Brexit – Page 11 – John Vincent

Aviation & Brexit 97

The 40th G7 summit has taken place this week in Biarritz, France. The 7 are Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, United Kingdom (UK), United States (US) and the European Union (EU). Japan and Canada have just signed major free trade agreements with the EU. Otherwise the talk was of increasing trade tensions between the world’s biggest economies, namely: US and China. The environment did get a look in given the wild fires in South America.

In the past, G7 leaders have recognised the “urgent need” for the aviation industry to adopt zero-carbon growth strategy. Since there was no joint statement from this week’s meeting its difficult to tell if this continues to be an urgent concern. The signs are not good given the empty chair when discussion with world leaders were on helping the Amazon forest and reducing carbon emissions.

The International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) Carbon Offsetting & Reduction Scheme for Aviation (CORSIA) should also play an important role in achieving global environmental goals. At a regional level, there’s the Advisory Council for Aeronautics Research in Europe (ACARE)’s long-term aim to reduce air transport CO2 emissions by up to 75% by 2050. I don’t know if UK organisations will remain part of the ACARE[1] post-Brexit. That may happen for those international companies wishing to remain with influence in Europe.

At his first G7 summit as UK Prime Minister, Mr Johnson was consumed by the thining quicksand of Brexit. It’s said we have now gone from “a million to one” all the way to “touch and go[2]” as to whether the UK and EU agree a Brexit deal.

I’m wondering if Mr Johnson knows what “touch and go[3]” means. Maybe he does and the “go” will be a last minute extension to forge a final agreement on the Irish issue.

One subject the Brexiters are looking at is cutting the UK’s Air Passenger Duty (APD). APD was introduced in 1994. It has grown to be one of the highest taxes on flying in the world and brings in a considerable revenue to the UK Treasury. The UK MP for the town of Crawley, that’s near London Gatwick Airport, chairs an Air Passenger Duty All Party Parliamentary Group that meets in Westminster. They are pressing the UK Government’s finance ministry to drop the tax to boost flying after Brexit. What that will do for national and international environmental goals isn’t known.

A week ago, a leaked UK Cabinet Office Operation #Yellowhammer document was made public. Setting out the likely aftershocks of a No Deal Brexit, it doesn’t make for pleasant reading. It now appears that the document is from this month and not a historic document as some Ministers claimed. In fact, a Government Minister dismissed this as “Project Fear” and “scaremongering” and yet the document is by the Government. The report lists delays at EU ports and airports as one major risk.

The UK’s £36 billion aerospace sector is now faced with the work of preparing for a disorderly Brexit for a second time this year. Without a doubt a No Deal Brexit remains the worst outcome for flyers and the aviation industry. There are many UK businesses that are particularly vulnerable since they are not able to adapt. Also, with the currency falling in value control may go to overseas buyers as they snap up good deals.

There is no mandate for a reckless No Deal Brexit but it seems increasingly likely.

[1] https://www.acare4europe.org/about-acare/members

[2] https://www.euronews.com/2019/08/23/g7-summit-begins-on-shadow-of-us-china-trade-war

[3] https://calaero.edu/what-is-a-touch-and-go/

Aviation & Brexit 96

69 days left on the Brexit clock. Only a few days untill the UK Parliament returns from its summer break. And now 30 days to find an alternative to a hard border on the island of Ireland. Or is that now 28 days? That said, Brexiters have had decades to come up with a workable answer to that question so I wonder if a few more days will change anything. Now, the EU is waiting for “realistic, operational & compatible” proposals.

If the UK leaves the EU on 31 October 2019, the UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA)[1] will take over the functions performed by the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) in relation to aviation approvals and certifications. The EASA’s mandate and roles as an Agency of the EU with regulatory and executive tasks in the field of civil aviation safety are not altered within the EU-28 and 4 associated Countries until the UK leaves.

Details about a non-negotiated EU exit and its impact on aviation and aerospace industries have been published. It’s worth having a look at “The CAA’s guide to Brexit No Deal & Aviation Safety[2]”. It’s well presented and a useful summary of the temporary measure in place. There’s one mistake on the final page on slide 13 where it references: “membership of the global aviation regulator ICAO”. The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) is a specialised agency of the United Nations (UN). The UK has been an ICAO Member State since its origins. However, it’s not right to call ICAO an aviation regulator. It does publish Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPS) and its Member States are expected to comply with those SARPS. However, although ICAO conducts audits it doesn’t have a right of enforcement and thus is not a regulator. It can’t levy fines or amend or remove approvals or certificates. It doesn’t issue licences or directives. Aviation is a global industry, but it is not globally regulated.

