Britain tells the EU: we shall not sell out our fishermen

[david555]

7 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

There is no need for the UK to sell their Fish to the EU as the UK currently imports more fish than the UK exports, 40 years ago you would find it diffcult to find a Fish and Chip shop in the UK selling mackerel, Now there are a large number of Fish and Chips shops in the UK selling Mackerel

If you believe that the EU holds all the cards Why is the EU wasting time and money  negotiating the EU could simply state here the deal we are offering Take it or leave it

…"the EU could simply state here the deal we are offering Take it or leave it"

 

I think that is not to far of anymore ...????

[vinny41]

1 hour ago, TheDark said:

Sometime a post is so good, it deserves a smiley like and a reply.

 

This one was a stinger missile filled with glitter. Well done! ????

And we all know that the French could never be accused of exploitation of another countries resources or could it

France still robbing its 'former' African colonies

https://www.pambazuka.org/governance/france-still-robbing-its-former-african-colonies

France/Afrique : 14 African Countries Forced by France to Pay Colonial Tax For the Benefits of Slavery and Colonization

https://blogs.mediapart.fr/jecmaus/blog/300114/franceafrique-14-african-countries-forced-france-pay-colonial-tax-benefits-slavery-and-colonization

[vinny41]

10 minutes ago, TheDark said:

EU wishes to guarantee the best possible outcome from Brexit So the English should wish the same. 

 

Englanders 2025 order of fish and chips, is going to be a surprise for many people.

 

While fish is a negotiating, tactics, it's hilarious people are still talking about fish and chips, while there are so many more important ideas to talk about.

I think there are many Europeans on this forum that wish to down play the Fishing negotiations just remember it was Macron that stated  Boris holds 'fishing card' 

[melvinmelvin]

18 minutes ago, TheDark said:

You don't have to share the view. Simply check the news of various different EU countries, which are actually sending manpower, yes, real and physical human beings with border control background to help Greece to deal with the situations. 

 

That is what is reported right now. 

 

This problem, which is not an invasion, is being dealt as we speak.

 

Naturally the righwin leaders are keen to put out words like 'invasion', but that is not the case. Yes, there has been some people trying to enter the EU. Yes, they have been forced to go back.

 

EU being understanding and wishing to help those who suffer, does not mean it would allow it's borders to be wide open. It's now better shown during this outbreak attempt forced by Turkey.

I know all this very well, for sure.

But still, the assistance can be measured in farthings, it doesn't solve the problem

the help is geared at keeping Kudam clean.

 

Of course this is no invasion, but the challenge is sizeable and it grows and grows and grows

and there is a limit to how long Greece and Italy will be bothered to keep Oxford street and Kudam clean.

 

Sure Eurpope could close its borders and say "no tables free", that will keep the main streets clean but not solve anything

 

 

 

[TheDark]

14 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

I think there are many Europeans on this forum that wish to down play the Fishing negotiations just remember it was Macron that stated  Boris holds 'fishing card' 

It's true. Absolutely no Europeans wish to downplay fishing markets negotiation stance as it's only meant for English consumption for the moment.

 

Make a huge fuzz of something unimportant and make the people think it's something what people would consider important. 

 

Fishing is not an important industry. It has not been one for decades. 

 

As fishing is simply a distraction by the current Tory government, it's also a clear indication, we are going to end up with no-deal situation. 

 

The purest Brexit possible. Just like the financial sector millionaires always wanted.

[vinny41]

16 minutes ago, TheDark said:

It's true. Absolutely no Europeans wish to downplay fishing markets negotiation stance as it's only meant for English consumption for the moment.

 

Make a huge fuzz of something unimportant and make the people think it's something what people would consider important. 

 

Fishing is not an important industry. It has not been one for decades. 

 

As fishing is simply a distraction by the current Tory government, it's also a clear indication, we are going to end up with no-deal situation. 

 

The purest Brexit possible. Just like the financial sector millionaires always wanted.

Strange if Fishing is not important to the EU why would the EU fishing countries ask Michel Barnier to make it his number 1 priority and to seek an agreement by July 1st 2020.

Overall, French fishing boats generate 30% of their revenue from catches in British maritime territories, particularly rich in fish stocks.

And he has hinted today there is some movement from the original demand by the EU countries for Status Quo access to remain

The EU’s chief negotiator hinted that Brussels could be prepared to shift from its stance that European boats will have continued access to UK waters under the same conditions as now.

