[Smaragd]

To that extent, would you honestly expect the government to announce they HAVE a risk assessment? What is worse? To have your cards exposed before the final round of poker, or to be considered inept but keeping your hand secret......

"BBC 6 Dec 2017 - The government has not carried out any impact assessments of leaving the EU on the UK economy, Brexit Secretary David Davis has told MPs. Mr Davis said the usefulness of such assessments would be "near zero" because of the scale of change Brexit is likely to cause." But it's because of the scale of change that an impact assessment is needed - and it would have been particularly useful before the vote! But back to the subject - the regulatory regime that will surround UK aviation. EasyJet has already decided it could not afford to "wait and see". Hardly surprising - but is their decision beneficial to the UK?

[johnm]

The vassal state thing happens if we don't sign up to ECJ supervision and want to stay with EASA as a third country.

We'd have to adhere to EASA rules but without being part of the decision-making process.

Again it’s a bit more complicated than that. If we stay with EASA we need to accept the role of the ECJ in that context and we have no direct influence over the basic regulation, however that doesn’t stop us having a role in EASA operational activities and the interpretation of the intent of the basic regulation.

[Full Metal Jackass]

How does this vassal state idea turn up? We are one of 28 equal partners just like Germany. I don’t see Germany as a vassal state of Europe or am I missing something?

Equal partners? Do you recall the saying

'he who pays the piper, calls the tunes'?

Let's face it, Germany pays the most, then Britain and France. But the influence of Great Britain is not representative of the cash it pays. Now I could accept a union of 28 equal partners pays according to capabilities were it not for one thing. That was when the EU decided to overturn the Dublin Regulation without agreement from the nation states, based on the demands of Germany. That decision effectively made negotiations between nations superfluous and all nations were suddenly subservient to unelected officials and their coercion by Germany.

I could tell a similar story about why Greece is still suffering economic hardship - because it's better for Greece to suffer hardship than German banks to become bankrupt. If that's a union of 28 equal partners, then the word EQUAL has a different meaning in my book....

[peter272]

Again it’s a bit more complicated than that. If we stay with EASA we need to accept the role of the ECJ in that context and we have no direct influence over the basic regulation, however that doesn’t stop us having a role in EASA operational activities and the interpretation of the intent of the basic regulation..

Quite true but that will depend on how things progress in the talks. They could play hardball or not.

[johnm]

I can accept the qualification of equal, as discussed by @Full Metal Jackass however U.K. influence is a U.K. problem which relates to ambivalence of successive governments.

The economics of the Euro are another complicated discussion altogether.

[Leodisflyer]

The population of Greece is not that much greater than that of London and less than that of the North West of England and Yorkshire & Humber combined. It is however nearly double that of Scotland.

The UK hasn’t got a great track record of looking after the financial interests of the NE and NW of England so we should probably look in our own back yard before criticising Germany over Greece.

Not all countries in the EU are equal, other than having equal rights to veto.

[trevorjharris]

Personally EASA has been a pain in the neck but some may see that as just a selfish attitude.

My view is that aviation safety should be managed on a world wide basis and not on a narrow european one. The ICAO has at least 191 member states and is in a perfect place to carry out this function. All the EU states are members of ICAO and the EU has to work closely with the ICAO in any case. EASA is just an extra layer of needless bureaucracy.

EASA is just part of the EUs vision of empire building.

So as far as I am concerned the quicker we leave the better.

[johnm]

On the other hand for me, after a shaky start, EASA is much better than the CAA/JAR set up. Nothing is perfect so when we leave the problems won't go away they'll just change shape yet again.

A global regulator would be great, as would a global equivalent of the EU, but good luck with that in a world that will elect Trump, believe Farage and allow leaders like Assad and Putin to rule the roost

[Full Metal Jackass]

To that extent, would you honestly expect the government to announce they HAVE a risk assessment? What is worse? To have your cards exposed before the final round of poker, or to be considered inept but keeping your hand secret......