In 31 days, the ICAO Assembly[3] takes place in Montreal, Canada. This is the international organisation’s sovereign body where major policy decisions are made for the next 3-years. ICAO’s 193 Member States, and many international organisations are invited to the general Assembly. Many working papers and information papers are submitted for the participants to consider. European papers are coordinated before the Assembly[4]. In this case they are submitted and presented by Finland on behalf of the EU and its Member States, the other Member States of the European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC), and by EUROCONTROL. I imagine this situation will remain unchanged if Brexit happens since the UK will remain a member of ECAC and EUROCONTROL. At least as far as I know.

[1] https://info.caa.co.uk/brexit/

[2] http://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP1714BrexitAviationSafetyE3.pdf

[3] https://www.icao.int/Meetings/a40/pages/default.aspx

[4] https://www.icao.int/Meetings/A40/Pages/wp.aspx

Aviation & Brexit 95

Thundering down the road like a man obsessed, UK Prime Minster Johnson stares the Brexit deadline of 31 October in the face. Some British people like this bravado. It plays well as emotions are manipulated in the heightened reality of a stage drama. Unfortunately, this isn’t a dramatic production this is real life.

In real life, the UK is not prepared for a No Deal Brexit. Separation from the European Union (EU) without a mutually beneficial, reasonable and rational deal has become almost a certainty. Forcing this situation on every walk of life in the UK is tragic.

The aviation industry is not ready[1].

Here’s another aspect of this situation that troubles me. I was an engineering student in the city of Coventry at the end of the 70s, beginning of the 80s. Large swaths of traditional British manufacturing were dying all around us. The UK Government’s approach was: “devil take the hind most”. Its crude free market thinking that I see in play now. It goes like this: we, the Government will not support you (industry) if you are not strong enough to survive a transformative downturn because that’s the test of your worth to the nation. So, rather than helping major employers bridge a gap, reorganise and build a future the UK lost or sold off potential future global industrial titans.

In aviation, travel maybe be governed by foreign exchange volatility in the short-term. In the long-term technology and the regulatory framework are the key issues. To suceed, the more harmonised regulations become the more of an enabler they can be.

Today, regardless of the domestic political machinations of Brexit there’s a global industrial transformation going on. Some people call it the fourth industrial revolution. Reading numerous intelligent commentators[2] on this subject it’s more than clear that the aggressive approach taken in the early 80s is completely hopeless when faced with what’s coming down the road.

As an internationalist, I’ll use some words that start with “inter” – interaction, interconnection, interdependency and interrelation. Connections between or among the people, things, or places are growing at an increasing rate. This will not slow down. More and more of everything around us is connected. In this world small minded nationalist thinking, barriers and walls are an anathema.

Brexit is hopelessly doomed. It encourages short-term reactive thinking, as we have seen over the last 3-years. It’s fuelled by hideously outdated free market thinking. It’s rejecting the power of cooperative working across Europe. In 72 days[3], there’s not much that can be done to reorient given such global trends. The conclusion is that Brexit must be delayed or preferably stopped. We (UK) are going down the wrong road.

[1] https://www.mro-network.com/maintenance-repair-overhaul/opinion-three-years-waiting-brexit-and-still-not-fully-prepared

[2] https://www.aerosociety.com/news/global-megatrends-and-aerospace/

[3] https://interactive.news.sky.com/2017/brexit-countdown/

Idiotic Approach

The word “idiotic” might seem to be strong. It’s to show a complete lack of thought or common sense. Some academics would say that we are idiotic a lot of the time because we don’t take the time to think things through[1]. Certainly, we have all had moments when we wish we’d just taken a bit more time over a decision. To me that brings to mind the politicans prayer: Lord, give us the wisdom to utter words that are gentle and tender, for tomorrow we may have to eat them.

What I’m asserting here is that the UK Government’s approach to Brexit is idiotic. Now; I know the reaction to that statement might be a knee-jerk one driven by commitments to support Brexit. Let’s try to put simplistic responses aside. Let’s try to quell prejudices and pre-conceived ideas. Let’s stand-back and take a wider view of what’s going on.

To start, I’m going to need to make assumptions. Clearly if you disagree with these then you may make a different case. But there’s a fundamentals that need to be written.

