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

[nauseus]

3 hours ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

it is not without reason that fisheries in general is not part of the EEA treaty,

doesn't matter much to Liechtenstein

but very important to Iceland and Norway

 

And why Norway did not join the EEC/EU.

[elliss]

On 3/3/2020 at 12:30 AM, TheDark said:

Are you loving the huge sums of money, like less than one euro per month for each EU citizen?

 

How much was that Starbucks coffee again?

 

 

 

      Starbucks coffee is for immigrants , too expensive for your average brit ..

 

[TheDark]

25 minutes ago, Logosone said:

Given the massive economic decline and problems the UK is facing now the fisheries issues is, dare I say it, a red herring...

I think the Sole purpose is to distract people to to see the bottom line.

[melvinmelvin]

6 minutes ago, nauseus said:

And why Norway did not join the EEC/EU.

actually no, a host of other reasons for that

and twice the decision -don't join- was taken not by Norway but others

[TheDark]

10 minutes ago, nauseus said:

And why Norway did not join the EEC/EU.

While I was watching this talk, please enjoy and educate yourself. 

 

This goes rather deep in to the reasonings and political atmosphere in Norway, during the time when Norway might have joined the EU alongside with it's Nordic brothers.

 

Also why Norway and other EFTA countries joined to Schengen area. 

 

If you listen carefully, you can also hear the reasoning, why UK is not going to be part of EFTA. 

 

Have a good 1.5 hours of listening to educate yourself, in case you are interested to educate yourself, that is. 

 

My guess is not.

 

 

[rickudon]

8 hours ago, Thongkorn said:

You dont know a lot about fishing realy or fish, Herring is a good source of protein mainly kippers, same goes for mackerel, There are/was plenty of fish in the North Sea Due to britain's conservation before the EU took control, Now Danish Belgique, and all the rest, Come with there beam trawlers Electric stunning nets and leave the sea bed like a plowed field , lifeless, Then there's the  Hover boots who literaly hover everything off the sea bed leaving nothing but sand and mud , all the catch is used no matter how small so no regeneration of most spices,  So Bring on a No deal, Let Grimsby  Once the biggest port in the world regenerate and start catching Fish In British waters with British boats,

Yeah, i know nothing about fish - just trained as a fisheries biologist and also worked on Fisheries surveilance for 2 years ....  ????, also in Australia and now a fish farmer......

[TheDark]

5 minutes ago, rickudon said:

Yeah, i know nothing about fish - just trained as a fisheries biologist and also worked on Fisheries surveilance for 2 years ....  ????, also in Australia and now a fish farmer......

Oh my. You are an expert on the subject. Wait no more, there will be brexiteers, who are more than willing to silence you by saying you are a troll and you can't even write comprehensive English. ????

 

"We are sick of the experts" was their mantra then and it's still their mantra now.

[melvinmelvin]

1 hour ago, TheDark said:

While I was watching this talk, please enjoy and educate yourself. 

 

This goes rather deep in to the reasonings and political atmosphere in Norway, during the time when Norway might have joined the EU alongside with it's Nordic brothers.

 

Also why Norway and other EFTA countries joined to Schengen area. 

 

If you listen carefully, you can also hear the reasoning, why UK is not going to be part of EFTA. 

 

Have a good 1.5 hours of listening to educate yourself, in case you are interested to educate yourself, that is. 

 

My guess is not.

 

 

 

don't think I'll invest 1.5 hours in that talk,

looking at the age and education of the stalker (sorry-talker) I would guess that the talk would be kinda Labour Party infected

 

Norway's approach towards EEC did not match in  time with the Nordic brother's approaches, 'cept Denmark - once.

 

I'll give you the brief version:

Norway has had a go at joining 4 times, all 4 pushed by a Labour Party government.