[nauseus]

2 hours ago, Logosone said:

The general concept that membership in the common market would involve certain legal obligations would have been clear to any informed observer in the 1970s.

 

As for explaining the full legal effect of the primacy of EU law on UK law to every member of the British electorate that's quite the most stupid notion I've read all day. It would hardly have been possible. Not just because the majority of the British electorate would not have understood it. Also because most lawyers had by that time not been able to gauge the full effect, it would take decades of case law for the full effect to be clear even to lawyers.

Ah! I see we are back to fickernus! You are shooting yourself in the foot again as you admit that the primacy issue was not fully explained. Additionally case law has nothing to do with the immediate submission to treaty law, which the UK was subject to once Heath had signed us up to The Treaty of Rome. So stupid back with knobs on.

[TheDark]

6 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

Strange if Fishing is not important to the EU why would the EU fishing countries ask Michel Barnier to make it his number 1 priority and to seek an agreement by July 1st 2020.

Overall, French fishing boats generate 30% of their revenue from catches in British maritime territories, particularly rich in fish stocks.

And he has hinted today there is some movement from the original demand by the EU countries for Status Quo access to remain

The EU’s chief negotiator hinted that Brussels could be prepared to shift from its stance that European boats will have continued access to UK waters under the same conditions as now.

Fishing industry accounts about 42% of England's economy. In fact, by the 1542 treaty of Tripoli, England's international debt is calculated by tonnes of mackarel.

 

Making one's own reality and presenting those as facts is actually quite fun.

 

[nauseus]

3 hours ago, TheDark said:

Quite the opposite. When EU was surprised it's pants down in 2015, EU countries learned their lessons. What happened then can be never allowed to happen again.

 

That's why EU strike a deal with Turkey. Giving Turkey money to host the immigrants in Turkey's soil. Giving physical money to the refugees, so that the refugees in Turkey can have a decent life and decide by themselves what they need - instead of handing them food items and toilet paper, which they might not have needed.

 

EU also made sure that the Turkey hosted refugee kids were able to go to schools and get education. 

 

EU naturally did not have to do all those things, but it did, because it's a right thing to do and it's also a wise thing to do, to stop mass immigration to the EU.

 

Now when Turkey has used the immigrants for Turkey's game to gain support for Turkey killing Syrians, Greece, supported by EU, has said no to the flow of immigrants. 

 

This time EU's pants were on already. This was one of the EU's way to say to Turkey, stop playing with us. The others are on more on political and financial sides.

 

 

Basically meaning that Merkel has had enough and decided to keep quiet this time.

[nauseus]

3 hours ago, Logosone said:

 

Well, yes, and it will always be a lesson to proper European countries never to trust the effectively criminal cartels of Greek fraudsters. Mistakes were made for sure, the lax enlargement mania of politicians at the time was absolutely political and unnecessary. What did we gain by accepting countries like Greece, led by lying fraudsters and criminals? Only problems. It is an absolute scandal that German taxpayer monies are used to this day to subsidise Greek extravagance.

 

So yes, mistakes were made, but to equate the very necessary flexibilisation of self-imposed debt boundaries by Germany on account of the extraordinary and massive cost of sanitising East Germany from communist mismanagement, in short achieving the glorious goal of German re-unification, to this day a shining example to the world, to equate this with the Greek shape-shifter economic fraudsters is frankly defamation of the highest order.

 

 

 This time I only got this far: proper European countries ????

[nauseus]

2 hours ago, Logosone said:

I can just imagine the scene. The British and French negotiators sit in a room. The British say clearly they will not accept other countries fishing in the British fishing zone.

 

The French, indignantly reply 'So you, the nation that has for centuries exploited dozens of country's natural resources for its own gain, will not share even 35% of your miserable haddock with us, your allies? Why don't you tell your fishermen to sell zeir fish to the New Zealanders, ey? NEXT LET US TALK ABOUT ZE FINANCIAL SERVICES!"

Did you know how much influence the French still have in Africa? Thought not.

[nauseus]

2 hours ago, TheDark said:

Sometime a post is so good, it deserves a smiley like and a reply.

 

This one was a stinger missile filled with glitter. Well done! ????

Not filled with glitter but another substance.

