Ryanair’s Micheal O’Leary, as reported in today’s Mirror:
Ryanair chief threatens to ground cheap flights to persuade voters to ‘rethink’ Brexit
CEO Michael O’Leary says he wants to make people realise they are “no longer going to have cheap holidays”
Ryanair is threatening to ground its planes to persuade voters to “rethink” Brexit .
Michael O’Leary, the budget airline’s chief executive, said he wants to “create an opportunity” by making people realise they are “no longer going to have cheap holidays.”
He told an audience of airline leaders in Brussels: “I think it’s in our interests – not for a long period of time – that the aircraft are grounded.
“It’s only when you get to that stage where you’re going to persuade the average British voter that you were lied to in the entire Brexit debate.
“You were promised you could leave the EU and everything would stay the same. The reality is you can leave the EU, yes that’s your choice, but everything will fundamentally change.”
Mr O’Leary warned that there would be a “real crisis” as flights between the UK and the EU are disrupted after Brexit.
He said: “When you begin to realise that you’re no longer going to have cheap holidays in Portugal or Spain or Italy, you’ve got to drive to Scotland or get a ferry to Ireland as your only holiday options, maybe we’ll begin to rethink the whole Brexit debate.
“They were misled and I think we have to create an opportunity.”
Or EasyJet’s Johan Lundgren?
EasyJet chief executive Johan Lundgren, who was on stage alongside Mr O’Leary, interrupted him to say: “If you start grounding your planes, I’m flying.”
Yeah, “I’m taking my ball and going home” doesn’t even work for kids, who invented the tactic.
German airplanes being used to try and convince the Brits to change their mind? Why has nobody thought of this before? I can’t see any PR downsides for the remaniac cause whatsoever.
Should have added, “And with the increased business we’ll able to offer better discounts.”
OK, but any Ryanair flight entering UK airspace gets forced to land, is evacuated and used for hijack-storming practice by the boys from Hereford, or droned target practice for the Brylcreem boys (and girls). Seems a fair enough arrangement.
I would say that anyone flying Ryanair deserves all they get, the firm seems to almost have made a virtue of despising its customers over the years. Personally, I will never take a Ryanair flight, train and boat if needs be, no matter how far.
I can’t honestly say that I’ve noticed that Switzerland is some great void in European airspace, having passed over through on the way to/from Germany a few times, and pretty damn close on the way to Italy.
Priceless.
As things currently stand, almost all international flights from the UK to other countries will become illegal when Britain leaves the EU in a year’s time. This is not just flights to the EU, but to about the 40 most important non-EU destinations as well. (Treaties between the EU and the third country have voided previous bilateral treaties between Britain and the third countries when such treaties have been signed. This has actually generally been a good thing, given the extreme protectionism that Britain has previously shown in signing such treaties). For trade in physical goods, if a trade deal is not signed you just revert to WTO rules and trade continues. In the case of aviation treaties, there is no equivalent to the WTO, and there is therefore no legal framework whatsoever for flights to continue. Britain therefore has to negotiate about 40 treaties in the next year, where historically it has generally taken five years or so to negotiate one. If I was Michael O’Leary or any other airline executive, I would not be pleased by this.
Obviously, international flights from the UK are not actually going to cease in a year’s time. Some way will be found to muddle through this unholy mess. However, watching the waving of hands around and screaming (of which this is an early example) is going to be amusing.
Michael Jennings (March 6, 2018 at 10:32 pm), no-one will have the least difficulty – unless of course their politicians want to inflict it. London is a huge hub and, very obviously, anyone who refuses our flying to them will be equally unable to fly to us.
That was when a prior treaty existed and the negotiation was to change it. When, in our lifetimes, outside circumstances of great political hostility, has five years elapsed when Britain could not fly to a country of any significance – or they to us – because “sorry, we’re still working on the treaty”? A status quo ante interim treaty can be signed in a day, and then a renegotiated one, if desired, signed in five weeks unless there is positive political ill-will not to, and very easily in the year we have left.
Ryanair are based in Ireland. The UK lies between Ireland and most of Europe. Mr Ed (March 6, 2018 at 9:56 pm) suggests we could refuse them our airspace if they try this but does it even need any formally-additional action by us? If Ryanair treats the existing treaty as void, will that not of itself void their treaty rights to fly over UK airspace? That famous Ryanair trumpet will be sounding less often if all their flights divert and none can use Ryanair’s many UK airports.