A modern democratic State, of which the UK is one, and each of the 27 Members of the European Union (EU) are one too, comprises of constantly changing ambitions and attitudes that may or may not accurately reflect those of its people. Some democratic systems are better at making that connection than others.

I assume that States are dispassionate and are driven by their own interests above other considerations[2]. That said, they can recognise common interests when they choose to do so. Major topics, like Climate Change need an agreed common approach.

Adding to all that the famous words of Scottish poet and cleric, John Donne; “No Man is an Island”[3]. In other words, everything we do is seem by others, has the capacity to influence others and vice versa. We are all involved in mankind. So, that’s my basic assumptions in a few lines.

Today, the UK Government’s approach to Brexit negotiations is to play chicken. That’s to engage in a test of nerve in which, they expect the EU to blink at the last moment. The UK Government has made demands which are aimed at applying pressure to the EU to blink. If either party does not swerve before the end of October deadline then both parties lose in walking away with a No Deal outcome.

This is idiotic. Driving at high speed towards a brick wall is always stupid regardless of how good a car’s brakes might be, unless the intention is to hit the wall.

This is idiotic. Hoping to secure a deal while talking up failure, and an attempt to blame others for that failure eats away at trust. Deals are only done if trust is upheld.

This is idiotic. The world is watching. A dispassionate observer might say; if they do this to their next door friends of 40 years what on Earth might they do to us? Reputational damage is normally best avoided. Ego, bluster and bullish puffing up of the chest cannot cover up weak excusses. It takes a long-time to recover damaged reputations.

This is idiotic. There are 195 countries in the world. The combinations and permutations of different relationship is large. If we take trade, it’s true those relationships vary greatly in terms of alignment and level of business. However, the common interest of States is to see the rule of law upheld.

This is idiotic. The combined GDP of the EU 27 Members States is 6-times bigger than that of the UK. If the EU blinks at the last moment in Brexit negotiations other large parties, it has trade relations with like the US or China may look to apply the same strategy. Clearly, it’s not in the EU’s interest to take that risk and therefore it will not do so. Better to lose at a smaller game than lose at a bigger one.

This is nice but the argument above doesn’t come with a special British get out of jail free card. The “play chicken” approach is not in the interests of most States. And when it’s mostly obviously done to satisfy a domestic UK political audience it’s doubly bankrupt.

The UK Government’s approach to Brexit is idiotic. Let’ hope we can still change it.

[1] https://thepsychologist.bps.org.uk/clever-people-understanding-idiotic

[2] De Gaulle (in English): “France has no friends, only interests.” (De Gaulle did not speak specifically of France, but of all nation-states, including Britain.

[3] https://www.scottishpoetrylibrary.org.uk/poem/no-man-is-an-island/

Aviation & Brexit 94

Preparations for the UK’s Brexit continue but these times cannot be “normal”. New Conservative UK Prime Minister Johnson insists that the UK will leave the EU on the 31 October 2019 “do or die”. Bellicose politicians can be inclined to use outspoken language but in this case it’s more than even the House of Commons is accustomed too.

A sharp divergence for all to see. There’s the pragmatic and rational approach where judicious arrangements are made around an overall deal between the UK and EU. This is not exactly a win-win but it’s to get as close to it as possible in the current climate. At the same time, there’s the reckless push to sever relationships with only the minimum of temporary provisions at the lowest possible default conditions. This really is the lose-lose for both UK and EU[1].

Sitting in the South East of England, as I do, I see there’s a myopic element to this foolish “do or die” attitude. It’s a political approach that’s taken to satisfy a domestic audience as if the rest of the world doesn’t exist. However, the rest of the world can see what is going on between UK and EU and most reports aren’t complementary.

The next European Council[2] summit is 14 days before the UK is due to leave the EU. The agenda for that meeting in Brussels has yet to be published but Brexit is surely going to be on the list. On 19 October there’s to be big protest march through the streets of London. Organised by the European Movement and the People’s Vote[3] campaign this is expected to be a major historic event. So, a full 3-years after the 2016 UK referendum the final half of 2019 is going to be a rough ride for all involved and beyond.

Aviation companies, licenced people and regulators have been preparing for Brexit from the moment the UK Prime Minister’s letter kicked-off the Article 50 process. The stated assumption was that a UK-EU deal would be struck, and a reasonable degree of continuity would be maintained. In an inconsistent fashion UK Prime Minister Johnson has recently said that the chances of a No Deal Brexit are a million to one. This doesn’t seem credible given that no negotiations are on-going.

