The EU: In, out, shake it all about.... (14 Viewers)

[CCFCSteve]

Taken from the Twitter account @RussInCheshire

View attachment 17898

Kind of irrelevant if you can’t see where the EU boats are. We have quotas so can only catch limited quantities of fish in our waters.

There should be a deal to be done which agrees continued access for the EU boats in our waters and vice versa. Just not the status quo which is what the French, Dutch etc were pushing for

As said before, it’s a minor issue in relation to GDP but a point of principle on both sides

Ps we don’t have the size of fishing industry to catch all the fish now anyway so should be flexible. That being said, you also don’t agree to leave the status quo forever either

 

---

[Sick Boy]

Reports here are saying Johnson has made a concession about future alignment, that’s a surprise!

 

[CCFCSteve]

Reports here are saying Johnson has made a concession about future alignment, that’s a surprise!

People either want a compromise or not though Sick boy. Sounds like this is about future divergence which is understandable ie if our standards greatly diverge and this has a material affect on our companies competitiveness over EU companies in certain sectors some kind of tariffs can be applied.

If it is this, seems a sensible compromise as it’s allows Johnson to say we are sovereign (whatever that truly means) and it’s our choice to make whether we allow ourselves to diverge from certain EU regs in future (we’ve already agreed not to drop from current environmental and employee standards) but also stops the EU shitting themselves that we’re going to find a way to allow standards to drop and become some kind of ultra competitive nation on their doorsteps without recompense

won’t know if or until the final wording of an agreement is released though

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Kind of irrelevant if you can’t see where the EU boats are. We have quotas so can only catch limited quantities of fish in our waters.

There should be a deal to be done which agrees continued access for the EU boats in our waters and vice versa. Just not the status quo which is what the French, Dutch etc were pushing for

As said before, it’s a minor issue in relation to GDP but a point of principle on both sides

Ps we don’t have the size of fishing industry to catch all the fish now anyway so should be flexible. That being said, you also don’t agree to leave the status quo forever either

I agree it needs to include EU boats too.

There is the issue that much of the fish around our coast Brits don't like to eat much, preferring deep sea fish. So what we do catch we largely have to export anyway.

Also quoatas were introduced because of massive overfishing depleting the stock and thus the fishermen were slowly putting their own industry at stake by having less available to catch.

This is of course true of the EU boats too (but the issue predates the EU) and whatever quotas they had in our waters could not be taken on by our fishermen to replace those lost from being able to fish in others waters (which are far larger than ours). This still doesn't solve the issue of needing to export what we catch unless we see a massive campaign to get people to alter their preferences (which would likely be costly and largely ineffective).

We've seen quite a few no-fish zones established in recent years to enable stocks to recover, with a decent degree of success, and it remains to be seen if these will be retained. Given previous suggestions and indications i'd suggest they're more likely to be at risk than extended under UK govt rules.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

People either want a compromise or not though Sick boy. Sounds like this is about future divergence which is understandable ie if our standards greatly diverge and this has a material affect on our companies competitiveness over EU companies in certain sectors some kind of tariffs can be applied.

If it is this, seems a sensible compromise as it’s allows Johnson to say we are sovereign (whatever that truly means) and it’s our choice to make whether we allow ourselves to diverge from certain EU regs in future (we’ve already agreed not to drop from current environmental and employee standards) but also stops the EU shitting themselves that we’re going to find a way to allow standards to drop and become some kind of ultra competitive nation on their doorsteps without recompense

won’t know if or until the final wording of an agreement is released though

We may have agreed to not drop from current environmental and employee standards but do you honestly take them at their word on that? I don't believe you're that naive.

Many of those in power have been looking to reduce the influence of the unions, done little on things like zero hours contracts, temp worker rights and employee/subcontractor status.

When given the opportunity to enshrine in law food standards so as not to allow lower standards as feared in a US trade deal they voted it down. Which seems like an odd choice when the bill is exactly what your pledging to do.

 

[skybluetony176]

Kind of irrelevant if you can’t see where the EU boats are. We have quotas so can only catch limited quantities of fish in our waters.