🙂
Is O’Leary related to O’Bama? His plan seems remarkably similat to the way that the latter weaponised the US “government shutdown” to inflict distress on the American people.
While I’m asking, is Lundgren related to that top scientist, Dolph?
Will the last sane person to leave Once Great Britain please open the sea-cocks before they depart.
Never mind the lights; they have been going out for years already.
Is that just a random blurt? I have no idea what point you are trying to make.
“Is that just a random blurt? ”
Not entirely random, and it seems to not exclusively be related to Britain.
Surely you are not suggesting that everything is shipshape, sweetness and light over there. Here in the Antipodes, it sure as Hell isn’t.
How long can the remaining sane folks maintain their much-vaunted “stiff upper lip”, before they are either marched, whistling “Colonel Bogie”, to the camps, or utterly subjugated by a government-approved alien ideology?
Rolling up sleeves, hoisting the black flag, (not the one covered in squiggles), spitting on hands and slitting a few throats, a la H. L. Mencken, seems to be permanently off the menu.
There’s hope. Find the videos from King’s College yesterday, in which the antifa tried to shut down a discussion. Watching a few of those antifas getting waled upon by some of the rather annoyed audience members was heartening.
We need to start referring to Antifa as just Fa since that is clearly what they actually are.
Avtually, it reminds me rather of Obama’s threat that it would take ten years to work out a US/UK trade deal.
To be fair, given Obama’s level of competence and work habits, maybe ten years was fair estimate of the time it would take him. Rumour has it his replacement is more skilled at making deals.
Michael, “no legal framework whatsoever for flights to continue”.
What’s stopping people (pilots, mechanics, air traffic controllers) from just getting up the day after Brexit and doing what they did yesterday? What actually happens? I’m guessing it’s not fighter jets shooting down airliners. But something. Maybe people not getting paid or something like that.
I find them equally persuasive.
I’m backing Brexit whatever the two of them decide to do with their planes.
This bit is good:
“You were promised you could leave the EU and everything would stay the same…”
I don’t recall ever hearing that particular promise. In any case, why would I want everything to stay the same? Being really unhappy with the status quo is the reason that I voted out.
Maybe this will lead to a bump in US-UK tourism traffic? Plenty of us in the US love the UK and might “vote with our wallets” on the controversy. Plenty of places in Europe I want to visit as well, but I could put those off until things settle down and get more sensible. Of course I WON’T be using Ryanair unless they change leadership (wanna bet the rank and file at Ryanair disagree with “leadership”?).
“You were promised you could leave the EU and everything would stay the same…”
This is the stupidest talking point lie I ever heard.
And an accurate description of the “Brexit” your Masters are building.
Quite so staghounds – we do not want things to “stay the same”, we want an end to paying the E.U. money and an end to their regulations in our internal affaris.
As for Mr O’Leary – when a friend of mine used your airline his steel helmet was smashed. How did you even do that Mr O’Leary? It was battle grade helmet. And, of course, your company did not pay compensation for the damage you caused.
And the one time I tried to use your airline I was directed to a telephone number (because your company had got the bill wrong) – it was an 0800 style number, i.e. telephoning to complain would have cost me a fortune. Damn you Mr O’Leary, damn you Sir.
You deserve the competition that EasyJet has threatened you with – and I hope they wipe the floor with you. Competition is what capitalism is about – in order to keep political bullies like you in your place. You are trying to tell us that this country can not be independent – do you want to “discuss” that matter Mr O’Leary?
Niall Kilmartin: as I said at the end of the article, some way will indeed be found to muddle through. The danger is that the treaties that are in place are protectionist ones that favour state owned or politically well connected airlines rather than ones allowing more competition. Alas, there is a long history of this, and the British government’s record of protectionism is particularly bad. (Previous treaties prevented other British airlines from competing with BA on many routes, let alone allowing much foreign competition).
As it is, any European airline may fly from Britain to any of those 40 countries (subject to their ability to obtain slots at the airports they want to fly to). If new treaties return us to situations where only airlines from the two countries involved can fly particular routes – this is a step backwards. (There will be at least some cases where the country involved will insist on this). If Britain was to unilaterally push for a situation where any airline from anywhere was allowed to fly from Britain to anywhere, then I would be enthusiastic, but I am not expecting it.
