Consequences of Brexit [part 7] Read first post before posting

[L00b 441]

1 hour ago, retep said:

We can always give the EU their nuclear waste back.

You could, but not without first exiting the IAEA Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management, on top of exiting the EU.

 

Topical Brexit-related advice here, should you care for a primer and details (or just look at points 7 & 8 on page 3 if TL;DR: EU law on the topic is derived from the IAEA Convention, not the other way around, which why the UK's exit from the EU is largely immaterial to existing nuclear waste arrangements).

 

An actual list of all the international treaties and conventions which you want to exit would be useful. Would make it look a bit more...erm...planned, if you know what I mean.

 

Edited August 20, 2019 by L00b

[Top Cats Hat 10]

And let’s not forget air travel.

 

The only way that any UK registered aircraft can continue to legally  fly after a ‘no-deal’ Brexit, is if we became associate members of EASA, which puts our aviation under the control of the European Court of Justice. So even the precious ‘no-deal’ is not actually no-deal at all.

 

Of course this is all Project Fear. If the UK wants to fly un-certificated aircraft, what is stopping it?

[Pettytom 1]

15 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

And let’s not forget air travel.

 

The only way that any UK registered aircraft can continue to legally  fly after a ‘no-deal’ Brexit, is if we became associate members of EASA, which puts our aviation under the control of the European Court of Justice. So even the precious ‘no-deal’ is not actually no-deal at all.

 

Of course this is all Project Fear. If the UK wants to fly un-certificated aircraft, what is stopping it?

That’s typical of you remoaner types .

 

Always looking for a problem where there is one.

[retep 68]

33 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

And let’s not forget air travel.

 

The only way that any UK registered aircraft can continue to legally  fly after a ‘no-deal’ Brexit, is if we became associate members of EASA, which puts our aviation under the control of the European Court of Justice. So even the precious ‘no-deal’ is not actually no-deal at all.

 

Of course this is all Project Fear. If the UK wants to fly un-certificated aircraft, what is stopping it?

That's all it is,

 

"Ownership and control

The EU has stated that UK airlines licensed before the UK leaves the EU will continue to be eligible for permission to operate provided that they are majority owned and effectively controlled by nationals of the UK and/or nationals of the EU and EEA countries. For airlines licensed in the UK after exit day to be eligible to operate, they would have to be majority owned and controlled by UK nationals.

The UK believes restrictions on ownership and control in aviation are outdated, and do not reflect the reality of the global capital markets. What matters is that an airline is safe, secure and properly regulated, not the nationality of the owner. Ownership and control restrictions simply constrain the ability of airlines to raise capital. Therefore, the UK intends to take a more liberal approach for the duration of this measure. Rather than require member state airlines to be majority owned and controlled by nationals from that EU country, in order to be eligible to operate services between the EUand the UK, member state airlines would instead need to satisfy the CAA that they are majority owned and effectively controlled by EU nationals and/or nationals of other EEA countries and/or nationals of the UK.

The UK will start discussions on future ownership and control arrangements from the perspective of a level playing field."

[Top Cats Hat 10]

25 minutes ago, retep said:

The EU has stated that UK airlines licensed before the UK leaves the EU will continue to be eligible for permission to operate provided that they are majority owned and effectively controlled by nationals of the UK and/or nationals of the EU and EEA countries.

Regulated by EASA and subject to the ECJ.

 

Isn’t that one of the red lines that you Leavers were getting your panties all up in a bunch about? So we leave the EU in October and all law regulating our aircraft and air traffic control will be made in Brussels. 

 

And guess what? We won’t have any say in that legislation.

[L00b 441]

50 minutes ago, retep said:

That's all it is,

 

"Ownership and control

The EU has stated that UK airlines licensed before the UK leaves the EU will continue to be eligible for permission to operate provided that they are majority owned and effectively controlled by nationals of the UK and/or nationals of the EU and EEA countries. For airlines licensed in the UK after exit day to be eligible to operate, they would have to be majority owned and controlled by UK nationals.

