EU Encroachment

[nimbusgb]

Just in case any of the people here who support compulsory licensing or inspections through a centralised EU body still think it's a good idea I suggest you go and talk to a couple of glider pilots.

After 60 years or more of self regulation about 5 years ago gliding UK control was formally brought under the control of the Civil Aviation Authority ( CAA ). Being a government body it was only a short time before they became mired in EU control.

5 years later the only thing that EASA seems to have delivered is masses of bureaucracy, additional costs, paperwork and ever increasing limitations and encroachments on what used to be a pretty casual hobby. The only people who seem to think there is ever a problem with anything is of course the EU with a bunch of armchair pundits regulating things they simply don't understand.

In sailing circles we should take this as an example of just how badly getting the EU involved can screw up a perfectly well self regulating system and resist and react as quickly as possible to any suggestion that we go this way in any way, shape or form.

 

[mainsail1]

Well said!

 

[Baggywrinkle]

+1

If we don't want it, fight it. Regardless if it comes from Westminster or Brussels. There's been enough proposed interference by Westminster already without Brussels joining in too.

Unfortunately government bureaucrats don't go into work in the morning and say "I think we've got enough laws and regulations, let's leave it at that".

 

[Downsman]

Standby standby I detect the approach of Eurocuddlies...

 

[Baggywrinkle]

Standby standby I detect the approach of Eurocuddlies...

I'm not a Euro-cuddly on this. I certainly believe they should be put back in their box on a number of issues, but I'm still pro EU. Government of any persuasion is there to serve.

 

[wotayottie]

Not so sure how much this is to do with the EU as opposed to our civil service. Do you really think the same rules will be applied in the same way in Italy or Spain or Greece? Probably will in the fatherland or holland say but not elsewhere. So why cant our authorities be equally flexible? The answer is they dont want to be. Our civil service believe that everything should be controlled and are more likely to use the EU as a way of achieveing this than be forced into it by the EU.

In short you would get the same irreversible trend towards regulation whether in or out of the EU. Dogs bark, civil servants regulate.

 

[Zen Zero]

Not so sure how much this is to do with the EU as opposed to our civil service. Do you really think the same rules will be applied in the same way in Italy or Spain or Greece? Probably will in the fatherland or holland say but not elsewhere. So why cant our authorities be equally flexible? The answer is they dont want to be. Our civil service believe that everything should be controlled and are more likely to use the EU as a way of achieveing this than be forced into it by the EU.

In short you would get the same irreversible trend towards regulation whether in or out of the EU. Dogs bark, civil servants regulate.

I'm with Wotta on this one. I don't know much about gliding, but the CE mark on new boats is a good thing in my book - a boat built in one EU country is good in all of them and no member country can protect its home market with silly rules.

Sadly the EU gets blamed for a lot of silliness that is not its fault at all, but after years of hearing about directives for the size of eggs or shape of fruits, you can accuse the EU of any kind of absurdity and a lot of people will believe you without any proof being necessary.

 

[Seajet]

An example of what Wottayottie is saying is the heavy handed enforcement patrol boats operated by the UK against UK boats !

Nothing to do with Brussels, just that they gave an excuse for someones' little empire to spring up...

 

[maxi77]

I'm with Wotta on this one. I don't know much about gliding, but the CE mark on new boats is a good thing in my book - a boat built in one EU country is good in all of them and no member country can protect its home market with silly rules.

Sadly the EU gets blamed for a lot of silliness that is not its fault at all, but after years of hearing about directives for the size of eggs or shape of fruits, you can accuse the EU of any kind of absurdity and a lot of people will believe you without any proof being necessary.

+1

Having experienced trying to sell things when there was no single market, it was a nightmare, different countries would even specify different layout for the drawings to try and get approval, now you just get your home state approval and it is valid all through the EU. Equally small retailers can sell to any country in the EU without any bother from customs etc. This allows me for example to buy stuff from the UK and have it shipped to Portugal with minimum hassle, or buy the Bloc almanac fron France for much less that retailers in the UK charge.

There is of course the down side that it can only work if everyone works to the same rules

 

[Puffin_Billy]

I'm not sure there is too much to be scared about. Gliding is very different to sailing / motorboating. Where I am (Aus) there is a compulsory ticket for skippers and it isn't a big deal, but doesn't keep the d1ckh3ads off the water either. In my personal view, what it does do very markedly is set a low bar where people think they are now "safe" (because the Government says I am) and fail to take further training. This leads to the average (and I stress average) standards to be much lower than the UK.

 

[Grumpybear]

+1

Having experienced trying to sell things when there was no single market, it was a nightmare, different countries would even specify different layout for the drawings to try and get approval, now you just get your home state approval and it is valid all through the EU. Equally small retailers can sell to any country in the EU without any bother from customs etc. This allows me for example to buy stuff from the UK and have it shipped to Portugal with minimum hassle, or buy the Bloc almanac fron France for much less that retailers in the UK charge.

There is of course the down side that it can only work if everyone works to the same rules

True enough, but whose rules?

The demanding British Standard for furniture fire resistance was heavily watered down into an EU standard to suit the existing practices of the Italian furniture industry, the biggest in the EU and a major element of the Italian economy. I wonder how many people have been killed or injured as a result? And I'm sure that there are other examples, not least the price our fishermen have paid because of the terms demanded by Spain and Portugal to convince them to join the EU, presumably to feed the mania for growth, power and hence promotion that animates, like all such cultures, the bureaucracy in Brussels (not like a poor old GB, which had to surrender so much to be allowed in against the opposition of the French).

