Brexit and British Airways, easyJet, Ryanair, et al.

[epsilon]

. British Airways, Virgin, EasyJet, Ryanair and others will have to negociate new traffic rights with the EU. And they have to do so as beggers: Europe doens’t need their traffic: they need our traffic. They need our tourists. They need business links for their economy.

Airlines like Easyjet and Ryanair will have to accept the conditions that both departure and arrival countries will implement. Set up a base somewhere in Europe, as some suggest? Remain/become member of the European Common Aviation Area? Sure, but that won't be given unconditionally, as the EU has warned the U.K. before the Brexit vote.

Last time I checked Ryanair is an Irish airline and Ireland is still in the EU...

[sn26567]

. British Airways, Virgin, EasyJet, Ryanair and others will have to negociate new traffic rights with the EU. And they have to do so as beggers: Europe doens’t need their traffic: they need our traffic. They need our tourists. They need business links for their economy.

Last time I checked Ryanair is an Irish airline and Ireland is still in the EU...

Indeed. Besides BA and easyJet, two companies are likely to be affected: bmi regional (which flies a lot of intra-EU flights, including for SN), and Flybe (in a similar way, also flying for SN).

[epsilon]

But is Ryanair affected for their UK-EU traffic (7th freedom)? Apart from Irish destination flights

[Passenger]

So sorry indeed, but I blame my blackout to this photo:

[sean1982]

Sure, but that won't be given unconditionally, as the EU has warned the U.K. before the Brexit vote.

Says who? are you suddenly an expert in a field where even the real experts don't have a clue on where to start? If anything, Europe has very big intrests in keeping the UK in the common aviation area because europe's biggest airport happens to be located in the UK and is not only a motor for UK but also a motor for the whole of europe.

(And just to remind everyone, a referendum has no legal basis for anything. Only after the UK government actually instigates article 50 and AFTER the negociations will the changes take place. Europe's leaders can jump up and down as long as they want, the UK needs to formally let them know first and they can take as long as they want for that. Johnson is saying he doesnt expect the UK to leave europe until 2020)

[Passenger]

Says who? are you suddenly an expert in a field where even the real experts don't have a clue on where to start? If anything, Europe has very big intrests in keeping the UK in the common aviation area because europe's biggest airport happens to be located in the UK and is not only a motor for UK but also a motor for the whole of europe.

(And just to remind everyone, a referendum has no legal basis for anything. Only after the UK government actually instigates article 50 and AFTER the negociations will the changes take place. Europe's leaders can jump up and down as long as they want, the UK needs to formally let them know first and they can take as long as they want for that. Johnson is saying he doesnt expect the UK to leave europe until 2020)

I don't say I'm an expert on international politics: I only said what I think about it - the aim of a forum. I hate the Brexit but I accept the vote.

Anyway, because you were probably too busy with moving to your new office at Heathrow, you have probably missed the official statement "a no is a no" from the European Union, exluding the possibility that the U.K. will remain in the European Union: "...As agreed, the New Settlement for the United Kingdom within the European Union, reached at the European Council on 18-19 February 2016, will now not take effect and ceases to exist. There will be no renegotiation..."

Source:
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press ... eferendum/

Full press release:

President Tusk, President Schulz and Prime Minister Rutte met this morning in Brussels upon the invitation of European Commission President Juncker. They discussed the outcome of the United Kingdom referendum and made the following joint statement:

"In a free and democratic process, the British people have expressed their wish to leave the European Union. We regret this decision but respect it.

This is an unprecedented situation but we are united in our response. We will stand strong and uphold the EU's core values of promoting peace and the well-being of its peoples. The Union of 27 Member States will continue. The Union is the framework of our common political future. We are bound together by history, geography and common interests and will develop our cooperation on this basis. Together we will address our common challenges to generate growth, increase prosperity and ensure a safe and secure environment for our citizens. The institutions will play their full role in this endeavour.

