UK – Page 40 – John Vincent

Brexit and Aviation 32

2903_brexit Tuesday, chief #Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier will brief the EU 27 Member States Ministers about the ongoing talks with the UK[1].

“The Ministers will discuss the state of play of the negotiations, concerning both the completion of the work on withdrawal issues and the discussions on the framework for future EU-UK relations. Ministers will also look at the annotated draft agenda for the next meeting of the European Council (Article 50) of 18 October 2018.”

An agreement on a future relationship can only be negotiated and concluded once the UK has become a “third country” with respect to the EU. That’s after 31 March 2019.

Additionally, during their EU27 Leaders’ summit in Salzburg on 19 – 20 September 2018 hosted by the Federal Chancellery of Austria there will be a discussion on #Brexit. The discussions during this informal summit will be reflected in the work and the conclusions of the next meetings of the European Council.

The preparedness notices related to aviation, published by the EU in January[2] and April[3] this year continue to be applicable. Yet, we have not seen a formal UK public response to these notices. With such slow progress the once-unthinkable prospect of a “no-deal” #Brexit is becoming a real one.

These notices set out the consequences of the withdrawal of the UK from the EU without a formal, ratified agreement. The implications are stark.

Aviation is undergoing major changes, with challenges like; the growth of air traffic, economic and environmental pressures, digitalisation, new technologies, drones, cybersecurity and other security issues. All of these are pan-European challenges. None of them can successful be addressed by one Nation alone. The regulatory framework in which aviation operates is a key factor in its performance. The chaos that a “no deal” #Brexit may bring will impact this significantly.

[1] http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/meetings/gac-art50/2018/09/18/

[2] https://ec.europa.eu/transport/sites/transport/files/legislation/brexit-notice-to-stakeholders-air-transport.pdf

[3] https://ec.europa.eu/transport/sites/transport/files/legislation/brexit-notice-to-stakeholders-aviation-safety.pdf

Brexit and Aviation 31

It’s now under 200 days until the end of the Art. 50 Brexit negotiating period. I’m guessing that’s why we have had an absolute deluge of technical guidance papers popping out of the UK Government[1]. Although many are in the “unlikely event of the UK leaving the EU without a deal” it’s almost as if that’s the aim. Incidentally, some papers drop the “unlikely” altogether.

If only this huge effort could have been channelled towards something useful. Certainly, to apply so much civil service effort to health and education would have been a much better idea.

13 September 2018 has been a busy day for the Government’s publications people. As yet, there’s no paper on my favourite subject: Aviation. That’s still in the works.

There’s a hint of what maybe to come. Here’s some words form the paper on vehicle Type Approval.

“After March 2019 if there’s no deal. In a no deal scenario, type-approvals issued in the UK would no longer be valid for sales or registrations on the EU market. EC type-approvals issued outside of the UK, would no longer be automatically accepted on the UK market. This means that affected manufacturers would need to ensure that they have the correct type-approval for each market.”

So, duplication, extra costs and other such waste is on the way.

Here’s a random list of the papers published:

Haulage permits and trailer registration

Arrangements for future haulage permit and trailer registration schemes after leaving the European Union (EU).

UK nationals in the EU: essential information

Information on the rights and status of UK nationals living and travelling in the European Union (EU).

Passport rules for travel to Europe after Brexit

Advice for British passport holders in the unlikely event of the UK leaving the EU without a deal.

How to prepare if the UK leaves the EU with no deal

Guidance on how to prepare for Brexit if there’s no deal.

‘No deal’ Brexit advice for businesses only trading with the EU

HMRC letters to VAT-registered businesses only trading with the EU that explain changes to customs, excise and VAT in the unlikely event that the UK leaves the EU without a deal.

European Regional Development Funding if there’s no Brexit deal

How current and future European Regional Development Fund projects would be affected if the UK leaves the EU with no deal.

Trading goods regulated under the ‘New Approach’ if there’s no Brexit deal

How trading in harmonised goods regulated under the ‘New Approach’ would be affected if the UK leaves the EU with no deal.

Upholding environmental standards if there’s no Brexit deal

How businesses and others regulated through environmental quality standards would be affected if the UK leaves the EU with no deal.