"BBC 6 Dec 2017 - The government has not carried out any impact assessments of leaving the EU on the UK economy, Brexit Secretary David Davis has told MPs. Mr Davis said the usefulness of such assessments would be "near zero" because of the scale of change Brexit is likely to cause." But it's because of the scale of change that an impact assessment is needed - and it would have been particularly useful before the vote! But back to the subject - the regulatory regime that will surround UK aviation. EasyJet has already decided it could not afford to "wait and see". Hardly surprising - but is their decision beneficial to the UK?

You honestly still believe what the BBC broadcast? My god, and I thought the days of naivety were long gone. I wouldn't trust the BBC - and most main stream media, for that matter - to transmit the truth. Nor, to be honest, do I believe what Politicians in Westminster announce - doubly so when we think that the publication of such a impact assessment would effectively 'give our hand away' to the EU.

I'll go further: Everything, since Teflon Tony, has been about 'the angle', about getting the 'right spin' on the story. Publishing the truth without bias has long gone out the window. The fact that the BBC reports things as 'inspite of Brexit' when it's good news or 'because of Brexit' when it's bad news demonstrates where their bias lies.

Now concerning EasyJet - they reacted before knowing what Brexit would bring - they could have waited until all is clear but instead they formed a company in Vienna to allow them to fly intereuropean routes because forming the company is the easier route and all Brexit uncertainties are gone.

But let's think about that. Is it beneficial for Britain? Not really. But is it as disastrous as the Remoaners believe? If it is so disastrous, why then was there not an outcry when EasyJet formed their Swiss subsidiary? I honestly don't understand why the Remoaners are so adamant that Brexit will be such a disaster.....

I'm sure it won't be, I'm actually hopeful that Britain will become a beacon against the bureaucracy that the EU is spreading, that the EU will be forced to change, to become an organisation with the good of the people at the heart of it's considerations, rather than the good of mega corporations / rich individuals. Either that or face being torn down when the people realise just how restrictive and anti-competitive this moloch has become......

[johnm]

I'm sure it won't be, I'm actually hopeful that Britain will become a beacon against the bureaucracy that the EU is spreading, that the EU will be forced to change

The UK govt as a beacon against bureaucracy

[Full Metal Jackass]

I'm sure it won't be, I'm actually hopeful that Britain will become a beacon against the bureaucracy that the EU is spreading, that the EU will be forced to change

The UK govt as a beacon against bureaucracy

How did London City become such a leading light in Finance? Because UK Government rules made it possible, by removing bureaucracy. Had the EU had anything to say about it, the Big Bang would probably have never happened.

Ok, so too little control can lead to disaster as we saw in 2008 but that's another story. As someone who lives and works in Europe, I see just what an administrative monstrosity the EU has become. That a significant proportion of Britons don't realise what an opportunity is awaiting them, instead determined to decry Brexit at all costs, is just mind boggling...

[tomshep]

Because it was there before the EEC was formed.

[johnm]

That a significant proportion of Britons don't realise what an opportunity is awaiting them

That's the point. No-one has yet shown me a single worthwhile opportunity I couldn't exercise from within the EU, perhaps you know better??

The de-regulation of the finance industry and the opportunity for lawyers to advertise has opened the door for the 2008 crash, loans to poor people at 1395% APR* and our ambulance chasing liability and blame culture, I don't see any of that as a very great benefit.

The laissez faire attitude has ensured also that almost all our core infrastructure and industrial base is now foreign owned I don't see that as a great benefit either. Ironically much of it is owned by entrepreneurial EU based companies, some state owned, the rest by Indian and Chinese conglomerates!

Meantime we can't get anything done in Local Govt or Central Govt without reams of paperwork or hours in front of a computer screen. We can't make the NHS and care for elderly and infirm work properly or even maintain the roads. None of which is affected by the EU.

*No I didn't forget the decimal point, it's advertised on the day time TV channels along with funeral plans and mobility scooters

[G-BLEW]

Can we keep this thread to EASA and GA please?

Thanks

Ian

[johnm]

Sorry