We now expect the United Kingdom government to give effect to this decision of the British people as soon as possible, however painful that process may be. Any delay would unnecessarily prolong uncertainty. We have rules to deal with this in an orderly way. Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union sets out the procedure to be followed if a Member State decides to leave the European Union. We stand ready to launch negotiations swiftly with the United Kingdom regarding the terms and conditions of its withdrawal from the European Union. Until this process of negotiations is over, the United Kingdom remains a member of the European Union, with all the rights and obligations that derive from this. According to the Treaties which the United Kingdom has ratified, EU law continues to apply to the full to and in the United Kingdom until it is no longer a Member.

As agreed, the “New Settlement for the United Kingdom within the European Union”, reached at the European Council on 18-19 February 2016, will now not take effect and ceases to exist. There will be no renegotiation.

As regards the United Kingdom, we hope to have it as a close partner of the European Union in the future. We expect the United Kingdom to formulate its proposals in this respect. Any agreement, which will be concluded with the United Kingdom as a third country, will have to reflect the interests of both sides and be balanced in terms of rights and obligations.”

[Inquirer]

I increasingly get the impression that while the UK is brutally awakening from a daydream and thinking 'what have we done?', many within the EU are somehow relieved to be able to finally show the Brits the door; that doesn't bode well for the terms under which the UK will trade with the EU in future.

[sean1982]

Says who? are you suddenly an expert in a field where even the real experts don't have a clue on where to start? If anything, Europe has very big intrests in keeping the UK in the common aviation area because europe's biggest airport happens to be located in the UK and is not only a motor for UK but also a motor for the whole of europe.

(And just to remind everyone, a referendum has no legal basis for anything. Only after the UK government actually instigates article 50 and AFTER the negociations will the changes take place. Europe's leaders can jump up and down as long as they want, the UK needs to formally let them know first and they can take as long as they want for that. Johnson is saying he doesnt expect the UK to leave europe until 2020)

I don't say I'm an expert on international politics: I only said what I think about it - the aim of a forum. I hate the Brexit but I accept the vote.

Anyway, because you were probably too busy with moving to your new office at Heathrow, you have probably missed the official statement "a no is a no" from the European Union, exluding the possibility that the U.K. will remain in the European Union: "...As agreed, the New Settlement for the United Kingdom within the European Union, reached at the European Council on 18-19 February 2016, will now not take effect and ceases to exist. There will be no renegotiation..."

Source:
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press ... eferendum/

Full press release:

President Tusk, President Schulz and Prime Minister Rutte met this morning in Brussels upon the invitation of European Commission President Juncker. They discussed the outcome of the United Kingdom referendum and made the following joint statement:

"In a free and democratic process, the British people have expressed their wish to leave the European Union. We regret this decision but respect it.

This is an unprecedented situation but we are united in our response. We will stand strong and uphold the EU's core values of promoting peace and the well-being of its peoples. The Union of 27 Member States will continue. The Union is the framework of our common political future. We are bound together by history, geography and common interests and will develop our cooperation on this basis. Together we will address our common challenges to generate growth, increase prosperity and ensure a safe and secure environment for our citizens. The institutions will play their full role in this endeavour.

We now expect the United Kingdom government to give effect to this decision of the British people as soon as possible, however painful that process may be. Any delay would unnecessarily prolong uncertainty. We have rules to deal with this in an orderly way. Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union sets out the procedure to be followed if a Member State decides to leave the European Union. We stand ready to launch negotiations swiftly with the United Kingdom regarding the terms and conditions of its withdrawal from the European Union. Until this process of negotiations is over, the United Kingdom remains a member of the European Union, with all the rights and obligations that derive from this. According to the Treaties which the United Kingdom has ratified, EU law continues to apply to the full to and in the United Kingdom until it is no longer a Member.

As agreed, the “New Settlement for the United Kingdom within the European Union”, reached at the European Council on 18-19 February 2016, will now not take effect and ceases to exist. There will be no renegotiation.

As regards the United Kingdom, we hope to have it as a close partner of the European Union in the future. We expect the United Kingdom to formulate its proposals in this respect. Any agreement, which will be concluded with the United Kingdom as a third country, will have to reflect the interests of both sides and be balanced in terms of rights and obligations.”