 

1) at the very beginning, in the 50s, the others didn't fancy Norway in the gang - stranded

2) towards the end of the 60s, at the same time UK had a go at joining,

    the French general didna fancy UK in EEC, he didna have the guts to say no to UK and yes to Norway

    so he said no to expansion - stranded

3) early 70s; referendum, majority said don't join, small majority - in the same range as the Brexit majority - stranded

4) early 90s; ----------------------------------"---------------------------------------------------------- stranded

 

on occ 3 and 4 farmers and fishermen making a lot and loud noise, but I'd hazard the view that the average sod don't

give a <deleted> re farmers and fishermen

like in UK; sovereignty VERY BIG ISSUE

like in UK; making rules at home rather than in Belgium VERY BIG ISSUE

 

even with the mini NO majority there was never any fuss about following it, not in parliament

not in government not among the plebs.

(as in the UK the referendum was advisory)

 

last few years;

* as far as I remember only one political party has JOIN EU in their to do program, that is the party

currently having the PM

* there is a do not join EU organisation that is alive

* there is a get out of EEA organisation that is alive

* there is a join EU organisation that is alive

* most MPs/parties appear comfortable with the EEA membership

* some relatively recent EU spasms (hence, EEA spasms) have upset politicians and others;

   + wholesale electrical power sale and transport across Europe

   + worker's rights and minimum salary stipulations,

      both politicians and labour unions are hysteric about this

      they want to negotiate such rather than having it in the rule book

      this has the potential to become A BIG ISSUE, ie labour unions collectively wanting Norway out of EEA

couple of other stumbling blocks that slips my mind right now after the 3rd sizeable nip

 

LIke in Japan, Norway has erections every 4th year,

before the campaigns are lauched the political party leaders have an informal chat of whether to make EU membership

an issue in the erection campaign or not,

since the early 90s it has been NOT

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 4, 2020 by melvinmelvin
typo

[melvinmelvin]

1 hour ago, TheDark said:

While I was watching this talk, please enjoy and educate yourself. 

 

This goes rather deep in to the reasonings and political atmosphere in Norway, during the time when Norway might have joined the EU alongside with it's Nordic brothers.

 

Also why Norway and other EFTA countries joined to Schengen area. 

 

If you listen carefully, you can also hear the reasoning, why UK is not going to be part of EFTA. 

 

Have a good 1.5 hours of listening to educate yourself, in case you are interested to educate yourself, that is. 

 

My guess is not.

 

 

 

if your are intimate with this show,

please tell us why UK is not going to join EFTA, that I would be VERY interested in hearing

 

I have my rather strong views on why not, but I would like to hear what this video artists say

 

[TheDark]

22 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

if your are intimate with this show,

please tell us why UK is not going to join EFTA, that I would be VERY interested in hearing

 

I have my rather strong views on why not, but I would like to hear what this video artists say

 

Well, do watch the speech, it's not a show. I'm sure you'll eventually do so ???? 

 

Generally speaking. EFTA is a club of small countries, which wish to co-exist with EU and not wishing to disturb how things are done too much. That's why EFTA countries follow the EU rules. 

 

EFTA is like being part of the EU, but not really being part of it and not being able to make difference how EU is run. That's fine for smaller countries, but UK would definitely not want to just stay aside and not rock the boat as she would have to be, being EFTA member - outside of EU core.

 

That simply would not happen, unless England simply gives up all her ambitions and becomes a follower.

 

Don't get me wrong. Being a follower in EFTA case makes a lot of sense. Letting others to do all the boring negotiations is what many engineers wish to watch from a distance. 

 

England as proud as she is, could never abide by rules set by others. She wasn't doing so during the EU years. She is right now doing so, during the transition period. It's unlikely she will be one after 2020.

 

Co-operation is not a thing England does with others. England wishes to rule and subject others and that's about it.

 

 

[nauseus]

2 hours ago, TheDark said:

While I was watching this talk, please enjoy and educate yourself. 

 

This goes rather deep in to the reasonings and political atmosphere in Norway, during the time when Norway might have joined the EU alongside with it's Nordic brothers.

 

Also why Norway and other EFTA countries joined to Schengen area. 

 

If you listen carefully, you can also hear the reasoning, why UK is not going to be part of EFTA. 

 

Have a good 1.5 hours of listening to educate yourself, in case you are interested to educate yourself, that is. 

 

My guess is not.

 

 

Good guess. Norway had one referendum on EEC membership and one referendum on EU membership. Tight votes but the Norwegian people said no to both. 