The RCD was written for the EC by representatives of the mainland European volume boatbuilders, and suits them very well. They can even self certify and self audit. This feeds into the interesting debate on the other thread about ballast ratios which has so delightfully reinvigorated the MAB vs AWB debate. The British boatbuilding industry was largely a victim of its own amateurishness (see dozens of threads over the years) but having to work to rules framed by and for their major competitors can't have helped.

 

[maxi77]

True enough, but whose rules?

The demanding British Standard for furniture fire resistance was heavily watered down into an EU standard to suit the existing practices of the Italian furniture industry, the biggest in the EU and a major element of the Italian economy. I wonder how many people have been killed or injured as a result? And I'm sure that there are other examples, not least the price our fishermen have paid because of the terms demanded by Spain and Portugal to convince them to join the EU, presumably to feed the mania for growth, power and hence promotion that animates, like all such cultures, the bureaucracy in Brussels (not like a poor old GB, which had to surrender so much to be allowed in against the opposition of the French).

The RCD was written for the EC by representatives of the mainland European volume boatbuilders, and suits them very well. They can even self certify and self audit. This feeds into the interesting debate on the other thread about ballast ratios which has so delightfully reinvigorated the MAB vs AWB debate. The British boatbuilding industry was largely a victim of its own amateurishness (see dozens of threads over the years) but having to work to rules framed by and for their major competitors can't have helped.

None of that detracts from the principle that one set of rules is always going to be better than many sets of rules. If our industries cannot survive under a single set of rules they would collapse sooner under multiple rules. The fisheries thing is a completely different argument and as such is a con in this argument to try and make trading rules look bad when the reality is they do simplify things for all.

 

[rhumlady]

I seem to remember folk on here saying that the RCD was mainly a product of the BMIF rather tan the European industry.

 

[DownWest]

So, we are back to a Common Market, rather than a Federal Europe? THAT I can agree with.

The French ignore the stuff that doesn't suit, while UK deparments relish the enforcement power it gives them.

 

[Grumpybear]

None of that detracts from the principle that one set of rules is always going to be better than many sets of rules. If our industries cannot survive under a single set of rules they would collapse sooner under multiple rules. The fisheries thing is a completely different argument and as such is a con in this argument to try and make trading rules look bad when the reality is they do simplify things for all.

Not sure that my post actually disagreed with your point! My point about fisheries was not intended to address trading rules anyway, so to describe it as a con is simply wrong. Methinks you were a little tetchy this evening.

 

[Grumpybear]

So, we are back to a Common Market, rather than a Federal Europe? THAT I can agree with.

The French ignore the stuff that doesn't suit, while UK deparments relish the enforcement power it gives them.

Too true. Our civil servants have always exploited the opportunity to gold plate EC directives where the French and others water them down or simply ignore them altogether (I understand that governments on the continent actually get pursued for breaches of EC directives rather more often than the British media actually notice. Whether that is simply incompetence or some conspiracy to make our government look unenthusiastic, I coundn't say). I have little sympathy for any bureaucrats, let alone Brussels ones, so it grieves me to admit that sometimes the latter may take flak from the British for rules which actually originated in Whitehall rather than from Brussels!

I sometimes wonder what the employees of government would have done had the Nazis taken over in London. Would they have rounded up the Jews, for example, as happened in so many occupied countries?

 

[Seajet]

You can bet your arse they wouldn't have rounded up the Freemasons, more's the pity !

 

[grumpy_o_g]

I'm not sure there is too much to be scared about. Gliding is very different to sailing / motorboating. Where I am (Aus) there is a compulsory ticket for skippers and it isn't a big deal, but doesn't keep the d1ckh3ads off the water either. In my personal view, what it does do very markedly is set a low bar where people think they are now "safe" (because the Government says I am) and fail to take further training. This leads to the average (and I stress average) standards to be much lower than the UK.

Gliding in the UK used to be near-identical to sailing in terms of governance and oversight. Anyone could buy a glider and fly it as long as they had third-party insurance and some method of launching. It was regulated by the BGA, who worked closely with the RAFGSA and the CAA. In practice everyone followed the BGA syllabus for training, if only because you couldn't get a launch anywhere except at an airfield with a BGS-affiliated club. There were very, very few accidents and the standard of instruction and supervision was generally very high indeed. A very high proportion of professional and ex-professional pilots, both military and civil contributed to a culture that was at least as robust as that of the CAA's.

Despite the fact that there was no problem to fix a massive amount of legislation and bureaucracy has been introduced which has made it quite simply harder to participate in the sport without increasing safety in the slightest.

 

[maxi77]

Not sure that my post actually disagreed with your point! My point about fisheries was not intended to address trading rules anyway, so to describe it as a con is simply wrong. Methinks you were a little tetchy this evening.

Then why was it rolled up with your other comments one can only comment on what one sees. The regrettable reality is that if you wish to create a 'common market' with no internal barriers to trade you need regulations and standards that apply to all otherwise it doesn't work. The choice for the UK is to be part of this regulation creation system, or to not take part in the creation of the regulations but still comply.

 

[WindyOut]

Love Europe, hate the behemoth the EU machine's turned itself into. Margaret Thatcher warned in Bruges that Britain has twice rescued Europe from falling under a single power. Now it's happening a third time - but to a monster of its own making. Just give us the single free market we all voted for.