The UK believes restrictions on ownership and control in aviation are outdated, and do not reflect the reality of the global capital markets. What matters is that an airline is safe, secure and properly regulated, not the nationality of the owner. Ownership and control restrictions simply constrain the ability of airlines to raise capital. Therefore, the UK intends to take a more liberal approach for the duration of this measure. Rather than require member state airlines to be majority owned and controlled by nationals from that EU country, in order to be eligible to operate services between the EUand the UK, member state airlines would instead need to satisfy the CAA that they are majority owned and effectively controlled by EU nationals and/or nationals of other EEA countries and/or nationals of the UK.

The UK will start discussions on future ownership and control arrangements from the perspective of a level playing field."

Could we have a source for that copy-paste, please? 

 

Because on reading it, it looks like it's missing a lot of context, to effectively back up your counter-argument. In particular, whether what the EU is reported to have stated (top paragraph) applies in the context of a signed and ratified WA only, or also applies in the case of no deal.

 

The second paragraph is just a wishlist of what the UK aims to do in the future, so not exactly relevant to the consequences of Brexit to the aviation sector, whether under WA or without, and as Project Fear or the cold hard reality regardless.

Edited August 20, 2019 by L00b

[Top Cats Hat 10]

‘Mr Johnson has said the backstop is "anti-democratic" and must be scrapped.’

 

Hold on a minute, didn’t Johnson vote for May’s deal which included the Irish backstop?

 

What an idiot! 🙄

[Magilla 510]

No-deal plan threatens UK fuel plants:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49405270

[Top Cats Hat 10]

7 minutes ago, Magilla said:

No-deal plan threatens UK fuel plants:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49405270

Penney should like that.

 

0% tax on imported Russian fuel will make it even cheaper than his red diesel! 🙃

[retep 68]

2 hours ago, L00b said:

Could we have a source for that copy-paste, please? 

 

Because on reading it, it looks like it's missing a lot of context, to effectively back up your counter-argument. In particular, whether what the EU is reported to have stated (top paragraph) applies in the context of a signed and ratified WA only, or also applies in the case of no deal.

 

The second paragraph is just a wishlist of what the UK aims to do in the future, so not exactly relevant to the consequences of Brexit to the aviation sector, whether under WA or without, and as Project Fear or the cold hard reality regardless.

Link,

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/air-services-from-the-eu-to-the-uk-in-the-event-of-no-deal

[Top Cats Hat 10]

7 minutes ago, retep said:

Link,

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/air-services-from-the-eu-to-the-uk-in-the-event-of-no-deal

As Loob has already said, that text is just a wish list of what the EU and the UK would like to see happen in the event of a no deal.

 

What it doesn’t deal with, as I pointed out earlier, is certification and safety regulation of our aircraft. As soon as we leave the EU, we cease to  be a member of EASA (the European Air Safety Authority) therefore all UK registered and certified aircraft will be in a legal limbo. The bottom line is that it is unlikely that any airline’s insurers would allow the operation of any aircraft which could be deemed to be legally ‘unairworthy’. And even if they would, no pilot is going to risk their licence (also regulated by EASA) by flying an uncertified aircraft.

 

This is what we face if we leave the EU without a deal and no amount of dodgy links or wishful thinking will alter that. What the idiots who support no-deal don’t seem to get, is that the world has been both integrated and global for decades and just disengaging from everything unilaterally and thinking that everything will be fine is just plain crackers! 😱 

[L00b 441]

29 minutes ago, retep said:

Link,

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/air-services-from-the-eu-to-the-uk-in-the-event-of-no-deal

Thank you.

 

So this (about ownership and control of airlines) is all still in draft as an EU Directive, and therefore obviously dependent on the EU's goodwill.

 

Which has been sorely tested, never less so than since Johnson became PM (his letter to Tusk was penned to aggravate, not to negotiate).