What does anyone believe in such a strange situation? With days to go, I believe it’s wise to plan for the worst-case scenario, of a No Deal Brexit with animosity on both sides. Services will be vulnerable to interruption. Transactions will be more complex. The regulatory framework will be uncertain. It’s highly likely some civil aircraft will be grounded because they can’t get the right parts with the right paperwork at the right time.

Post Brexit the UK will be viewed as a “Third Country” in respect of European legislation. A huge amount of work will be needed to re-build relationships.

[1] https://adage.com/article/digitalnext/lose-lose-beats-win-win/310805

[2] https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/meetings/european-council/2019/10/17-18/

[3] https://www.peoples-vote.uk/

Aviation & Brexit 93

83-days[1] to the next scheduled Brexit cliff edge.

Large numbers of companies based in the UK have applied to the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) to be recognised as “third-country” organisations that are able to do business within the European Single Market[2]. Few consider that a purely UK approval will be enough to enable them to continue their international business. This is not taking back control from “bureaucrats” but giving them more work to do.

Many in the aviation industry, including myself did firmly believe that the UK would remain a member of EASA, despite Brexit. However, it seems we were wrong.

It’s important to recall that prior to the UK referendum the now Prime Minister Johnson was saying that we will not leave the European Single Market. Leave campaigners sold a story that, for all its incoherence and inconsistency, was simple but downright dishonest. Yet, every single time an “expert” points out the significant downsides of Brexit, almost faster than the speed of light, a volley of criticisms come their way. It’s a predicable range of statements from: just ignore them it’s “project fear” again to fake news by elitists having a hissy fit to stop Brexit. And then there’s the abuse that is much worse but the less said about that the better.

The claims now being made by Brexit supporting UK Ministers are that UK business wants certainty and the only way to get it is to force the issue on 31 October 2019. Given the level of turbulence and uncertainty that the last 3-years have brought us, these claims from a pretty rum bunch are a dubious and desperate justifications to say the least.

The UK Department for Transport (DfT) is responsible for several public bodies, including the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA). The UK aviation industry operates essentially without subsidy and so is not a big part of DfT spending. With Brexit there’s been a leadership problem. Who speaks for aviation in the UK Government? On my reckoning there’s been 4 Aviation Ministers in the last 3-years. That’s not good when it comes to setting policy and strategy. For one of UK’s foremost industries and under some jeopardy with a No Deal Brexit coming this is not good at all.

Aviation Minister at the DfT	From	To
Lord Ahmad	May 2015	June 2017
Lord Martin Callanan	June 2017	October 2017
Baroness (Liz) Sugg	October 2017	April 2019
Baroness Vere of Norbiton	April 2019	Now

[1] https://interactive.news.sky.com/2017/brexit-countdown/

[2] https://eandt.theiet.org/content/articles/2019/07/uk-aerospace-firms-fleeing-the-caa-over-brexit-concerns

Aviation & Brexit 91

90-days[1] to the next predictable Brexit cliff edge. The UK Government has still got a hell of a lot of work to do to get ready for a Brexit No-Deal scenario. The international currency markets have detected the fragility of the current situation and reacted accordingly. The British pound sterling is at 1.216 to the $ and 1.094 to the EURO as I write this short sentence. That’s an incredibly poor rate, even if you took the view that the pound sterling has been overvalued. British summer holiday makers are going to find this fact painful, but the flipside is tourist coming to the UK are going to have a great time. No doubt, air traffic will continue to grow to carry these welcome visitors from overseas. Unfortunately, in the short-term the threatened strike at British Airways (BA) may put a damper on that prospect.

The bigger issue is: what the state of the national currency says about the level of risk we are taking with Brexit. It’s not a vote of confidence. Currency rates may tumble further.

There’s a list of Brexit downsides and one is that British assets now look cheap to overseas purchasers.

I’m not saying that this is a specific example, but I noted with interest the sale of the British defence and aerospace group, Cobham to a US private equity firm for 4 billion pounds[2]. Today, Cobham employs 10,000 people. They were known for the development of airborne refuelling systems, which was a British innovation. This organisation is part of my aerospace design history. In the 1990s, on a regular basis, I visited what was then called; Flight Refuelling Ltd, just outside Bournemouth. I did numerous approvals of modifications to the Falcon 20 aircraft that they flew[3].

Sadly, the UK’s recent keenness to leave the European Union (EU) without a deal, on 31 October 2019 is like hanging out a big “For Sale” sign. Sound companies with valuable intellectual property look like a good buy. That said, this is not new for the UK. There are desperate periods in our history where selling the family silver was quite the vogue.