Travelling to the EU with a UK passport if there’s no Brexit deal

Check whether you would be affected by changes to rules for British citizens travelling to some European countries after March 2019 if the UK leaves the EU with no deal.

Recognition of seafarer certificates of competency if there’s no Brexit deal

How seafarers would be affected if the UK leaves the EU with no deal.

Merger review and anti-competitive activity if there’s no Brexit deal

How merger review and investigations into anti-competitive activity would be affected if the UK leaves the EU with no deal

Accessing public sector contracts if there’s no Brexit deal

To explain how existing or potential bidders for UK public contracts and public sector buyers would be able to access and publish future public procurement contract opportunities if the UK leaves the EU with no deal.

Using and trading in fluorinated gases and ozone depleting substances if there’s no Brexit deal

How businesses dealing with fluorinated gases (F-Gases) and ozone depleting substances (ODS) would be affected if the UK leaves the EU with no deal.

European Social Fund (ESF) grants if there’s no Brexit deal

How organisations receiving European Social Fund (ESF) grants would be affected if the UK leaves the European Union (EU) with no deal.

Industrial emissions standards (‘best available techniques’) if there’s no Brexit deal

How standards for emissions from industry affected by the Best Available Technique (BAT) regime would be affected if the UK leaves the EU with no deal.

Reporting CO2 emissions for new cars and vans if there’s no Brexit deal

How vehicle manufacturers would be affected if the UK leaves the EU with no deal.

Travelling in the Common Travel Area if there’s no Brexit deal

Confirmation that the Common Travel Area arrangements and the associated rights and privileges of British and Irish citizens are protected if the UK leaves the EU with no deal.

Vehicle type approval if there’s no Brexit deal

How vehicle and component manufacturers would be affected if the UK leaves the EU with no deal.

Driving in the EU if there’s no Brexit deal

How holders of UK driving licences would be affected if the UK leaves the EU with no deal.

Trading under the mutual recognition principle if there’s no Brexit deal

How importing and exporting non-harmonised goods would be affected if the UK leaves the EU with no deal.

Getting an exemption from maritime security notifications if there’s no Brexit deal

How shipping companies would be affected if the UK leaves the EU with no deal.

Travelling with a European Firearms Pass if there’s no Brexit deal

How travelling with a European Firearms Pass would be affected if the UK leaves the EU with no deal.

Data protection if there’s no Brexit deal

How the collection and use of personal data would change if the UK leaves the EU in March 2019 with no deal.

Trading in drug precursors if there’s no Brexit deal

How trading in drug precursor chemicals would be affected if the UK leaves the EU with no deal.

Appointing nominated persons to your business if there’s no Brexit deal

How appointing a nominated person to carry out duties on your behalf when selling certain goods would be affected if the UK leaves the EU with no deal.

Running an oil or gas business if there’s no Brexit deal

How oil and gas energy businesses would be affected if the UK leaves the EU with no deal.

Funding for UK LIFE projects if there’s no Brexit deal

How organisations receiving funding under the EU LIFE programme would be affected if the UK leaves the EU with no deal.

What telecoms businesses should do if there’s no Brexit deal

How the telecoms regulatory framework would be affected if the UK leaves the EU with no deal.

Mobile roaming if there’s no Brexit deal

How leaving the EU without a deal would affect mobile roaming in EU and EEA countries.

Connecting Europe Facility energy funding if there’s no Brexit deal

How applying for and receiving energy grants from the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) fund would be affected if the UK leaves the EU with no deal.

Broadcasting and video on demand if there’s no Brexit deal

How the rules for broadcasters and providers of video on demand services would change if the UK leaves the EU with no deal.

[1] https://www.gov.uk/government/brexit

Mettle and Mulligrubs

My last post had a glimmer of optimism about it. As the week progresses the basis for that optimism is subsiding. Slowly but surely. One cause is the endless, wholly erroneous diatribe of macho language that bleeds from the Brexit supporters. So, much effort and energy are being expended provoking conflict, heightening tensions and blaming others.