Edited March 4, 2020 by nauseus
EEC

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

don't think I'll invest 1.5 hours in that talk,

looking at the age and education of the stalker (sorry-talker) I would guess that the talk would be kinda Labour Party infected

 

Norway's approach towards EEC did not match in  time with the Nordic brother's approaches, 'cept Denmark - once.

 

I'll give you the brief version:

Norway has had a go at joining 4 times, all 4 pushed by a Labour Party government.

 

1) at the very beginning, in the 50s, the others didn't fancy Norway in the gang - stranded

2) towards the end of the 60s, at the same time UK had a go at joining,

    the French general didna fancy UK in EEC, he didna have the guts to say no to UK and yes to Norway

    so he said no to expansion - stranded

3) early 70s; referendum, majority said don't join, small majority - in the same range as the Brexit majority - stranded

4) early 90s; ----------------------------------"---------------------------------------------------------- stranded

 

on occ 3 and 4 farmers and fishermen making a lot and loud noise, but I'd hazard the view that the average sod don't

give a <deleted> re farmers and fishermen

like in UK; sovereignty VERY BIG ISSUE

like in UK; making rules at home rather than in Belgium VERY BIG ISSUE

 

even with the mini NO majority there was never any fuss about following it, not in parliament

not in government not among the plebs.

(as in the UK the referendum was advisory)

 

last few years;

* as far as I remember only one political party has JOIN EU in their to do program, that is the party

currently having the PM

* there is a do not join EU organisation that is alive

* there is a get out of EEA organisation that is alive

* there is a join EU organisation that is alive

* most MPs/parties appear comfortable with the EEA membership

* some relatively recent EU spasms (hence, EEA spasms) have upset politicians and others;

   + wholesale electrical power sale and transport across Europe

   + worker's rights and minimum salary stipulations,

      both politicians and labour unions are hysteric about this

      they want to negotiate such rather than having it in the rule book

      this has the potential to become A BIG ISSUE, ie labour unions collectively wanting Norway out of EEA

couple of other stumbling blocks that slips my mind right now after the 3rd sizeable nip

 

LIke in Japan, Norway has erections every 4th year,

before the campaigns are lauched the political party leaders have an informal chat of whether to make EU membership

an issue in the erection campaign or not,

since the early 90s it has been NOT

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think Norway has more erections than that. At least I hope so.

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, TheDark said:

Oh my. You are an expert on the subject. Wait no more, there will be brexiteers, who are more than willing to silence you by saying you are a troll and you can't even write comprehensive English. ????

 

"We are sick of the experts" was their mantra then and it's still their mantra now.

Fluent in effluent as ever.

[melvinmelvin]

57 minutes ago, TheDark said:

Well, do watch the speech, it's not a show. I'm sure you'll eventually do so ???? 

 

Generally speaking. EFTA is a club of small countries, which wish to co-exist with EU and not wishing to disturb how things are done too much. That's why EFTA countries follow the EU rules. 

 

EFTA is like being part of the EU, but not really being part of it and not being able to make difference how EU is run. That's fine for smaller countries, but UK would definitely not want to just stay aside and not rock the boat as she would have to be, being EFTA member - outside of EU core.

 

That simply would not happen, unless England simply gives up all her ambitions and becomes a follower.

 

Don't get me wrong. Being a follower in EFTA case makes a lot of sense. Letting others to do all the boring negotiations is what many engineers wish to watch from a distance. 

 

England as proud as she is, could never abide by rules set by others. She wasn't doing so during the EU years. She is right now doing so, during the transition period. It's unlikely she will be one after 2020.

 

Co-operation is not a thing England does with others. England wishes to rule and subject others and that's about it.

 

 

 

no I will not spend 90 minutes listening to that chap unless recommended by fellow countrymen whose judgement

I have confidence in, 90 minutes is a long time, at least 6 nips

 

I see that we are, at least roughly, on the same shelf why UK wouldn't join,

my pitch would be less pallatable though (and also include some further aspects)

 

where I have a somewhat different view is when we talk about EFTA members influence on acquis

bar stool riders and also heaps of TVF readers would say no influence,

with that I do strongly disagree, STRONGLY

EFTA members have plenty opportunities to influence directive development, plenty.

but, have no formal say like UK has/had

BUT

unlike UK (as a member) an EFTA/EEA member can actualy say NO to a directive,

this UK can could not.

