Kaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12781 posts, RR: 34
Reply 3, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 2553 times:
It's a useful concession, but I'm wondering if it's in response to the recently announced EU plan to penalise non-EU airlines which have received state funding. This is clearly directed at the US and its airlines and were the EU to press ahead, it would cause a pretty vicious battle.
The EU has, contrary to what the article has said, been successful in getting airlines to strike down their open skies deals with the US, in that the EU court has ruled these illegal, so they have to abandon them. The UK has a problem with Heathrow, the Irish are happily shooting themselves in the foot with the Shannon stopover, Greece has an Olympic battle ahead of it, but Spain can deal with it manana. However, the EU will hopefully focus attention on the first two - Ireland and Britain - which are said to have the biggest objection to the EU negotiating directly with the US.
Searpqx From Netherlands, joined Jun 2000, 4344 posts, RR: 10
Reply 4, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 2 hours ago) and read 2529 times:
If I remember the ruling correctly, the EU Court of Justice didn't say the agreements per se were illegal, just that parts of them (specifically the 'nationality' issue) were. Basically it left open the possibility that each country could modify the agreements to come into line with EU law. What the US has offered goes a long way towards making those agreements compliant, though not completely. And, AFAIK, no country has publicly agreed to or even suggested that they would be willing to cede negotiating power on this issue to the EU.
Like I said earlier, can't wait to hear how the individual countries respond.
"The two most common elements in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity"