[Genghis the Engineer]

On 110% defence offset usually

G

[johnm]

I suspect nobody really has a clue - CAA have clearly run a continuous activity of downsizing, and most recently have aggressively insisted that EASA is the only game in town.

It was probably never very wise in this general regard, but now looks rather like a corporate ostrich.

I know that nobody in the industry wants the UK to leave EASA - but a continuous denial that it is impossible looks increasingly silly.

G

Nothing is impossible but leaving the SES and EASA would be Nuts

[johnm]

I prefer to trust the US more than Germany heading a march towards a Federal States of Europe and heading its Army. Isn't that kind of thing precisely what NATO was formed to prevent?

Actually the "EU army" initiative came from France not Germany and NATO was about keeping Russia in check not Germany.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Nothing is impossible but leaving the SES and EASA would be Nuts

I agree.

But failing, when there has been a reasonable possibility, then a certainty, of the UK leaving the EU over 3ish years, to plan for that possibility, is both irresponsible and arguably incompetent.

G

[cockney steve]

As has oft been remarked, the Septics have a far larger GA base than us, far more practice running an administrative system and would appear to deliver a much better experience at a much smaller cost . we should adopt the FAA framework and allow the CAA limited powers to interfere with it. Europe, as far as I'm aware, allows American aircraft free passage, landings and pax transfers over and in Euroland, therefore it's self-evident they consider American Aviation is safe. We presently proceed according to EASA standards, It's unlikely that we will cease to do that on Brexit. Therefore, any obstruction by the EU can only be viewed as malicious and mendacious.. Retaliatory measures by a strong Government would ,hopefully, follow. As the Hydra appears hell-bent on making it difficult as possible for us to remove our head, any climbdown now is likely to be seen as weakness and we would likely suffer in a subsequent continued membership. Oh for a strong leadership with the country's interests at heart and not their own.

Ref NATO Intervention......It's normal for the Army to be called in to maintain law and order when the Civil forces are overwhelmed.....next excuse for inaction?

Cloggies obviously had the sense to spot the EU gravy-train and thought "we'll have some of that" Not a positive from the EU at all, Just exploitation of it's wasteful existence. (I dare say Belgium will be a lot poorer when the EU collapses and the location of their secondary HQ (used a short time each year at phenomenal cost ) will also suffer when derailment comes.

[johnm]

I do not understand, and never have, why there's an aversion to the bulk of Europe co-operating, however imperfectly, in developing the economic and social well-being of its citizens.

You still think the EU is an economic or social enterprise?

Of course not, it's a mechanism for managing shared activity between 28 states with a common goal in improving the social and economic situation of all their citizens.

[johnm]

@Genghis the Engineer , far be it from me to criticise anyone for advocating damage limitation and contingency planning in present circumstances

[Bathman]

As a semi hobby pilot I would have the old UK system back in an instant.

No LAPL/NPPL silliness just a valid for life PPL with a Class 3 medical (which now could be simple (Med Dec)

Group ratings. So up to 5700 kg on piston it turbine.

Ratings that could be renewed with no CAA intervention.

No aero's rating, No aero's instructor rating, glider towing rating and it goes on and on. None of which I could ever see the need for.

CPL with embedded IMC privileges.

I used to be able to teach for any licence or rating. None of this approval business. Which is nearly 10 grand for a simm.

Just look at the damage the FTO approval costs and engine year limits have done to MEP training.

I could go on and on.

All its done is it's added complication and expensice.

I even think some of the old dinosoars that held the old UK back. Would by now have become more proactive eg PCL

[kanga]

.. pockets of excellence such as ..aerospace in Bristol, Derby etc. ...

<ahem> .. Gloucestershire

[Filton is in South Gloucestershire not Bristol, and there's a lot of world-class aerospace expertise around/near Staverton, too. Actually, even Hercules Propellers in Stroud is world-class in its field ]

</drift>

[mo0g]

The UK only meets the requirement as the provisions for the Trident replacement and Military pensions are included in the 2%......

And?

We exceed the 2% however you want to slice it AND we aren't proposing a separate EU Army.

No one is proposing a separate EU army, it's proposed we pool resources more effectively and manage them a bit like NATO does, which makes sense as we're part of NATO anyway

Well, its almost panto season so..

Oh yes they did!!

https://www.politico.eu/article/angela-merkel-emmanuel-macron-eu-army-to-complement-nato/

How many times now have I had to provide links to prove assertions made, usually with the which makes it worse, are factually incorrect?

It's me who should be every two mins.

(..Oh no it isnt.. etc etc)

[mo0g]

I prefer to trust the US more than Germany heading a march towards a Federal States of Europe and heading its Army. Isn't that kind of thing precisely what NATO was formed to prevent?

Actually the "EU army" initiative came from France not Germany and NATO was about keeping Russia in check not Germany.

Hahahahahahahah. Make your mind up, "no one" proposed an EU Army, or France did? And Juncker? And Merkel agreed or not?

NATO was formed to protect individual countries in Europe from being consumed by a huge political bloc, with its own army, yes or no?