But nothing has been decided yet?? Officiallly we don't even know yet if the uk will leave. They just asked the populatation:"what do you think?". They politicans will come together on monday and decide whether or not they will do what the people said and they will have to consider the petition that allready more than 2 milion Brits have signed for another referendum. Again, the uk can take as much time as they want for this. There is no law that gives them a timeframe on when they have to decide no matter what Tusk and his euro friends say. No sympathy for them btw, the way europe was led in the last 2/3 years is the sole reason for the eurosceptism that is sweeping the EU. Shamefull

I increasingly get the impression that while the UK is brutally awakening from a daydream and thinking 'what have we done?', many within the EU are somehow relieved to be able to finally show the Brits the door; that doesn't bode well for the terms under which the UK will trade with the EU in future.

Relief? We must have been reading and watching different newsfeeds then. All i can see is worry, on BOTH sides of the northsea

[Passenger]

If anything, Europe has very big intrests in keeping the UK in the common aviation area because europe's biggest airport happens to be located in the UK and is not only a motor for UK but also a motor for the whole of europe.

Contrary to what you say, LHR is not the motor of Europe. Actually, Europe doens’t even needs LHR. It is the British carriers that need Europe’s passengers. Europe has enough hubs: CDG, FRA, AMS, MAD, MUC, ROM, … What are the destinations that European travelers really need and that only LHR can offer us?

(And just to remind everyone, a referendum has no legal basis for anything. Only after the UK government actually instigates article 50 and AFTER the negociations will the changes take place. Europe's leaders can jump up and down as long as they want, the UK needs to formally let them know first and they can take as long as they want for that. Johnson is saying he doesnt expect the UK to leave europe until 2020)

All press articles I read about this, is that Article 50 is a formality now. Cameron has said he doens’t want to do it, hence he resigned. So once a new PM has been appointed, that one will have to call Art 50. The European leaders give the U.K. some time now to appoint a new PM. But if this takes too long, and/or if the new PM refuses to call Art 50, the European Union will start the Brexit via Art 7 (hostile action).

They politicans will come together on monday and decide whether or not they will do what the people said and they will have to consider the petition that allready more than 2 milion Brits have signed for another referendum.

Seriously, you take that online petition serious? There is no name check, no ID check, and everyone can fill in the form as many times as he/she wants. Even a 6-year old from Ushaia can “vote” for a new Brexit referendum. Fact: Vatican City officially has 800 UK citizens. So far, 30.000 UK citizens who have declared they live in Vatican City have signed the petition…

[sean1982]

(And just to remind everyone, a referendum has no legal basis for anything. Only after the UK government actually instigates article 50 and AFTER the negociations will the changes take place. Europe's leaders can jump up and down as long as they want, the UK needs to formally let them know first and they can take as long as they want for that. Johnson is saying he doesnt expect the UK to leave europe until 2020)

All press articles I read about this, is that Article 50 is a formality now. Cameron has said he doens’t want to do it, hence he resigned. So once a new PM has been appointed, that one will have to call Art 50. The European leaders give the U.K. some time now to appoint a new PM. But if this takes too long, and/or if the new PM refuses to call Art 50, the European Union will start the Brexit via Art 7 (hostile action).

Seriously? You think they will start a war just to get uk to brexit? The member who leaves dictates the timetable and no one else.

Nikos Skoutaris, lecturer in European Union law at the University of East Anglia said: “To trigger article 7, there must be a reason to do with the foundational values of the EU, democracy and the rule of the law on so on. It has never been used. There have been occasions when there have been threats to use it, in the 1990’s when there was a possibility of neo-Nazis being in an Austrian coalition.

the EU can only suspend a member if it deems it to be in breach of basic principles of freedom, democracy, equality and rule of law, which is not the case here

They politicans will come together on monday and decide whether or not they will do what the people said and they will have to consider the petition that allready more than 2 milion Brits have signed for another referendum.

Seriously, you take that online petition serious? There is no name check, no ID check, and everyone can fill in the form as many times as he/she wants. Even a 6-year old from Ushaia can “vote” for a new Brexit referendum. Fact: Vatican City officially has 800 UK citizens. So far, 30.000 UK citizens who have declared they live in Vatican City have signed the petition...

Whether i take that serieus is not the issue. The uk law says that as soon as 100.000 signatures have been reached, it needs to be debated. 6.000.000 signatures by now cannot be ignored.

Whats your real issue here btw? First you were against everything that had to do with FR. Now everything related to LHR, BA and the UK is bad too? Personal vendetta is the issue and nothing else. Sad person

[Comet]

Whether i take that serieus is not the issue. The uk law says that as soon as 100.000 signatures have been reached, it needs to be debated. 6.000.000 signatures by now cannot be ignored.

The rule on petitions on the UK government website is that when a petition has reached 100,000 signatures "it will be considered for debate in parliament". There is no guarantee that the issue will be debated but a debate has to be at least considered.

The petition calling for a second referendum has been investigated for fraud: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-e ... m-36634407

[sean1982]

Whether i take that serieus is not the issue. The uk law says that as soon as 100.000 signatures have been reached, it needs to be debated. 6.000.000 signatures by now cannot be ignored.

The rule on petitions on the UK government website is that when a petition has reached 100,000 signatures "it will be considered for debate in parliament". There is no guarantee that the issue will be debated but a debate has to be at least considered.

The petition calling for a second referendum has been investigated for fraud: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-e ... m-36634407

Just as it would be unwise to ignore the referendum, it would also be unwise to ignore a petition that 6.000.000 people signed. Its not because there might be signatures present from people outside the uk, that the majority is not from Brits. Contrary to the referendum, Brits living abroad can also sign this petition.

[Passenger]

I’ve posted already twice here that I’m against Brexit. But at the same time, I accept the decision from a democratic vote. Just like Mark Eyskens once did, when he had lost an election: “the voters are always right, also when they are wrong”.

It's useless what the British now say and it's useless if they will or will not apply Art. 50. The president of the European Commission, the president of the European Parliament and the president of the actual presidency of the Council have said that the Brexit has officially started when the results were officially announced. There is no way for the U.K. to undo that. The only discussion with the EU will be about the timing. Statements like "it's just a referendum, it's not a Parliament decision" are useless and worthless.

Regarding that petition "for a new referendum". Actually, it's another example of the poor populism from the Remain camp. The petition was created by a certain Oliver Healey. Not last Friday, but a month ago: on 27th May 2016 = in tempore non suspecto, when all polls expected a win for the Remain camp. Heayley wanted that the rules for the 23/06 referendum would be amended: “We the undersigned call upon HM Government to implement a rule that if the remain or leave vote is less than 60% based a turnout less than 75% there should be another referendum”.

Conclusion: all those who think that they sign a petition for a new referendum, only sign an old petition, asking for a minimal turnout and a decent difference for an event on 23/06. Thus outdated. On top of that, the old pro-Brexit supporters for that petition are now counted as "against Brexit".

People are referred to this page:
https://petition.parliament.uk/petition ... atures/new

They should have been referred to this page:
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

[Stij]

And let s stick to aviation please!!!!!

[LJ]

But is Ryanair affected for their UK-EU traffic (7th freedom)? Apart from Irish destination flights

No, Ryanair only needs to set up a subsidiary in the UK should ECAA be gone (for its intra-UK flights). Any new treaty will be EU - UK.

Anyway, BA won't have any problem provided as it doesn't have any intra-EEA flights outside the UK. easyJet will probably move its HQ to an EEA country and easyJet PLC becomes a subsidiary of that new company. Then again, they can also remain in ECAA and then nothing changes. The only certainty is that each day there's uncertainty it will cost everyone money.

BTW the real impact could come should the UK restrict foreign ownership. However, that's unlikely to happen.

[CRJ 900]

Hi LJ,
What about BRU - BLL flights?
Rgds,
CRJ 900

[sn26567]

What about BRU - BLL flights?

They are operated by a Danish company, thus nothing should change IMHO.

[Ozzie1969]

What about BRU - BLL flights?

They are operated by a Danish company, thus nothing should change IMHO.

What airline is that?

[sean1982]

Sun air.

[Inquirer]

Are British Airways still offering this route then?
I thought they were off by a combination of Brussels Airlines' competing flights and the attacks of March?