My point is that there are valuable British assets that look cheap to foreign investors given the uncertainties of Brexit. Which is ironic because it’s completely the opposite of what Brexit was supposed to be about, namely; take back control.

History always has lessons for us. Even recent history. I’d recommend an offering from the UK TV Channel 5 with Portillo’s series: “The Trouble with The Tories”[4]. He interviews many of the key players who brought the never-ending Brexit calamity upon us. I watched it and thought, just how useless knowledge with hindsight can be. Not only that but how dreadful British politicians are at assessing risk.

One thing I’m sure of, next week is going to another Brexit rollercoaster. It’s as if we have invented perpetual motion. It would be wrong to see No Deal as the end point or finish line.

[1] https://interactive.news.sky.com/2017/brexit-countdown/

[2] https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-cobham-m-a-advent/us-private-equity-group-advent-buys-uks-cobham-for-5-billion-idUKKCN1UK0NA

[3] http://www.aeroflight.co.uk/tag/flight-refuelling-ltd

[4] https://twitter.com/channel5_tv/status/1157040808845094912?s=20

No Mandate

There’s no mandate whatsoever for a No Deal Brexit[1]. None. Having the false assertion out there, and so widespread that this is a great danger to our democracy. Pushing forward with a policy based on a lie, that everyone can see is normally the preserve of dictatorships and communist regimes.

The new British Foreign Secretary Mr Raab has been speaking falsely. The new UK Government has no mandate for a No Deal Brexit. In fact, there would be no need to blame the European Union (EU), as Mr Raab has started to do if there was a true mandate for a No Deal Brexit.

Before the 2016 EU referendum, the lead Leave vote campaigners were saying that the UK would be mad to leave the European Single Market. That European market that Britain had fought so hard to establish. They were explicitly proposing a Norway-type deal and stating that getting such a deal would be quick and easy. Leave vote campaigners sold Brexit on the basis that there was little risk as we held all the cards in any negotiations. It doesn’t take long to survey the archives of British media from 2016 to understand just how far we have drifted from reality. There’s an abundance of recorded evidence. There’s no mandate for a No Deal Brexit.

If we move to the UK General Election of 2017, I don’t recall a No Deal Brexit being part of the last Conservative Party manifesto. Yes, there was a commitment to negotiate a Brexit deal but not to give-up and walk away.

Now, I can hear a Brexiter saying but it’s the “default” position. This word “default” is somehow used to justify what is in truth an active policy choice. The UK Government has the power to stop a No Deal Brexit right up to the moment before it happens. Unfortunately, at the moment, Johnson’s new Government does not have the will or the common sense to do so.

The lie that there is a mandate is likely to be sustained by the Johnson Government because it’s the only way they can justify “turbocharging” the preparation for No Deal Brexit planning. Essentially that means throwing billions of taxpayers’ money at something they can’t define, and most people don’t want.

This morning the British Foreign Secretary told the big fib on BBC Radio 4. It’s recorded and the rest of the world listening knows it’s a fib. So, why would anyone take talk of any future negotiations seriously having heard his radio interview?

Also, let’s remember that the British Foreign Secretary who says the UK will do a No Deal Brexit on 31 October 2019 if the “undemocratic backstop” isn’t scrapped, is the same Mr Raab who was a Brexit Secretary. Whatever happened to the The Ministerial Code?

Our sad state of affairs will leave us wandering in the wilderness for many years to come. There’s an alternative. Stop Brexit by a simple act of revoking Article 50[2]. Eat the humble pie and save Britain. Action now.

[1] #NoDealBrexit

[2] #RevokeA50

Aviation & Brexit 90

Minister Michael Gove says the UK Government is “working on the assumption” that the United Kingdom (UK) will leave the European Union (EU) without a deal on Thursday, 31 October 2019. A huge No-Deal Brexit public information campaign is on the way. This doesn’t much change the facts on the ground, but it does put a bright red flag up to the whole Country and beyond. There are denials that a UK General Election is on the way. At the same time the new UK Government appears to be on an election footing. Now, the architects of the Leave campaign in the 2016 referendum hold power in the UK. It’s reasonable to ask; how on earth did we get to this point?

