Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
By force8
#1617401
Seems to ignore the UK is signatory to ICAO annexes. Not quite as cut and dried as painted. (And I was a remainer - who has only had all his concerns re-affirmed by the chaos and mis-management going on with Brexit in all areas).
By johnm
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1617410
force8 wrote:Seems to ignore the UK is signatory to ICAO annexes. Not quite as cut and dried as painted. (And I was a remainer - who has only had all his concerns re-affirmed by the chaos and mis-management going on with Brexit in all areas).



I don’t think it ignores the fact, it rather worries that U.K. notified the ICAO that certain matters were considered EU competences and there’s a need to agree with EU and EASA how those matters and the everyday practicalities get dealt with and then notify ICAO. As we’ve discussed before the obvious answer is to stay in EASA but that breaches the Brexit “ No ECJ rule “ so there’s clearly a need for some practical work.
User avatar
By Sooty25
#1617459
maybe,

“The impact of Brexit on aviation is not isolated to UK companies, it falls on the European aerospace industry as a whole.”


might just make Barnier realise that the 27 might need to compromise
User avatar
By GolfHotel
#1617478
Sooty25 wrote:maybe,

“The impact of Brexit on aviation is not isolated to UK companies, it falls on the European aerospace industry as a whole.”


might just make Barnier realise that the 27 might need to compromise


I bet that will make him see the error of his ways and bring him to heel.
Sooty25, Flyin'Dutch' liked this
By johnm
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1617495
The evidence is that the 27 are, and always have been, willing to compromise to some degree that's how they've managed trade deals with a good number of third countries, but they have red lines just like the UK govt does. They are patiently awaiting some practical proposals from the UK as to what it wants, but the UK govt. has no bl00dy idea how to plan and manage the practicalities.
User avatar
By Flyin'Dutch'
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1617501
2Donkeys wrote:Switzerland manages not to be in the EU whist being in EASA and not recognising the ECJ's authority. Perhaps there is a model there?


They also pay in some real money into the EU pot and allow free movement of folks, who is the arbiter in disputes relating to EASA matters?
By johnm
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1617502
2Donkeys wrote:Switzerland manages not to be in the EU whist being in EASA and not recognising the ECJ's authority. Perhaps there is a model there?



Not quite right, at least not yet. There is a discussion between the EU and Switzerland on a separate arbitration body specific to the Swiss Treaty and that would include EASA. That model may well be OK for the UK too at some point. It effectively casts the ECJ as adviser on EU law to the separate body. However the Swiss discussions are not on an Article 50 timescale.
User avatar
By GolfHotel
#1617515
johnm wrote:The evidence is that the 27 are, and always have been, willing to compromise to some degree that's how they've managed trade deals with a good number of third countries, but they have red lines just like the UK govt does. They are patiently awaiting some practical proposals from the UK as to what it wants, but the UK govt. has no bl00dy idea how to plan and manage the practicalities.


and once our politicians have argued and debated and come up with a fudge after many weeks it will take Barnier (or whatever he is called) a full five minuets to say NO.
By johnm
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1617516
and once our politicians have argued and debated and come up with a fudge after many weeks it will take Barnier (or whatever he is called) a full five minuets to say NO


Michel Barnier would be well justified in saying no to a fudge, he has to have something that stands a chance of being put before the Council of Ministers and the Parliament without making the Commission look stupid and unprofessional.
Smaragd liked this
By Bob Upanddown
#1617558
Andrew Haynes, former CEO of CAA, said something along the lines of the CAA was not planning what it might need to do if the UK left EASA because that option simply wasn’t a workable option. (Translation – I will have retired before the #### hits the fan so not my problem).

Ian, this is part of Brexit. You can’t divorce this problem from the fact it seems that no-one fully understood the potential pitfalls of leaving the EU. Never mind we won’t have access to EU medicines, EU GPS satellites, EU skies.......
This is going to be a huge problem for many industries.
By johnm
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1617566
Aviation ought to be one of the more straightforward issues in truth. Staying in SES and EASA and working with Switzerland to develop a suitable long term model for conflict and other issue resolution ought to be OK with a straightforward Treaty and subsequent amendment based on work already in progress with the Swiss.

The wider customs and freight related issues for JIT manufacturing are an infinitely more complicated discussion clearly not for this thread as Ian has made clear.