There should be a deal to be done which agrees continued access for the EU boats in our waters and vice versa. Just not the status quo which is what the French, Dutch etc were pushing for

As said before, it’s a minor issue in relation to GDP but a point of principle on both sides

Ps we don’t have the size of fishing industry to catch all the fish now anyway so should be flexible. That being said, you also don’t agree to leave the status quo forever either

It is relevant because taking back control of our fishing waters from the EU also includes the EU taking back control of their fishing waters from us. The U.K. fleet is in danger of losing access to waters they currently (from the map) seem to be fishing more than our own waters. On top of that the fleet lose access to their biggest market. The EU. It’s not difficult to see how a hard Brexit could be a disaster for the British fishing industry.

 

[Astute]

I agree it needs to include EU boats too.

There is the issue that much of the fish around our coast Brits don't like to eat much, preferring deep sea fish. So what we do catch we largely have to export anyway.

Also quoatas were introduced because of massive overfishing depleting the stock and thus the fishermen were slowly putting their own industry at stake by having less available to catch.

This is of course true of the EU boats too (but the issue predates the EU) and whatever quotas they had in our waters could not be taken on by our fishermen to replace those lost from being able to fish in others waters (which are far larger than ours). This still doesn't solve the issue of needing to export what we catch unless we see a massive campaign to get people to alter their preferences (which would likely be costly and largely ineffective).

We've seen quite a few no-fish zones established in recent years to enable stocks to recover, with a decent degree of success, and it remains to be seen if these will be retained. Given previous suggestions and indications i'd suggest they're more likely to be at risk than extended under UK govt rules.

We purchase most of our fish off the boats allowed to fish in what will be UK water. We catch what they prefer elsewhere. These quotas are decided by the EU and not those that fish for a living. Just like we can fish in French water when they are not allowed to fish. It causes animosity.

 

[Astute]

It is relevant because taking back control of our fishing waters from the EU also includes the EU taking back control of their fishing waters from us. The U.K. fleet is in danger of losing access to waters they currently (from the map) seem to be fishing more than our own waters. On top of that the fleet lose access to their biggest market. The EU. It’s not difficult to see how a hard Brexit could be a disaster for the British fishing industry.

And back to the truth.

We can only fish where allowed by the EU.

 

[skybluetony176]

And back to the truth.

We can only fish where allowed by the EU.

Which is EU waters. Which is where I said.

 

[Astute]

Which is EU waters. Which is where I said.

We have to fish where they say. The best fishing is in UK water. That is why they want to keep it.

Or are you saying everyone is fighting for water not as good as what they would have left?

 

[CCFCSteve]

It is relevant because taking back control of our fishing waters from the EU also includes the EU taking back control of their fishing waters from us. The U.K. fleet is in danger of losing access to waters they currently (from the map) seem to be fishing more than our own waters. On top of that the fleet lose access to their biggest market. The EU. It’s not difficult to see how a hard Brexit could be a disaster for the British fishing industry.

My point was it’s kind of irrelevant without the bigger picture ie there might be less ‘UK’ boats in our waters as we might’ve hit our quotas. It’s just half of the info/story

Agree about no deal. Always said a sensible deal is best all round and hopefully we’re edging In the right direction

 

[Ian1779]

We have to fish where they say. The best fishing is in UK water. That is why they want to keep it.

Or are you saying everyone is fighting for water not as good as what they would have left?

Am I missing something here? Surely the best fishing water is where the fish are?

Or is Boris planning on building a fish wall around the UK border and making the EU pay for it?

 

[CCFCSteve]

We may have agreed to not drop from current environmental and employee standards but do you honestly take them at their word on that? I don't believe you're that naive.

Many of those in power have been looking to reduce the influence of the unions, done little on things like zero hours contracts, temp worker rights and employee/subcontractor status.

When given the opportunity to enshrine in law food standards so as not to allow lower standards as feared in a US trade deal they voted it down. Which seems like an odd choice when the bill is exactly what your pledging to do.