 

[TheDark]

8 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

no I will not spend 90 minutes listening to that chap unless recommended by fellow countrymen whose judgement

I have confidence in, 90 minutes is a long time, at least 6 nips

 

I see that we are, at least roughly, on the same shelf why UK wouldn't join,

my pitch would be less pallatable though (and also include some further aspects)

 

where I have a somewhat different view is when we talk about EFTA members influence on acquis

bar stool riders and also heaps of TVF readers would say no influence,

with that I do strongly disagree, STRONGLY

EFTA members have plenty opportunities to influence directive development, plenty.

but, have no formal say like UK has/had

BUT

unlike UK (as a member) an EFTA/EEA member can actualy say NO to a directive,

this UK can could not.

 

I can spend hours each day to listen to the different views, what people who actually have studied and understood these things talk about. I prefere debates, where different ideas fight each other using logical talking points. 

 

During these talks and debates, there might not be a clear winner, but each listener became better educated of both sides. That's what I like. To learn new and more.

 

UK can not become EFTA member for the same reasons why Russia and Turkey can not become EU members. They are simply too large entities to be absorbed by these well functioning communities. 

 

 

[melvinmelvin]

8 minutes ago, TheDark said:

I can spend hours each day to listen to the different views, what people who actually have studied and understood these things talk about. I prefere debates, where different ideas fight each other using logical talking points. 

 

During these talks and debates, there might not be a clear winner, but each listener became better educated of both sides. That's what I like. To learn new and more.

 

UK can not become EFTA member for the same reasons why Russia and Turkey can not become EU members. They are simply too large entities to be absorbed by these well functioning communities. 

 

 

yes, but 90 minutes is a loooooooooong time and looking at the chap his age and having looked up his education

I suspect I have a fairly good idea of what he says in that show

 

your Turkey and Russia bit is a point, by all means,

(this was recently highlighted by this UK trade secretary lass, 5 minutes after UK is out of EU she wants to teach

 the world how they should run WTO - talk about urin artist full of herself)

 

You say UK is too large, I'd say size doesn't matter - attitude matters, UK is PACKED with non pallatable attitude.

Who in their right mind would want the UK superiority complex in EFTA?

 

 

 

[CG1 Blue]

3 hours ago, TheDark said:

Perhaps denying access to the English waters, could actually be beneficial for the EU.

 

Let the English do all the hard work, catch the fist out in the open seas. Add sufficient tariffs, to make sure that the fish price stays low for the sellers (EU countries getting the tax revenue). Also making sure that only unprocessed fish is allowed to enter the EU. Thus cutting of the value added fish processing industry altogether.

 

Then process the fish inside Europe, adding value to the product and sell it either to the EU markets.

 

This model would make the English fishermen as producers of bulk items. 

Negotiations are just beginning.

 

EU position = Keep EU access to UK waters and regulation as it is

UK position = UK takes back full control of it's fishing waters, and regulations for sustainability etc. 

Outcome = Will be somewhere in between

 

This is how negotiations work. Why you keep on coming up with these fantasy 'UK punishment' scenarios I don't know. The negotiators on both sides will take a more grown up approach than you, thankfully ????

 

 

[TheDark]

1 minute ago, CG1 Blue said:

Negotiations are just beginning.

 

EU position = Keep EU access to UK waters and regulation as it is

UK position = UK takes back full control of it's fishing waters, and regulations for sustainability etc. 

Outcome = Will be somewhere in between

 

This is how negotiations work. Why you keep on coming up with these fantasy 'UK punishment' scenarios I don't know. The negotiators on both sides will take a more grown up approach than you, thankfully ????

 

 

I'm not sure how can I tell you that the EU position is far, far, far beyond talking about fish, when it talks about fish.

 

These negotiations are not going to be even funny if UK's current government keeps on playing checkers, while EU has been playing 4D chess for quite some time already.