Huh? Helps me understand? I have seen more-than-one video showing Michael O’Leary expressing obvious, extreme contempt for the EU and its regulators and bureaucrats. When did he change his tune/for what reason? Is it just that, despite his expressed contempt, that the EU open-borders policy is an absolutely-necessary part of his current business model?
Regardless, I like the approach of Mr Lundgren more – sure, circumstances may change, but we’ll adapt to that change – not moan about it because it upsets our current model. We’ll just make a new model. This is not exactly an uncommon thing in the air travel market, the last few years. Laker, Virgin, and yes, Ryanair, all threw out the current model and forged a new one – time to do it again, as Clemenza advised – we need these things every few years, cleans out all of the dead wood, clears up all of the bad blood.
llater,
llamas
What’s stopping people (pilots, mechanics, air traffic controllers) from just getting up the day after Brexit and doing what they did yesterday?
What’s the worst that could happen? The relevant international or multilateral organisations (the ICAO and the IATA) refusing to accept flight plans that did not have proper legal authorisation. This would prevent the aircraft from flying through airspace of other countries. (There actually is an example of this, which is flights to and from Northern Cyprus. Northern Cyprus is not recognised as an independent nation by anyone other than Turkey, and flights from Northern Cyprus can therefore only fly to Turkey and only fly through Turkish airspace).
Will this actually happen? Probably not, because some compromise will be reached before we get to that point. However, it’s not possible to do nothing and just assume everything will go on as usual.
When did he change his tune/for what reason?
Some time between the first Irish referendum on the EU constitution (which he opposed) and the second one (which he supported). One does wonder exactly how he was lobbied, yes.
Ryanair’s growth and success is a consequence of the European single market in aviation, yes. This is a good thing.
Here in mid-USA, I just checked flights to London and to Paris. They’re abundant, some are surprisingly cheap, and I suspect they all include all of the flight plan filings and required legal authorizations.
And the USA isn’t part of the EU!
So, once Brexit occurs, everyone quickly signs new agreements, and it’s all back to normal, and I suspect that it will be in each country’s own self-interest to quickly sign such agreements, unless they truly wish to stop the horrid influx of British business and tourism.
Look for maybe a three-week hiatus while arrogant jerks like O’Leary stall on making his own agreements to make a political point, but I bet you’re all back to easy flights that quickly.
I don’t recall any particular nonsense over flights and other rights when the USSR collapsed, quite the contrary, it opened up a huge area of the world to overflight. The only reason that this would be a problem would be either Mrs May and her gang or the EU acting in bad faith.
Which they will.
In the case of aviation treaties, there is no equivalent to the WTO
Open Skies ?
That is exactly what the Easyjet boss is eagerly hoping for – a three-week period in which he can steal considerable market share.
I suspect however that O’Leary (of Brexit) will posture for the EU politicians but attend to Ryanair’s commercial interests in action – and that the Easyjet boss will be very unsurprised if that’s what actually happens.
Michael Jennings:
Forgive my ignorance of EU aviation rules but, if the EU and the UK both remain ICAO members, how does that not ensure that flights continue? Does the EU have some bureaucracy that over-rules even ICAO? In Canada and the U.S. we have domestic aviation agencies whose rules take precedence over ICAO (FAA and TC), but no mere trade agreement would affect how they function with respect to an ICAO member country.
I know the international-flight situation was originally very weird in Europe. That’s how they ended up with national airlines: Each European country would only recognize one carrier from another country. But I assumed they had long since grown past that era.
It would probably be useful for everybody if somebody skilled in such things made a model interim treaty and a press release so the press could talk about it long before it becomes an actual crisis. A one-page document along the lines of the preceding agreement is adopted wholesale as a bilateral agreement.
The UK’s friends will be happy to sign on and then negotiate things going forward for improvements. The UK’s enemies will seek disruption.
It will be a great moment of clarity to see which is which, but only if somebody actually writes up the sample treaty text with a great big blank for the industry affected and actually proposes it as an agreement.
Then you can go around and ask all the remainers for their horror stories and propose the interim treaty as a solution for each of them. Ask them if they would support continuing the status quo for now. I’d be genuinely interested to know how many would not.
I am rather surprised that the UK’s government has not already gone and done this for the hundred plus nations it has relations with that are *not* in the EU. It’s positive press all around and minimizes unplanned disruption.