Constant uncertainty of the Brexit clock ticking is doing damage, even as we speak. The health of manufacturing confidence has reached a low. Contingency measures are kicking-in as companies move out of the UK. Hard working, tax paying, long-standing EU nationals are drifting away.

As real impacts are being felt by real people, so our politics seems more unreal. The UK is divided between people who are head-down studying, training or working and frantic groups that are fighting ancient battles. Politically Left or Right there’s a myopic obsession infecting public life.

Former governor of the Bank of England, Lord King has branded Brexit preparations as: “incompetent”. He’s coming from a position of supporting Brexit. My answer to him is the earthy historic phrase: you can’t make a silk purse out of a pig’s ear. The poor of preparation started the day an “advisory” referendum was proposed and driven through by a gambling PM.

Now, we have the ridiculous situation of the Brexit secretary Raab saying those in Parliament worried about warnings of damage to the UK car industry: “show more mettle”. Again a 17th century phrase. Maybe it’s time to revive some other historic words and phrases from that era.

Government is telling a: “Banbury tale” which is a form of: “cock and bull” story. That’s a ridiculous story, or a tale that rambles on without going anywhere. How apt for Brexit. Particularly considering that David Cameron’s constituency was in Oxfordshire.

I’m always astonished how many Brexiters are “mulligrubs”. That’s people in an exaggerated bad mood all the time. How they keep it up being so sullen when they “won” the referendum in 2016 is beyond belief. That word rolls off the tongue so maybe it’s worth reviving.

The political media is full of “pickthanks”. That’s gossiping tell-tales who spreads malicious rumours to carry favour. I can see why that one died. There are better words for such people but many of them are not to be used in polite company.

Brexit isn’t an answer to our current predicament. It’s a symptom of a much deeper problem. The longer we avoid that reality the worse the situation will get. Regrets are not enough. We need serious action to rethink. Sign-up[1].

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

Brexit and Aviation 30

The summer holidays are ending, and the prospect of autumn is all around. Fortunately, the summer weather continues, and the BBC PROMS[1] have one more week to run. The House of Commons returns on Tuesday, 4 September[2]. Already, UK MPs are lining up in front of the media with 101 opinions on where Mrs May is right, wrong, sad, mad and maybe the only game in town.

Where the political pendulum will settle is anyone’s guess. To give it a jolt there’s the Party conference season to come too. I’ll be down in Brighton this year.

In the statements coming from negotiations in Brussels[3], last week there’s some constructive and positive sounding words. The UK’s White Paper contains the recognition of the European Court of Justice as the ultimate arbiter of EU law. This sticks in the throats of Brexit fundamentalists. But it is pragmatic, as it’s the only way that 27 remaining EU Member States can be bound. This does open the door to the UK’s wish to remain a member of the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA).

Typically, several airlines release their late spring schedules for the following year in September. That task is going to be tricky this year given the uncertainty that continues as negotiations unfold. The schedule from 1st of April 2019 will likely mean that tickets sold will have terms and conditions saying this is subject to a new regulatory environment.

In my view the notion that UK airlines will be unable to fly into and out of the Europe is not plausible[4]. There’s been a lot of sensationalist media coverage and some badly written papers about what is theoretically possible as a worst-case scenario. There may be fewer routes, higher costs and restrictions, but it’s overwhelmingly in the interest of both sides that flights continue post-Brexit. It’s clear that the EU is not going to ignore its own legal framework, but parties reciprocate when it’s in their interests to do so.

What my advice? Plan a good winter break somewhere in Europe. The days of cheap flights to unusual destinations maybe ebbing away. At least from us in the UK. It’s sad to see such a curtailment of freedom of movement. The blame lies firmly on the shoulders of a generation of unimaginative politicians.

[1] https://www.royalalberthall.com/

[2] https://www.parliament.uk/about/faqs/house-of-commons-faqs/business-faq-page/recess-dates/

[3] http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_STATEMENT-18-5403_en.htm

[4] http://www.travelweekly.co.uk/articles/308215/easyjet-remains-confident-on-brexit

Brexit and Aviation 29

The negotiations continue but the water is muddy brown and impenetrable. EU-UK technical level meetings took place on Wednesday and Thursday this week. The assurance has been given that there are few remaining issues with the Withdrawal Agreement and the future relationship discussions. On Friday there’s to be a principals’ meeting with Michel Barnier, the European Commission’s Chief Negotiator, and Dominic Raab, UK Secretary of State for Exiting the EU.

