solution then they may force a hard Brexit which is likely to be very harmful to Ireland.
If the Irish governemnt vetos it then it's not politically acceptable, by definition.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom