AIBU or are we all going to be trapped in the UK from next March?

[Clarissalarissa]

So, Ryanair and Thomas Cook are inserting clauses in their booking terms to say that if your flight abroad doesn't go ahead because of Brexit that's your problem. No doubt others will follow. If any deal is ever done, to allow planes to fly, it is bound to be a lot more expensive than it is now.

Is everyone planning many years of UK-only holidaying?

@MRSsqueak

What panic? Ryanair, Thomas Cook, Inghams, Which, BALPA are all clearly stating the default position; No Agreement = No Flights.

People are starting to discuss if this is really can be the case, since apparently this was just 'Project Fear'. Now that reality is beginning to intrude (e.g. holidays being sold with Brexit-caveats) people are starting to realise that perhaps Brexit is not the great idea that it was cracked up to be.

Google 'less educated people voted Brexit' and multiple sources from multiple dates come to the same conclusion
you're pretty ill informed.
More people who are older voted leave than did younger people. older people are far less likely to have gone to university as it wasn't an option 30 years ago for everybody to do a degree in the Himalayan nose flute.
this doesn't mean that the older people are thick you ignoramus

Winnie - can you explain how foreign tourists will come to the EU if no planes are allowed to fly here

IF no planes are allowed (which obviously won't happen because that wouldn't be the wish of the people that would be eu politicians being petty and cause uproar in their countries, but you don't believe eu politicians to be petty, revenge seeking morons do you?) eu tourists will come by Eurotunnel and all the other countries will come here in exactly the same way as before.

Could you please tell me why you believe a country that's stood for thousands of years before the eu and who has the 6th largest economy in the world won't be able to manage itself? Can you explain how all the economies smaller than the 6th economy, who aren't in the eu, manage to run themselves without a bigger country telling them how to do it?

Could you please explain how, as net contributors, we will lose by withdrawing? Our money for eg, has transformed Poland. We've paid for airports, roads, youth sports facilities, sewerage systems, pre schools and schools. They received around £60bn between 2007 -
2013 and there's another £60bn set aside for Warsaw in the 2014-2020 budget. Their farmers receive many billions in agricultural subsidies. Their citizens claim child benefit here if one partner works here (there are Polish publications encouraging people to claim) and this money when transferred to Poland means that Polish parents receive far, far more than parents here. A quote from the BBC (who can't be accused of being in favour of leaving) says; "We examined the 2014 budget, to find out what the EU spends the money on.

That year, the EU spent €138.44bn (£106.13bn).

Of that, almost 80% went to two main areas:

agriculture and fisheries
development of poorer areas of the EU

Most of the rest (ie 20%!!!) was spent on three other areas:

improving the EU's growth through investing in research, innovation and education
the EU's foreign policy and international aid
the administrative costs of running the EU institutions.

Just from that alone we see that 20 BILLION went on administration by their own admission (meaning that the actual total is going to be much, much higher. We see that billions and billions went on developing other eu countries, while our own NHS, roads, airports, schools etc crumble because of chronic underfunding. And that doesn't take into account the cost of treating and schooling eu citizens.

The skilled worker argument doesn't apply because we had before and will continue to have afterwards, skilled migration. If fact, it's just allowed us to at best become lazy and not bother to train our own workers, or more sinisterly we've been deliberately made to rely on eu workers. There are nowhere near enough British people employed. Nope, it's not racist, I'm talking about British people or ANY race.

I realise all the above are simplistic figures and I'm also aware that they'll be minimised as much as possible by the eu, but I fail to see how you can think that EVERY country MUST benefit from eu membership. The money is finite and being spread more thinly must mean that someone, somewhere loses. We can't ALL gain!

Oh, also the agricultural policies keep poor African farmers firmly out as well.

whatever anyones opinion it wont change the result. so if people have changed their minds it isnt relevant. there are a awful lot of people that didnt vote at all and a few have had conversations with me over it. without revealing to them what i voted i have simply told them they are too late to have an opinion now

Quite frankly if they insist on punishing us it doesn't endear me to the EU at all. They could do a deal tomorrow but it suits their political aims to string it out.
Unless we are to be treated as North Korea we will probably be offered a similar Open Sky agreements that most non EU countries have. All flights from carriers registered in the country will have to start or end in the country. So no internal flights in the EU. If this affected any carrier they could register in the EU (I imagine Ryan Air is Irish and already an EU company).
Will we will let them do this to us and not reciprocate in any way? Like banning their airlines from transatlantic routes. Which is a massive hit. You see, it works both ways.
I love the way they accuse us of cherry picking then inform us intelligence and security cooperation remain unaffected. Funny that. Two areas the EU massively benefits from our contribution. Frankly I'd bring our Army back from Germany and tell them to deal with that nice Mr Putin by themselves. And GCHQ can start charging them.

But surely it can't be too late? It hasn't happened yet. If all the signs - the financial predictions, the data collected, the historical evidence are saying 'it's a bad idea' why is it impossible to reverse the decision? Acknowledge it as one made without the full facts which we now have?

because that is how it works. we vote and whatever the result we honour it. or what is the point in democracy?

That isn't how it works in a parliamentary democracy.

In a parliamentary democracy we vote for representatives whom we trust to research issues or be advised on issues to make a decision based on fact.

We don't live in the other kind of 'democracy' - the one where people who have no knowledge of the actual facts get to make decisions that change future generations' lives.

I know the ex Air base local to me has been an Army barracks since 1992, and yes, they relocated from Germany. This was once Germany reunited and we got round to signing a Peace treaty. Oh, and the war finished in 1945, so these things are not exactly speedy.

SnorkFavour - Good point. If you need an example of neo colonial policy it would be the EUs treatment of African countries with respect to agriculture, fishing and manufacturing (some might even call it racist). Essentially we will take raw material off them but we won't allow them to add any value to them (where the majority of the profit lies). I for one hope we can offer better trading terms to poorer countries when we leave.

In a parliamentary democracy we have elections at least every five years. We don't say "that's it, you live with this for a generation or two." The only times we have suspended regular elections has been during War time, and even during the last war, once VE day had been declared an election was arranged pretty smartish. This was before the fighting was over in Asia.

that is exactly my point we were given the vote to decide it so yes we clearly do live in the "other kind of democracy"

Actually there is a massive and continuing democratic deficit in the UK. First Past the Post is a distortion and means in many places if you don't support the safe incumbent party your vote counts for precisely zero.

And so we arrived at a point where most people voted for something other than a Cameron Tory administration, and that minority government decided to hold the referendum.

The whole thing was a bag of shite to begin with.

Frankchickens - agree whole heartedly. Part of our problem during our stint in the EU was the clash between our political cultures. Our adversarial, winner takes all system does not easily translate to coalition building politics of the EU.
It is a shame that punishing the LibDems became the priority when the question of electoral reform arose.
A veritable bag of shite indeed.

@Apollo440

Quite frankly if they insist on punishing us it doesn't endear me to the EU at all.

Remind me, did the EU choose to throw out the UK, or did the UK decide to leave the EU? Despite what Boris and Farage claimed, the EU have not been begging for a deal and are not going to roll over and give the UK everything that they demand. To do so would compromise the entire EU, so the other 27 countries will not allow it. Brexit won, so get over it - and get on with delivering the promises.

we will probably be offered a similar Open Sky agreements that most non EU countries have

Yes, a deal that is far worse than the current deal, which covers not just UK-EU flights, but also UK-Rest of World flights. For example, the offer on the table from the USA would mean no current UK airlines could fly UK-USA, granting a virtual monopoly to United Airlines.

Will we will let them do this to us and not reciprocate in any way? Like banning their airlines from transatlantic routes.

How would the UK ban EU transatlantic flights? Flights from northern Europe fly over Greenland. Southern routes don't fly much over UK airspace either.

Anyway, Open Skies is not a UK-EU agreement. It is an international agreement negotiated between numerous countries, with the UK being part of the EU bloc. It is not up to the EU to allow the UK to remain a party to Open Skies. In fact, it is the UK that has decided to withdraw from Open Skies - perhaps one of those unintended consequences of leaving the EU that Boris ignored and dismissed as 'Project Fear'

Frankly I'd bring our Army back from Germany

That has already happened. There are now very few British soldiers stationed in Germany, and since 2010 permanent deployment of British Forces in Germany has been moving towards a total withdrawal by 2019.

Apollo440 - Agreed, I voted in favour of (albeit flawed) form of PR in that referendum - I lost.

The EU are not being petty, it is US LEAVING that means we need to renegotiate.

Ffs.

AIBU or are we all going to be trapped in the UK from next March?
YANBU. Yes we are going to be trapped.

Havanananana - Of course we couldn't ban transatlantic flights originating from the EU. But why should they continue from Heathrow/Gatwick/Manchester/Birmingham if the EU chooses to terminate our carriers rights?

The EU are not being petty, it is US LEAVING that means we need to renegotiate.

Right here is a starting point. Let's continue the arrangements as they are.

The EU can continue international flights from the UK and UK carriers can continue flights within Europe.
No? Why not? Politics, revenge? Looks petty to me.

If so many arrangements are being (expensively) torn up and replaced with something that's, you know, the same ... wtf are we leaving? Pride??

I for one hope we can offer better trading terms to poorer countries when we leave

Me too Apollo, the eu's treatment of Africa has been nothing short of disgraceful :(

Also this;

Right here is a starting point. Let's continue the arrangements as they are.
The EU can continue international flights from the UK and UK carriers can continue flights within Europe.
No? Why not? Politics, revenge? Looks petty to me

Nail on the head. What possible reason would there be to change the current arrangements other than pettiness/revenge.

MRSsqueak this referendum only needs to be regarded as advisory.

@Apollo440

Of course we couldn't ban transatlantic flights originating from the EU. But why should they continue from Heathrow/Gatwick/Manchester/Birmingham if the EU chooses to terminate our carriers rights?

The EU is not choosing to terminate the UK's carriers rights. The UK has chosen to withdraw from the EU, which means amongst other things withdrawing from 750 international treaties, including Open Skies. Flights operating from the EU to USA via the UK will simply bypass the UK.

Lets continue arrangements as they are. The EU can continue international flights from the UK and UK carriers can continue flights within Europe. No? Why not? Politics, revenge? Looks petty to me

Because by voting to leave the EU, the UK has rejected this. Open Skies is not solely a EU-UK treaty, it is an international treaty. The UK currently has a pretty good deal, thanks largely to the bargaining power of the EU countries negotiating as one bloc. Allowing the UK to continue within the Open Skies Agreement is not a decision that the EU can make - it requires the agreement of all of the international parties. USA already said no - and offered a singularly bad UK-US agreement that would prevent all current UK-owned airlines from flying UK-USA.