 

UK's current government should at least give a bit of challenge to the negotiations, unless it wishes to end up having lazy no-deal solution. I can't see how the current UK government would even give an effort to find a deal.

 

It's no-deal brexit. The wonderful <deleted> oh, WTO brexit you and so many others wanted. 

 

Congratulations. You got what you wanted. Now own the responsibilities which come along with no-deal brexit. Those responsibilities are all on you.

[vinny41]

12 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

yes, but 90 minutes is a loooooooooong time and looking at the chap his age and having looked up his education

I suspect I have a fairly good idea of what he says in that show

 

your Turkey and Russia bit is a point, by all means,

(this was recently highlighted by this UK trade secretary lass, 5 minutes after UK is out of EU she wants to teach

 the world how they should run WTO - talk about urin artist full of herself)

 

You say UK is too large, I'd say size doesn't matter - attitude matters, UK is PACKED with non pallatable attitude.

Who in their right mind would want the UK superiority complex in EFTA?

 

 

 

Liz Truss didn't say or imply that she wants to teach the world how to run the WTO here is what she said and you should be aware that David Walker from New Zealand is currently working on WTO reforms I know reform is a dirty word in the EU

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/britain-is-back-liz-truss-calls-for-new-rules-at-wto-to-tackle-unfair-trade-practices

 

[CG1 Blue]

19 minutes ago, TheDark said:

I'm not sure how can I tell you that the EU position is far, far, far beyond talking about fish, when it talks about fish.

 

These negotiations are not going to be even funny if UK's current government keeps on playing checkers, while EU has been playing 4D chess for quite some time already.

 

UK's current government should at least give a bit of challenge to the negotiations, unless it wishes to end up having lazy no-deal solution. I can't see how the current UK government would even give an effort to find a deal.

 

It's no-deal brexit. The wonderful <deleted> oh, WTO brexit you and so many others wanted. 

 

Congratulations. You got what you wanted. Now own the responsibilities which come along with no-deal brexit. Those responsibilities are all on you.

Just more rambling with no facts or evidence.

 

If you genuinely believed the UK was going to be battered by the EU negotiations, you wouldn't be on here every day getting angry. Deep down you know the UK is going to be ok. I see fear and denial in your comments.  And maybe a little bit of envy because your own country is stuck on board the sinking EU ship ????

[TheDark]

23 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

Just more rambling with no facts or evidence.

 

If you genuinely believed the UK was going to be battered by the EU negotiations, you wouldn't be on here every day getting angry. Deep down you know the UK is going to be ok. I see fear and denial in your comments.  And maybe a little bit of envy because your own country is stuck on board the sinking EU ship ????

I find these current Brexit events absolutely hilarious. I find the fact that brexiteers will have to bear the consequences and responsibilities of their actions amusing. So no anger on my side, simply entertainment. How about you? Are you fine how brexit turned out to be?

 

Just remember. You are one, who can be hold personally responsible for Brexit aftermath in 2021, 2022, 2023.. 2029.

[Loiner]

1 hour ago, TheDark said:

 

I prefere debates, where different ideas fight each other using logical talking points. 

 

During these talks and debates, there might not be a clear winner, but each listener became better educated of both sides. That's what I like. To learn new and more.

 

Hey, why not try some of that? You know, logical talking points. 
That would be much better that’s the usual nonsense, trolling, baiting and Anglophobia. 
You might learn new and more. 

[melvinmelvin]

3 hours ago, vinny41 said:

Liz Truss didn't say or imply that she wants to teach the world how to run the WTO here is what she said and you should be aware that David Walker from New Zealand is currently working on WTO reforms I know reform is a dirty word in the EU

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/britain-is-back-liz-truss-calls-for-new-rules-at-wto-to-tackle-unfair-trade-practices

 

your taste - enjoy

 

(if I am not mistaken what you link to is a list of main points - not a citation as such)

 

have given up on you

you cant read English politician speak in the context of international organisations

not when it comes to WTO/trade and not when it comes to UK waters and fish

 

maybe reform is dirty, I haven't a clue of where and why that word should be dirty

 

 

 

Edited March 4, 2020 by melvinmelvin

[kingdong]

8 hours ago, bannork said:

Then who will the UK fishermen sell all their excess fish to? If there's no agreement those fish will be slapped with tariffs if for sale in the EU.