Its why the suggested compromise feels about right (if correct). I think the non regression clause is likely to mean what youre suggesting would be very tricky though SBD. Difficult to say without seeing final text

 

[skybluetony176]

We have to fish where they say. The best fishing is in UK water. That is why they want to keep it.

Or are you saying everyone is fighting for water not as good as what they would have left?

We can fish anywhere in EU waters as members. If you care to pay attention to the map linked you can clearly see U.K. boats on Irish, French, Belgium, Dutch, Danish, Spanish and Portuguese waters. There’s even a few in the med of the south coast of France and northern coast of Spain. The majority of the U.K. fleet are fishing out of U.K. waters.

 

[skybluetony176]

We purchase most of our fish off the boats allowed to fish in what will be UK water. We catch what they prefer elsewhere. These quotas are decided by the EU and not those that fish for a living. Just like we can fish in French water when they are not allowed to fish. It causes animosity.

The quotas are following science to avoid overfishing. That isn’t going to change next year. The problem for British fishermen will be access to market in a no deal. We export something like 70% of what we catch in both ours and EU waters into the EU.

 

[Astute]

Am I missing something here? Surely the best fishing water is where the fish are?

Or is Boris planning on building a fish wall around the UK border and making the EU pay for it?

Of course you are missing something. The same thing several have been missing. The ability to understand the truth.

Or would you like to explain why all EU fishing communities want to fish in what would go back to UK water. Why is Macron making a massive thing of it?

But it doesn't matter. The truth isn't welcome on this thread most of the time.

 

[Astute]

The quotas are following science to avoid overfishing. That isn’t going to change next year. The problem for British fishermen will be access to market in a no deal. We export something like 70% of what we catch in both ours and EU waters into the EU.

So how much do we have to import that is caught in UK water? And try tonnage in both EU and UK water.

 

[Astute]

We can fish anywhere in EU waters as members. If you care to pay attention to the map linked you can clearly see U.K. boats on Irish, French, Belgium, Dutch, Danish, Spanish and Portuguese waters. There’s even a few in the med of the south coast of France and northern coast of Spain. The majority of the U.K. fleet are fishing out of U.K. waters.

Wrong. Just so wrong.

55% of the British quota is actually foreign owned. But it still counts as British as long as a certain amount caught is landed in the UK.

The quota is by fish. Another reason to fish elsewhere. Catch the wrong fish and you either throw it back or risk massive fines.

 

[Ian1779]

Of course you are missing something. The same thing several have been missing. The ability to understand the truth.

Or would you like to explain why all EU fishing communities want to fish in what would go back to UK water. Why is Macron making a massive thing of it?

But it doesn't matter. The truth isn't welcome on this thread most of the time.

Stop over analysing it - I don’t know the first thing about fishing rules or legislation - nor at any point have I claimed to.

My point is the fish will go where the fuck they like.

 

[Astute]

Stop over analysing it - I don’t know the first thing about fishing rules or legislation - nor at any point have I claimed to.

My point is the fish will go where the fuck they like.

So why don't they go elsewhere then?

You seem to know a lot on a subject you say you don't know a lot about.

 

[Ian1779]

So why don't they go elsewhere then?

You seem to know a lot on a subject you say you don't know a lot about.

Honestly - you’d pick a fight with your shadow if you could.

 

[Astute]

Honestly - you’d pick a fight with your shadow if you could.

Try again. You pick on honest and truthful posts making points you admit you know nothing about. Then you expect me not to reply.

 

[clint van damme]

Stop over analysing it - I don’t know the first thing about fishing rules or legislation - nor at any point have I claimed to.

My point is the fish will go where the fuck they like.

I know one thing about fishing. It employs 24k people and contributes 0.1% of GDP

If a favourable deal increases it input and it's workforce by ten is it really worth trashing far bigger sectors for?

 

[Ian1779]

Try again. You pick on honest and truthful posts making points you admit you know nothing about. Then you expect me not to reply.

I’m not picking on a post at all - just adding an observation. The politicians can argue about fishing waters and rights all day long - but they aren’t able to control the movement of fish are they??