[vinny41]

10 minutes ago, TheDark said:

Fishing industry accounts about 42% of England's economy. In fact, by the 1542 treaty of Tripoli, England's international debt is calculated by tonnes of mackarel.

 

Making one's own reality and presenting those as facts is actually quite fun.

 

Everything that I have posted can be backup and supported by links to media outlets can you do the same I don't think so

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, TheDark said:

You don't have to share the view. Simply check the news of various different EU countries, which are actually sending manpower, yes, real and physical human beings with border control background to help Greece to deal with the situations. 

 

That is what is reported right now. 

 

This problem, which is not an invasion, is being dealt as we speak.

 

Naturally the righwin leaders are keen to put out words like 'invasion', but that is not the case. Yes, there has been some people trying to enter the EU. Yes, they have been forced to go back.

 

EU being understanding and wishing to help those who suffer, does not mean it would allow it's borders to be wide open. It's now better shown during this outbreak attempt forced by Turkey.

Otherwise known as panic.

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, TheDark said:

EU wishes to guarantee the best possible outcome from Brexit So the English should wish the same. 

 

Englanders 2025 order of fish and chips, is going to be a surprise for many people.

 

While fish is a negotiating, tactics, it's hilarious people are still talking about fish and chips, while there are so many more important ideas to talk about.

And the winner is?

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, vinny41 said:

I think there are many Europeans on this forum that wish to down play the Fishing negotiations just remember it was Macron that stated  Boris holds 'fishing card' 

Yep, the jack of sprats:

 

Jack Sprat could eat no fat,
His wife could eat no lean;
And so betwixt them both,
They lick'd the platter clean.

[nauseus]

19 minutes ago, TheDark said:

Fishing industry accounts about 42% of England's economy. In fact, by the 1542 treaty of Tripoli, England's international debt is calculated by tonnes of mackarel.

 

Making one's own reality and presenting those as facts is actually quite fun.

 

This has to be one of the best examples of blurb I have ever seen on here. 

[luckyluke]

There still a desire to come to an agreement between the E.U. and the U.K. or both parties won't even have started negotiations.

 

The E.U. could have said to the U. K. : "Good riddance".

 

The U. K. could have said to the E.U. : "Only our way now".

 

But they both didn't, and they are sitting together now. 

 

Of course there is "Muscle Showing" from both, but this is part of the game. 

 

So wait & see;

it is my opinion they will come to an agreement and both parties will claim they won. 

 

For the new European budget (Thus without the important  contribution of the U.K.) all countries, except 4, seems  to be agree to pay now 1,074% of their GNI. 

 

Austria, Denmark, Holland, Sweden only wish to pay a maximum of 1 %. 

 

Here also I expect shortly a consensus. 

 

I think so, because I am rather realist;

not terrific optimist, neither abysmal pessimistic. 

 

Edited March 5, 2020 by luckyluke

[CG1 Blue]

4 hours ago, Logosone said:

Thank you for addressing this point.

 

The manner of 'how it came about' is rather the key issue here. It was not the EU invading and imposing its law. The British elected representatives of the House of Commons elected to grant EU law primacy in some areas and ratified this in law. Again, last I checked the members of the HoC were elected by the British.

 

Membership of the EU obviously impacted the legislation of the UK but this was at the request, ratification and grant of the British themselves. Therefore, ultimate sovereignty was still derived by the British people. Surely this is obvious?

 

Indeed you are taking that back, and the EU has never once tried to stop that process. The very fact that Britain is ABLE to take that back rather illustrates that sovereignty was never truly impacted, as soon as the HoC decided that it would no longer cede primacy to EU law it was able to do so. Thus sovereignty was at no point compromised.

 

As for the Poles and Romanians it is a matter of actual control. Here the UK government, as always, has capitulated and said 'Poles and Romanians', like all EU nationals, simply come in without a visa. No control. No control of immigration. Poles and Romanians will just come in and overstay. This is obvious.

 

 

As you have already admitted, the British people were sold a lie in the 70s. I'd say it wasn't until the mid 90s / early 2000s when the impact of the Maastricht & Lisbon treaties started to be noticed by the wider public, since the Europhiles Major and Blair had tried to keep it all under the radar. Thanks largely to UKIP (love em or hate em), the UK public were finally given a chance to have their say, and took it. 