Raab is confident a deal between UK and the EU is: “within our sights.” But the news this week has been up and down like a yo-yo. One minute there’s optimism and broadly 80% of the Brexit Withdrawal Agreement is concluded. Next minute we must remind people that a “no deal” scenario is getting closer and closer. There’s so much day-to-day game playing that it’s difficult to be either optimistic or pessimistic.

I must congratulate presenter Hannah Fry. Last night, by chance, I watched her BBC 4 programme called “The Joy of Winning”. That was an hour well spent. She successful opens our eyes to game theory. Not an easy thing to do in a way that keeps people watching. Adventures in maths don’t normally top the viewing figures. For this one-hour I’d recommend you give it a go.

Made me think – is anyone applying game theory to the Brexit negotiations? And if they are what does each side judge to be a win?

Switching to Aerospace. A win for Europe’s Aerospace sector would be either no Brexit or an outcome that maintains much of what has been won over decades. Europe’s Aerospace is a success. It employs at least 120,000 people in the UK[1]. The fact is the industry is highly integrated within the EU. Billions are done in international trade. And a common rulebook makes that work.

UK Brexit Secretary Dominic Raaab maybe an improvement on his predecessor. In these final months, I hope he has a sound winning strategy that is a win-win for both the UK and EU.

A so called “no deal” Brexit would be an unmitigated tragedy. It would be evidence of abject failure in negotiations. It would signal to the world a grave weakness at a time of pressure and venerability.

Is “no deal” part of a game? Like the MAD that we lived through in the 1980s – that’s the Mutually Assured Destruction of the Cold War. I don’t suppose we will know until the UK Government papers are released in 30 years’ time. I prefer to think that it is a form of game theory otherwise I must concede that we are run by ideological extremism in favour of Brexit at any cost. Not a nice thought to end the week on.

[1] @ADSgroupUK

Britain deserves better

Post-Brexit Britain will be more bureaucratic. The recently published Government papers are full of new regulatory regimes, doubling up of registration and extra processes for British business and consumers. When Ministers say, like Dominic Raab: “the UK will be better off outside the EU in any scenario…” we all know these are meaningless words. It’s his job to say that sort of nonsense even if this is turning reality on its head.

For the Conservatives it’s too late to change direction. They know that their negotiating strategy has fallen apart. Focusing on the negative, like threats of a “no deal” have done, has alienated potential partners. During negotiations, blaming people for intransigence has been a diplomatic blunder of the first order. It’s reinforced the solidarity of the potential partners.

The first batch in a series of Technical Notices on “no deal” assume a great deal of good will on the part of the EU. Some of them ignore the constraints that apply because of existing legislation in Europe. In an emergency, circumventing Regulations can be done but its going to be hard if the only reasons are ideological and pressures are like a game of Russian roulette.

The UK voted to leave the European Union on 23 June 2016. The world of early 2019 will not be the same as the world of early 2016. Populism remains but its not gathering any head of steam. It’s a minority of ideological radicals who keep pushing their cherished project. We don’t have to accept their view of the world.

We need a #PeoplesVote. But we need a positive campaign about the benefits of European solidarity. A campaign must present the facts and expose the lies of the last referendum. Britain deserves better.

Brexit and Aviation 28

The EU has already produced a series of notices on “Brexit preparedness”. It’s now the turn of the UK to publish notices. Taking the current course, the UK plans to leave the EU on 29 March 2019. What happens at that point remains a subject of much debate and discussion. Many hours of media time are dominated by speculation and those desperate to influence public opinion.

Brinkmanship is the apparent escalation of threats to achieve one’s aims. For brinkmanship to work, both sides escalate their threats. We never seem to be on the brink of anything good. Most “brinks” are on the edge of catastrophise, cataclysm, disasters, ruin, suffering or harm.