 

[stupot07]

Sounds like Boris offered a concession.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

 

[clint van damme]

Sounds like Boris offered a concession.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

He's going to let Merkel stick an apple in his mouth and ride round on him like a domesticated pig?

 

[Astute]

I know one thing about fishing. It employs 24k people and contributes 0.1% of GDP

If a favourable deal increases it input and it's workforce by ten is it really worth trashing far bigger sectors for?

Brexit isn't worth trashing the economy for. But the majority thought otherwise.

 

[Astute]

I’m not picking on a post at all - just adding an observation. The politicians can argue about fishing waters and rights all day long - but they aren’t able to control the movement of fish are they??

Who said they could? You are the only one mentioning it.

 

[Ian1779]

Brexit isn't worth trashing the economy for. But the majority thought otherwise.

The majority realised that the economy didn’t work for them. Brexit was their opportunity to voice their protest - sadly those with legitimate concerns had their voice hijacked by disaster capitalists that saw it as an opportunity to screw them over even more.

 

[clint van damme]

Brexit isn't worth trashing the economy for. But the majority thought otherwise.

I'd agree with 5hat but given.it was voted for I'm really struggling to see the justification for the disproportionate focus on a small industry.

As Stupot said looks like there's been a concession.offered so fingers crossed we get a deal sorted.

 

[shmmeee]

Of course you are missing something. The same thing several have been missing. The ability to understand the truth.

Or would you like to explain why all EU fishing communities want to fish in what would go back to UK water. Why is Macron making a massive thing of it?

But it doesn't matter. The truth isn't welcome on this thread most of the time.

You’re missing the point. You’re obsessed with “what the EU wants”, this is a trade negotiation. They can want the moon on a stick if they like, what matters is what we want and what we’re willing to give up.

They can afford to lose access to British waters if they don’t trash their single market because on balance the single market is worth more. We can’t afford to trash out services industry for fish.

So once all the bluster is out the way the face will remain that we need access more than they need fish. Especially because if we can’t provide services to the EU then EU service providers will take our place. But we’ll still need to buy in the fish we eat because it doesn’t swim off our coast.

This in a nutshell is why Brexit is so harebrained economically. We’re going to get kicked around by every major trading partner. And to even survive will have to give up a lot more “sovereignty” than we supposedly gain by leaving.

 

[skybluetony176]

So how much do we have to import that is caught in UK water? And try tonnage in both EU and UK water.

We import more fish from Iceland than we do any individual EU country and almost as much we do from the EU in total.
How would you even go about deciding what was caught in British waters as opposed to other EU waters? Fish don’t have passports.

 

[skybluetony176]

Wrong. Just so wrong.

55% of the British quota is actually foreign owned. But it still counts as British as long as a certain amount caught is landed in the UK.

The quota is by fish. Another reason to fish elsewhere. Catch the wrong fish and you either throw it back or risk massive fines.

It’s still based on science to avoid overfishing. Cod (amongst other spices) almost went extinct so the science had to be followed regardless of who the quota belongs too. We’re basically following a model adopted from the Norwegians who’s costal fishing stock was thriving while all around was collapsing.

 

[skybluetony176]

Wrong. Just so wrong.

55% of the British quota is actually foreign owned. But it still counts as British as long as a certain amount caught is landed in the UK.

The quota is by fish. Another reason to fish elsewhere. Catch the wrong fish and you either throw it back or risk massive fines.

Oh, and the reason so much of the British quota is in foreign hands is because the U.K. sovereign government sold it to them. Another reason why fishing is such a brexit red herring.

 

[skybluetony176]

There is the other issue with Brexit and fishing. The U.K. is obliged by international law to negotiate access and conservation of It’s fishing stock with it’s neighbouring countries. So even a hard Brexit isn’t going to make this issue go away. Better to use it as leverage in a friendly trade negotiation than to be in a hard Brexit situation and having to negotiate access under duress of UN law for nothing else in return.

Fishing has to be the most overplayed hand by leave.