 

I don't have a problem agreeing that the UK Parliament allowed things to get as far as they did. I don't dispute that. You won't admit that by leaving the EU the UK has taken back some of the sovereignty that had been eroded. This is something that is blatantly obvious. But you prefer to use a convoluted argument rather than admit it. That's fine, if it makes you feel victorious, fill yer boots ????

 

As to your claim that the UK government does not now have control over UK immigration policy - I just don't know where to go with this. As the philosopher Gilbert Ryle pointed out, "the eristic preoccupation with victory displaces any commitment to truth." 

 

By the way, can you show me this stuff about Romanians and Poles retaining freedom of movement please? I genuinely can't find it anywhere. 

 

 

 

[luckyluke]

I was rather confused by the term : Sovereign.

 

So I googled "sovereign nations". 

 

I found :

 

-World population review / Sovereign nation 2020-

 

There is a list,

Belgium is listed, so is the United Kingdom. 

 

Belgium is part of the E.U., the U.K. no more,

but both are considered as sovereign.

 

I read here from some British that they are proud to be part of the U. K., a sovereign country. 

 

I suppose that I can also state that I am, as Belgian citizen, proud to be part of the sovereign country Belgium. 

 

 

 

[sandyf]

13 hours ago, CG1 Blue said:

Ah, so you get pleasure out of hoping that others are going to suffer?

Brexit was all about making others suffer, sadly, like much of what happens in the UK it got screwed up and hit the wrong target.

[Logosone]

8 hours ago, vinny41 said:

There is no need for the UK to sell their Fish to the EU as the UK currently imports more fish than the UK exports, 40 years ago you would find it diffcult to find a Fish and Chip shop in the UK selling mackerel, Now there are a large number of Fish and Chips shops in the UK selling Mackerel

If you believe that the EU holds all the cards Why is the EU wasting time and money  negotiating the EU could simply state here the deal we are offering Take it or leave it

Lol, telll that to the British fish industry that sells every 2 out of 3 fish to the EU. Because the British don't buy what the British fishermen catch.

 

That is why the British fish industry has been  pushing the UK government to firmly ensure they have free access to EU markets then, because the UK has no need to sell its fish to the EU?

 

Is that why 66% of all British fish is sold to the EU currently, because the UK has no need to sell their fish to the EU?

 

You have to marvel at the nonsense Brexiteers come up with, they really live in fatansyland.

 

Here a British fishing experts explains with British fishermen desperately need the EU:

 

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2020/03/04/britains-fishing-industry-has-been-promised-a-lot-expect-cries-of-betrayal/

[sandyf]

10 hours ago, nauseus said:

We weren't even given a referendum in 1972 and the good reason for that is that if Heath had been honest and open, the British voters would have rejected membership, and he knew that! 

Selective memory. With a state of emergency having been declared twice in 1972 Joe Public was desperate to move in a different direction, the government decision was ratified in 1975 by a much greater margin than brexit.

[sandyf]

13 hours ago, melvinmelvin said:

(in general, international law is as soft as sponge or tit or mashmellow or whipped cream - your choice 

Are you trying to say the Kosovo case was not fought and won on the basis of international law.

The UK has always claimed it abides by international law so little to back up the claim that UK law would prevail.

When push comes to shove the UK will follow the Law of the Sea.

[Logosone]

5 hours ago, CG1 Blue said:

As you have already admitted, the British people were sold a lie in the 70s. I'd say it wasn't until the mid 90s / early 2000s when the impact of the Maastricht & Lisbon treaties started to be noticed by the wider public, since the Europhiles Major and Blair had tried to keep it all under the radar. Thanks largely to UKIP (love em or hate em), the UK public were finally given a chance to have their say, and took it. 

 

I don't have a problem agreeing that the UK Parliament allowed things to get as far as they did. I don't dispute that. You won't admit that by leaving the EU the UK has taken back some of the sovereignty that had been eroded. This is something that is blatantly obvious. But you prefer to use a convoluted argument rather than admit it. That's fine, if it makes you feel victorious, fill yer boots ????

 

As to your claim that the UK government does not now have control over UK immigration policy - I just don't know where to go with this. As the philosopher Gilbert Ryle pointed out, "the eristic preoccupation with victory displaces any commitment to truth." 

 

By the way, can you show me this stuff about Romanians and Poles retaining freedom of movement please? I genuinely can't find it anywhere. 