Next.......

[mo0g]

I do not understand, and never have, why there's an aversion to the bulk of Europe co-operating, however imperfectly, in developing the economic and social well-being of its citizens.

You still think the EU is an economic or social enterprise?

Of course not, it's a mechanism for managing shared activity between 28 states with a common goal in improving the social and economic situation of all their citizens.

If that were the case they'd be bending over backwards to get a free trade deal with us, after all we run a trade (in goods which is what the free trade deal is for) deficit of over £100 billion.

Instead they seem to be willing to cut their nose off to spite their face, or in EU terms willing to risk such a hugely important trade partner for the sole purpose of maintaining their members club. That is clearly political, not economic. That will clearly worsen the social and economic situation of all their citizens, not improve it.



But then again I suppose you consider £100bn 'peanuts', so its not surprising you do not see any economic benefit for the remaining EU members.

[skydriller]

We already have an agreement in principle about EU citizens living here and UK citizens living abroad.

We do?

I think you will find that the UK has said that EU citizens will still have the right to live and work in the UK if they are already doing so, but I am pretty sure that the EU has said no such thing regarding Brits abroad....

Yes, we do.

Progress in the Negotiations - Citizens’ Rights Agreement
On 14 November 2018, the UK government published the full legal text of the Draft Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union. This sets out the terms of the UK’s smooth and orderly exit from the European Union and puts us close to a Brexit deal.

The full legal text of the Withdrawal Agreement has been agreed in principle, securing the rights of one million UK nationals living in the EU. The Agreement will now be put to Member States to formally agree. Parliament will then have a vote on the Withdrawal Agreement and the terms of our future partnership.

The signed Agreement will provide certainty for you as a UK national and your family living in the EU. Most importantly, it will allow you to stay in the EU country where you are living after the UK leaves the EU on 29 March 2019.

So this will be "the deal" of the thread title, that every Tom, Dick and Harriette MPs are saying they wont support...

...And then it has to be Ratified by the EU...

Excuse me if I dont hold my breath...

Like I said before, the UK has publicly stated that EU citizens in the UK will have the right to live and work in the UK. None of the other EU member states have said they will give the same rights to UK citizens abroad.
I believe there is also no mention in "the deal" of those that live in one EU country and sometimes work in several others - thats me

Regards, SD..

[johnm]

And?

We exceed the 2% however you want to slice it AND we aren't proposing a separate EU Army.

No one is proposing a separate EU army, it's proposed we pool resources more effectively and manage them a bit like NATO does, which makes sense as we're part of NATO anyway

Well, its almost panto season so..

Oh yes they did!!

https://www.politico.eu/article/angela-merkel-emmanuel-macron-eu-army-to-complement-nato/

How many times now have I had to provide links to prove assertions made, usually with the which makes it worse, are factually incorrect?

It's me who should be every two mins.

(..Oh no it isnt.. etc etc)

This is a problem of semantics not facts. Most of the EU states have armies and most are also members of NATO so what's being proposed is a pooling of resources and attachment of an EU flag, not some new separate army. It's an interesting idea but that's all it is at present, because differences in equipment and organisation will take years if not decades to sort out.

[mo0g]

We do?

I think you will find that the UK has said that EU citizens will still have the right to live and work in the UK if they are already doing so, but I am pretty sure that the EU has said no such thing regarding Brits abroad....

Yes, we do.

Progress in the Negotiations - Citizens’ Rights Agreement
On 14 November 2018, the UK government published the full legal text of the Draft Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union. This sets out the terms of the UK’s smooth and orderly exit from the European Union and puts us close to a Brexit deal.

The full legal text of the Withdrawal Agreement has been agreed in principle, securing the rights of one million UK nationals living in the EU. The Agreement will now be put to Member States to formally agree. Parliament will then have a vote on the Withdrawal Agreement and the terms of our future partnership.

The signed Agreement will provide certainty for you as a UK national and your family living in the EU. Most importantly, it will allow you to stay in the EU country where you are living after the UK leaves the EU on 29 March 2019.

So this will be "the deal" of the thread title, that every Tom, Dick and Harriette MPs are saying they wont support...

I explicitly said that this was the agreement in PRINCIPLE. It is evidence that the EU is willing to agree a reciprocal agreement. I would absolutely agree they have dragged their heels over this specific issue, when everyone (with an agenda) was moaning at our government for not automatically and unilaterally guaranteeing rights for EU citizens here, as if they were just being the "nasty party" and using the EU citizen rights as a bargaining chip, I was asking those same people why on earth they werent moaning about and to the EU for not getting that issue done and dusted straight away. The UK government's primary responsibility is to its own citizens, and it was only right they sought to protect brits living and working in the EU by wanting a reciprocal agreement.

As for your specific examples, you live in France who have always been a law unto themselves, deciding which rules and laws they think they might implement or otherwise ignoring them.

Anyway, back on point, the EU has at last indicated that they are happy for a reciprocal deal for UK citizen rights in EU countries post brexit.