If you didn’t see the BBC documentary on the Brexit Crisis[1], I can thoroughly recommend it. You can watch it on the BBC iPlayer. It objectively tells the story of the Brexit negotiations, from behind the scenes on both sides. The programme is not about aviation but that subject, just like 101 others is caught up in the incomprehensible political maelstrom that is Brexit.

As I write here, opinion polls give the new UK Government a slight bounce. Those who say; “let’s just get it over with”, do seem to be getting a degree of support. However, this feeling people may have, is very far from reality. Those who think that a No Deal Brexit would at least be a way of moving on are wrong in every possible way. It just means that after the 31 October there will be the beginning of a whole new round of painful negotiation and general frustration.

For a moment then I’ll assume the new British Prime Minister (PM) pushes through all the opposition to deliver a No Deal Brexit. By any international measure this will be an indication of failure that other nations will observer and draw appropriate conclusions. Putting aside domestic considerations, it’s irrelevant who may or may not be to blame for such an outcome. It’s a failure.

In that international context; how long will it take for the UK and EU to come back to a close, cordial and stable relationship? Initially, temporary measures, continuing uncertainty and periodic instability will undoubtedly prevail. Using the past as an indicator, I will estimate at least a decade of competition, division and turmoil are likely. That takes us up to 2030.

Certainly, by that time a great number of the people who voted to Leave the EU in 2016 will no longer be with us. In fact, most people will have forgotten what all the fuss was about. Much as few people can describe Suez, the humble pie and the bill[2]. But there will be humble pie and a bill.

If Brexit happens, in the coming decade, I am sure Scotland will become an independent nation. The future of Ireland is less easy to predict. The pound sterling will decline further as we sell more of the family silver. UK’s ability to act on the global stage will be more dependent upon America.

This week, the new British PM talked of sunny uplands that would make Britain the best place in the world by 2050. That’s an aspiration we can all share but the direction we are going in isn’t the one that will deliver success. How long will it be before the new PM echoes one of his predecessors of 60 years ago and says: “You’ve never has it so good[3]”.

Personally, I hope I’m not writing these blogs in my 90s. Still, you never know.

[1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m0006wj2/panorama-britains-brexit-crisis

[2] 1959 and The Anglo-Egyptian agreement

[3] UK Prime Minister MacMillan in the 1960s

Aviation & Brexit 89

The ancient adage that: “when in a hole, stop digging”, did once have meaning in British politics. No more. The rate at which deep political holes are being dug exceeds decades of measurement. As a strategy, knowing something to be a bad idea and continuing to do it should have a limited lifespan. A difficult reckoning must come. Well, that’s conventional thinking. With Brexit conventional thinking goes way out of the window.

The 2-year period provided for by Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union (EU) has been extended until Thursday, 31 October 2019. Including the summer holidays and that’s about 14 weeks away. Can a new UK Prime Minister (PM) secure a Brexit deal and is there time to get it through the UK Parliament by 31 October 31?[1] They’d have to be a miracle worker. There’s little working time left. Little time for deal making and little time to legislate. Given past performance, it’s feasible but it’s extremely unlikely.

The prospective new PM has said that his first task will be to launch a huge No-Deal Brexit public information campaign to help minimise possible disruption[2]. That certainly is going to be interesting in respect of air travel to and from the UK. The question is out there; will the UK Government be generous in providing financial support to businesses adversely impacted by a No-Deal Brexit?

There’s no doubt that UK airlines will be able to fly to the EU provided EU companies are permitted to fly to the UK. That’s the most basic international rules being applied. That said, at the heart of this immense political severance is the impact on people. Brexit will reduce European aviation employment opportunities for UK citizens[3]. However, it may create new domestic opportunities as the UK struggles to construct a credible regime to replace the European system[4].

If the UK is to make a full departure from the European system, it would require a period in which to sign special arrangements with the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and other global regulators. This hasn’t happened – yet.

The UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) will need to undertake a major investment and recruitment activity if it’s to take over necessary functions, and Bilateral Aviation Safety Agreements (BASAs) with all the mutual recognition agreements needed. Such major changes from start to finish could take a decade to complete in the major global aviation markets.

I wonder what public information campaigns are going to do in the meantime.

[1] https://twitter.com/BBCParliament/status/1152256880246476800?s=20

[2] https://twitter.com/itvpeston/status/1151589697975492608?s=20

[3] https://blog.aviationjobsearch.com/what-does-a-no-deal-brexit-mean-for-aviation-employment-opportunities/

[4] https://www.prospect.org.uk/news/id/2018/July/6/CAA-must-prioritise-skills-pay-Brexit-plans