 

 

 

 

That is obviously a bit strong and a misrepresentation. The British people were not 'sold a lie' in the 70s. At that time it started to become clear that UK industry was in serious decline and there were justified fears that British industry would not be able to compete with European competition. Unless, that is, they also benefited from the massive benefits of a common market, like France, Germany et al. The British wanted to join the common market because they rightly thought it was in their economic interest. And the UK has certainly benefited massively, in economic terms, from membership in the common market. As the great decline in the UK economy now, following the exit, shows and will show to an even greater extent when the full consequences of Brexit become clear, particularly in financial services, the real engine of the UK economy.

 

It was also clear to an informed observer in the 70s that membership of the common market would come with legal obligations. What is true....is that the full legal implications were not apparent at the time. Not to anyone. Including UK lawyers, because it took many years of case law for the full primacy of EU law to even be established and fully understood. So there was no question of informing the British of these details, simply because they were not known at the time.

 

By leaving the EU the UK has eliminated the full primacy of EU law in some areas, this is of course the case. But the very fact it was able to do that shows that the UK never lost sovereignty. 

 

As for immigration the UK government has no real control over immigration at this point. It's in the new immigration rules. If you read them you will find that EU nationals have the right to enter the UK at will, without any Visa. And to stay for up to 6 months. If you think Poles and Romanians who wish to live in the UK will voluntarily leave after 6 months because they are so law abiding I think you're wrong. What control does the UK government really have, if Poles and Romanians can come in at will, without visa? 

[vinny41]

20 minutes ago, Logosone said:

Lol, telll that to the British fish industry that sells every 2 out of 3 fish to the EU. Because the British don't buy what the British fishermen catch.

 

That is why the British fish industry has been  pushing the UK government to firmly ensure they have free access to EU markets then, because the UK has no need to sell its fish to the EU?

 

Is that why 66% of all British fish is sold to the EU currently, because the UK has no need to sell their fish to the EU?

 

You have to marvel at the nonsense Brexiteers come up with, they really live in fatansyland.

 

Here a British fishing experts explains with British fishermen desperately need the EU:

 

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2020/03/04/britains-fishing-industry-has-been-promised-a-lot-expect-cries-of-betrayal/

Your fishing expert

Aaron Hatcher is a Senior Lecturer in Economics at the University of Portsmouth. His research interests focus on the sustainable management of natural resources, in particular capture fisheries

Michel Barnier provided update yesterday

And he has hinted today there is some movement from the original demand by the EU countries for Status Quo access to remain

The EU’s chief negotiator hinted that Brussels could be prepared to shift from its stance that European boats will have continued access to UK waters under the same conditions as now.

[Logosone]

4 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

Your fishing expert

Aaron Hatcher is a Senior Lecturer in Economics at the University of Portsmouth. His research interests focus on the sustainable management of natural resources, in particular capture fisheries

Michel Barnier provided update yesterday

And he has hinted today there is some movement from the original demand by the EU countries for Status Quo access to remain

The EU’s chief negotiator hinted that Brussels could be prepared to shift from its stance that European boats will have continued access to UK waters under the same conditions as now.

Lol, oh quelle surprise, the EU will generously compromise and shift on the (wholly unimportant) fish issue if the EU gets something important in return.

 

Welcome to negotiation 101.

[vinny41]

3 minutes ago, Logosone said:

Lol, oh quelle surprise, the EU will generously compromise and shift on the (wholly unimportant) fish issue if the EU gets something important in return.

 

Welcome to negotiation 101.

Michel Barnier seems to think its an important issue as he would like it settled by July 1st 2020

[Rookiescot]

11 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

Your fishing expert

Aaron Hatcher is a Senior Lecturer in Economics at the University of Portsmouth. His research interests focus on the sustainable management of natural resources, in particular capture fisheries

Michel Barnier provided update yesterday

And he has hinted today there is some movement from the original demand by the EU countries for Status Quo access to remain

The EU’s chief negotiator hinted that Brussels could be prepared to shift from its stance that European boats will have continued access to UK waters under the same conditions as now.

But Barnier is an unelected EU bureaucrat and they cant be trusted. Brexiteers have assured us on many occasions we should not listen to them.

[vinny41]

1 minute ago, Rookiescot said:

But Barnier is an unelected EU bureaucrat and they cant be trusted. Brexiteers have assured us on many occasions we should not listen to them.

Well if that's the case we will move to WTO terms and no deal problem solved