As many have pointed out, the idea that “no deal” is manageable because, er, we can negotiate a deal is kindly described as paradoxical. But it’s worth drilling down a bit.
Since @julianHjessop is an economist and not a lawyer, he can perhaps be forgiven for focusing on the “it’s in everyone’s interests” aspect and less on the legal/procedural/political issues that often stop results that are economically desirable.
As to the legal aspect, it’s worth a quick skim through the European Common Aviation Agreement. eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/…
It’s also worth looking at the agreement between the EU and Moldova. ec.europa.eu/transport/site…
A couple of headline points. First, as Julian accepts, signing up to these agreements means signing up to the entire EU aviation acquis - binding interpretation by the ECJ and all. Look at the long list of EU legislation at the back. Also EU competition and State aid rules.
Art 16.2 ECAA is a procedure for referring questions of law to the ECJ. And Commission decisions too will be binding.
Second point. These are mixed agreements entered into by the EU and its Member States acting together. That means that all of the EU27 as well as the EU must ratify: and in most cases that means getting approval through their parliaments (several parliaments in the case of 🇧🇪).
This takes time: and though provisional effect can be given, this still involves the EU sorting out its position and Member State governments all falling into line (remember Salvini and Poland, anyone?)
So even assuming (almost) everyone wants a deal, the risk of derailment is high: that’s the problem with EU procedures - Member States often reserve the right to be awkward (as we should know).
That’s why it is much better to sort out a holding arrangement for aviation (pending negotiating a final comprehensive trade agreement at more leisure) in the Withdrawal Agreement. No national veto there.
The problem of course is that @julianHjessop has to assume we can’t get one of those because of failure to agree money or the Irish border.
But if we can’t get the procedurally far easier WA solution to aviation on 30/3/19, it’s really hard to see how we’d get the procedurally trickier accession to the ECAA he proposes./end
PS a further question for @julianHjessop would be, given that he accepts what he agrees is an EEA solution for aviation, why that reasoning doesn’t extend beyond aviation to other areas of the economy (moving from other transport services to other highly integrated markets).