Pro-Brexit people often dismiss any such talk as, so called: “Project Fear”. That’s disingenuous because it’s an unscrupulous attempt to hide what brinkmanship is by definition. A threat, or outcome that no one sensible wants is ineffective unless it’s credible. It’s no good blaming anyone for this dreadful state of affairs. If the doctrine of – nothing is agreed until everything is agreed – continues, then this is what will happen.

Also, its foolish to think that this situation will only exist in the UK – EU relationship. It’s most likely to be encountered whenever the UK is negotiating with a larger Country or region. So, if Brexit happens we had better get used to it.

Naturally there’s the potential for errors or misjudgements. History is littered with brinkmanship gone wrong. It always better to have a life jacket than not have one but whether it will be any use or not is quite another matter.

Today, civil aviation is not on the list of how to prepare if the UK leaves the EU with no deal[1].

There are some inferences that can be taken from the notice on “Regulating medicines”. Basically, that’s the UK will continue to apply and accept the application of EU regulations even if there’s no deal. Ideally, the UK would like to remain part of the European Medicines Agency (EMA).

An attempt at humour, and the Bacon Lettuce and Tomato sandwich scenario after Brexit, fell flat. That said, most of the scenarios for no deal Brexit are Bl**dy Ludicrous Threats (BLTs). Better to stop this folly altogether and adopt a more practical, pragmatic and proportionate approach to EU Membership.

[1] https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/how-to-prepare-if-the-uk-leaves-the-eu-with-no-deal

No half-way houses

What do you do in a deeply divided country like ours? They say perception is all. Spend just 5 minutes reading Hard Remain Tweets and then 5 minutes reading Hard Leave Tweets. These two communities will NOT reconcile in anyone’s lifetime. We have Internationalist English and the Nationalist English. They live in different worlds and their beliefs are poles apart. They delight in insulting each other in ever more creative ways. Both believe the other one is sabotaging their dreams. Strong deals, good deals, bad deals, weak deals or no deal, whatever the final deal a large proportion of the English population will object to it even if they haven’t a clue what it means. We all know the status-quo is not tenable but where do we go from here? The traditional “bell curve” of politics is taking a holiday. That’s where once many politicians looked to position themseleves with the central moderate majority.

Let’s be clear that at a time of such troubles we need to get back to fundamentals.

“The first duty of the Government is to afford protection to its citizens.” My interpretation of the word “protection” takes in: safety, security, justice, economic wellbeing, social solidarity and environmental protection.

This is where the two camps are NOT equal. Wherever you are, you do need to pick a side. Appeasement has a poor history in all nations.

A quick look at the Brexiters priorities leave no doubt, in my mind that they are authoritarian and unscrupulous. Here’s a range of thing they want to do: One Party rule. In Parliament, shut down the House of Lords, as they say; no second house needed. More popular referendums to keep politicians on a leash. Returning capital punishment. Pulling up the draw-bridge to all but the wealthy. Privatisation of the BBC, NHS and other public bodies. Wholesale deregulation. Drastic cuts in welfare to let people sink or swim. Making dissent and protest crimes of treason. This list is a sample from Brexiters current on-line discussions.

Public safety, security, justice, economic wellbeing, social solidarity and environmental protection, will all be in jeopardy if they succeed. An outcome that “will be regretted for generations” is on the cards right now.

Let’s be clear the opinion to remain as an EU Member State is no longer the status-quo. The world has moved in the last two-years. A new dynamic exists in Europe as we face the challenges of Trump, Russia, China and the huge tech giants who dominate our lives. Nationalist voices will continue to make noise but that should on a level playing field with moderate voices.

If democratic States are to thrive and ordinary people not lose out, Government and its institutions must listen to their people. There is a growing demand and support for a #PeoplesVote. Let’s have that vote and show that the real deal is the one people want.

Brexit and Aviation 26

On my desk is coaster that says: “30 Years MOR Scheme 1976-2006”. It has the Civil Aviation Authority logo above the words. Now that was worth celebrating. Three decades of Mandatory Occurrence Reporting in civil aviation in the UK[1].

It would be difficult to put a number on the number of potential accidents and incidents prevented by the learning that has flowed from thousands of MORs. Nevertheless, there are certainly people who have been spared the fate of being involved in life threatening events.

1976 was my first year of paid employment. It was a glorious hot summer. In the autumn, I started an apprenticeship with no idea that the path of my career would lead to me working with MORs.

At that time, I was working out how to do engineering drawing and make precision items using machine tools. If remember right, being on a flat roof at Yeovil College experimenting with a solar water heater. Working out how to stop it leaking and pump at the right times.

Not my biggest interest but aviation was around me given the presence of Westland Helicopters in the town. That company had its own apprentice training school. Many of the college apprentices like me worked for small engineering companies that depended on Westland’s.

I recollect this because, at that time, my memories of a fatal aircraft accident were of the one that led to the establishment of the MOR system in the UK. In 1972, British European Airways flight 548 crashed in Staines killing 118 people on board[2]. This was a British aircraft, operated by a British company on British soil. A sad and tragic event. I plan to go to see the Trident memorial window in St Mary’s Church in Staines. The 118 stars in its border represent those who died.

The UK has contributed considerably to shaping the rules that now apply in Europe.

When I arrived in Cologne in 2004, the Directive 2003/42/EC was in place. This wasn’t the strongest piece of legislation and although it required EU Member States to have an MOR system it was weak on getting people to share information. That’s one of the big benefits of such approaches. It’s to learn from others so that you don’t have to experience the same problems.

Now, to give it the full title we have: Regulation (EU) No 376/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 April 2014 on the reporting, analysis and follow-up of occurrences in civil aviation, amending Regulation (EU) No 996/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Directive 2003/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Regulations (EC) No 1321/2007 and (EC) No 1330/2007 Text with EEA relevance.

Yes, that’s a mouthful but the text of the Regulation is invaluable to make a system of collecting and sharing MORs throughout the whole European aviation system. Will the UK continue to participate in this European system post-Brexit? Everyone assumes it will but the answer to the question how is – no one knows.

[1] https://www.caa.co.uk/Our-work/Make-a-report-or-complaint/MOR/Mandatory-occurrence-reporting/

[2] https://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19720618-0

Is this a new form of politics?

First: Identify an underlying hate or prejudice of a section of the population. Second: say something that will anger and enflame a significant majority of people. Get the mass News coverage. Thirdly: wait and then say “sorry” and get away with it without sanction. Meantime garnish the support of all those who share strong views but are normally unheard.

If reports are to be believed, it seems to work best when focusing on the extremes, either of the conventional left or right in politics. Our rapid news cycles are always looking for their next fix. There’s nothing like a rocking and rolling bandwagon to sell newspapers or increase viewers.

It’s a crude mechanism that polarises public opinion. Chalk or Cheese. Marmite – love it or hate it.

This is a real dilemma for the traditional centrist politicians. It becomes difficult to use words like: compromise, consensus and cooperation. In our heart of hearts, we all know that things get done when people pull together around a common goal. We all pine for better performing public services and greater customer care from private companies but we are not helping? I think not.

The political blame game polarises public opinion. Easy enough to do when faced with zero accountability and gaping great failures – the railways have been doing that in recent times.

However, if the blame game is the only game in town we’ve come to a real crossroads. It’s almost impossible to learn and put things right if there’s a constant risk of getting shot at. Who wants to take on difficult, almost intractable problems if just by doing so you become the target of hate and prejudice? The blame game just drives repeated failure.

There was a time when our British adversarial system challenged people to come up with better arguments or better solutions to problems. What we are seeing now is that maybe it had had its day. The adversarial system, in this social media age is like fuel to a fire. It’s just another way of burning down the house instead of putting out the fire.

Fine. Pointing out the issues creates lots of good talking points. Now, what is to be done?

For a start, centrist politicians must become less reactive and more radical. Tap into positive emotions. Bin technical words like compromise, consensus and cooperation. Talk about teamwork and us pulling together. Cite great achievements like the 2012 London Olympics.

Hope not fear. Bringing down walls not putting them up. Getting News coverage for fundamental changes. Looking to the future rather than always rehashing the past.