British people,checked out the price of fish in the uk?£17 a kilo of haddock.A lot of people currently can,t afford to eat fish,so when we get out the eu and it's stupid rules like fishermen having to throw back half the catch they could sell it cheaper and still make their money.

[melvinmelvin]

4 minutes ago, kingdong said:

British people,checked out the price of fish in the uk?£17 a kilo of haddock.A lot of people currently can,t afford to eat fish,so when we get out the eu and it's stupid rules like fishermen having to throw back half the catch they could sell it cheaper and still make their money.

right,

THAT I think you could forget right away,

that the price of fish will go down as a result of changes in the regulatory environment

[kingdong]

2 hours ago, TheDark said:

I find these current Brexit events absolutely hilarious. I find the fact that brexiteers will have to bear the consequences and responsibilities of their actions amusing. So no anger on my side, simply entertainment. How about you? Are you fine how brexit turned out to be?

 

Just remember. You are one, who can be hold personally responsible for Brexit aftermath in 2021, 2022, 2023.. 2029.

I also find the current situation hilarious,watch the eu tear itself apart in the next ten years (if that) watch the civil unrest escalate,watch Brussels go round with its hand out to all the European states wanting more funds to make up for the uk shortfall.

Edited March 4, 2020 by kingdong

[melvinmelvin]

3 hours ago, CG1 Blue said:

Negotiations are just beginning.

 

EU position = Keep EU access to UK waters and regulation as it is

UK position = UK takes back full control of it's fishing waters, and regulations for sustainability etc. 

Outcome = Will be somewhere in between

 

This is how negotiations work. Why you keep on coming up with these fantasy 'UK punishment' scenarios I don't know. The negotiators on both sides will take a more grown up approach than you, thankfully ????

 

 

 

that

seems like a likely outcome

but does UK command a fleet of floating devices sufficient for harvesting the UK waters?

or would additional/foreign harvesters be needed in order to keep stock in proper trim?

 

[vinny41]

15 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

your taste - enjoy

 

(if I am not mistaken what you link to is a list of main points - not a citation as such)

 

have given up on you

you cant read English politician speak in the context of international organisations

not when it comes to WTO/trade and not when it comes to UK waters and fish

 

maybe reform is dirty, I haven't a clue of where and why that word should be dirty

 

 

 

I think the forum rules here state when you quote someone post you quote their entire post and not selective edit it.

When you post about what any person has said you should provide a link to backup your interpretation so all members can see if you don't do it in the future I will simply call out your posts as fake and false

[melvinmelvin]

25 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

I think the forum rules here state when you quote someone post you quote their entire post and not selective edit it.

When you post about what any person has said you should provide a link to backup your interpretation so all members can see if you don't do it in the future I will simply call out your posts as fake and false

 

please, give me a break

I did quote the entire post, I did not edit ANYTHING at all

 

provide a link to backup my interpretation??? what on earth is that???

 

my posts are NOT fake

my posts are NOT false

my posts are what they are

 

[vinny41]

On 3/3/2020 at 3:09 AM, melvinmelvin said:

 

dunno, but reading the OP

letting the frogs fish in UK waters is within what she says in the OP

 

 

On 3/3/2020 at 11:05 AM, melvinmelvin said:

 

read the OP carefully,

having frogs and others fishing in UK waters is within what the lass is stating

 

 

21 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

please, give me a break

I did quote the entire post, I did not edit ANYTHING at all

 

provide a link to backup my interpretation??? what on earth is that???

 

my posts are NOT fake

my posts are NOT false

my posts are what they are

 

Here  are some examples when you claim Liz Truss UK MP and Secretary of State for International Trade

Its very unlikely that a Secretary of State for International Trade would refer to the French as frogs and letting other fish in uk Waters doesn't exist in the post and she hasn't said even though you claim she has , and we all know you can't provide any supporting links to support your claim as none exist therefore your posts are both False and Fake