Brexit discussion thread VII (Please read OP before posting)

ancapailldorcha

josip wrote: »

No surprises about the EU being in 2nd place, well, surprised it wasn't top of the list.

I am surprised Jeremy Corbyn makes it in at Number 4.
What has he done to prevent Brexit?

The red tops hate him as much as they hate the EU. Perhaps even more so. He's a direct threat to them and they're going to do everything they can to keep him from power. Look at some of the nonsense like the Czech spy stuff for example.

ToBeFrank123

With a No Deal Brexit Irish fishermen will lose a lot of their fishing areas in the Irish Sea but that will also likely happen with a deal unless some sort of bilateral arrangement can be made. There will have to be and already are a lot of bilateral arrangements between the two counties.

We cannot afford to fall out with the UK or they with us. We have to keep on good terms with them for many reasons, tempting though it would be to give them the two fingers sometimes.

lawred2

Infini wrote: »

Honestly I would not worry bout this too much. They can try blaming the EU but blaming someone else wont change the facts that theyre in the situation by their own choice and they were given an out. They created this they own this.

Yeah but populism is dangerous and especially a populism that can freely pit your neighbours as the bad guys.. And we've seen that British politicians are not afraid to harness populism in their aims.

This is how conflict happens.

This notion that British people are going to see the error of their ways is misguided. That's not how people work in general. I can see Brexiteers and their useful fools doubling down post Brexit.

PokeHerKing

ancapailldorcha wrote:

You and I know that but we both post regularly on a tightly moderated Politics forum. I'm sure you'll correct me if necessary but I'm going to assume that you've not been drinking significantly from the poisoned well that is the British press.

Ignorance is no excuse though.

ancapailldorcha

PokeHerKing wrote: »

Ignorance is no excuse though.

I never said it was but that's life, unfortunately. It's so frustrating when you hear in the news of people who think we've left or people who don't have even the slightest clue of how the EU works.

VinLieger

RobMc59 wrote: »

Armed warships arresting little fishing boats,posters celebrating warships firing on rusty old trawlers..Can you imagine if it was the UK doing this?..

Warships??? are you kidding me, the Samuel Beckett is a patrol boat with what could only be described as a pop gun on the bow. Her armament consist of 3 guns.....

lawred2

RobMc59 wrote: »

Armed warships arresting little fishing boats,posters celebrating warships firing on rusty old trawlers..Can you imagine if it was the UK doing this?..

going a bit daily mail/express with this hyperbole...

have you eventually gone native?

johnnyskeleton

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Mod note:

Mabye a little less rhetoric please?

Varta wrote: »

Not quite on the scale of the Belgrano though, is it?

VinLieger wrote: »

Warships??? are you kidding me, the Samuel Beckett is a patrol boat with what could only be described as a pop gun on the bow.

lawred2 wrote: »

going a bit daily mail/express with this hyperbole...

have you eventually gone native?

Mod note:

Don't make me tap the sign!

jm08

RobMc59 wrote: »

Is it protecting or bullying?It`s also interesting to note the UK is`nt enforcing this and has`nt stopped Irish boats fishing in UK waters.

Are there Irish trawlers fishing for mussels, prawns and crab in British waters?

Unsustainable fishing practices which has caused this. There needs to be some ground rules.

The four claim “aggressive and unsympathetic” fishing by NI vessels has caused the loss of a sustainable Irish mussel industry which could have employed hundreds of people. Losses to the State in earnings from export of mussels over the past 12 years could be as much as €200 million, they allege.
Available mussel seed dropped from 30,000 tons in 2002 to 2,400 tons in 2013 although the National Development Plan anticipated there would be 44,000 tons by 2015, it was also stated.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/supreme-court/supreme-court-to-rule-on-fishermen-s-appeal-over-mussel-stocks-1.2435257

ToBeFrank123

If the UK remain in some form of short or long term customs union, what happens with fishing? Just reading a bit about it. Seems Norway control their own waters but must pay a tariff. But other countries are not allowed fish in their waters. It remains to be seen what customs union arrangement the UK/EU go for.

RobMc59

lawred2 wrote: »

going a bit daily mail/express with this hyperbole...

have you eventually gone native?

Not really sure what you mean by "native".
This incident has been widely reported and it has also been pointed out that the UK hasn't stopped Irish boats in UK waters-I also pointed out if the boot was on the other foot-ie:it was British naval vessels arresting Irish boats the reaction would be a sight to behold!

VinLieger

RobMc59 wrote: »

Not really sure what you mean by "native".
This incident has been widely reported and it has also been pointed out that the UK hasn't stopped Irish boats in UK waters-I also pointed out if the boot was on the other foot-ie:it was British naval vessels arresting Irish boats the reaction would be a sight to behold!

I like how your choosing to ignore the two trawlers were breaking regulations that they are well aware of. If irish trawlers did similar snd broke regulations id fully expect them to face the repurcussions of their actions.

Also you are fully aware what is mesnt by native , calling a patrol boat with 3 guns a warship is jingoistic garbage.

Calina

RobMc59 wrote: »

Is it protecting or bullying?It`s also interesting to note the UK is`nt enforcing this and has`nt stopped Irish boats fishing in UK waters.

The Irish Navy has pulled in French and Spaniah trawlers too.

NI is not uniquely targeted.

Sam Russell

RobMc59 wrote: »

Armed warships arresting little fishing boats,posters celebrating warships firing on rusty old trawlers..Can you imagine if it was the UK doing this?..

It is not a warship - it is a fisheries protection vessel on fishery protection duty, and it arrested two trawlers fishing where they are not allowed to fish.

The problem resulting from this is 'Events dear boy, events' as Harold Macmillan said. One cannot predict 'events', but it does illustrate what a border with NI might kick up.

jm08

RobMc59 wrote: »

Not really sure what you mean by "native".
This incident has been widely reported and it has also been pointed out that the UK hasn't stopped Irish boats in UK waters-I also pointed out if the boot was on the other foot-ie:it was British naval vessels arresting Irish boats the reaction would be a sight to behold!

What were they doing in Irish waters when they know that 3 years ago they were told they were not allowed?

The UK has threatened to exclude everyone from their waters. Northern Ireland fishermen are very supportive of the plan to leave the EU and one of their big bugbears are EU quotas. Its laughable that they think they will be able to fish in Irish waters and yet not be bound by EU rules. Cake, cherries etc. come to mind.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/fishermen-in-the-north-look-forward-to-leaving-eu-1.2829943

johnnyskeleton

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

If the UK remain in some form of short or long term customs union, what happens with fishing? Just reading a bit about it. Seems Norway control their own waters but must pay a tariff. But other countries are not allowed fish in their waters. It remains to be seen what customs union arrangement the UK/EU go for.

I suppose the Common Agricultural Policy and the Common Fisheries Policy are more Single Market issues rather than Customs Union issues. If the UK were to join the EEA, they would have access to the single market but would be excluded from CAP and CFP.

The money Norway pays is for access to the single market in accordance with the EEA agreement and a separate agreement on the accession of the 10 new member states in the 2000s. Norway pays approximately €400m per year, give or take, based on a population of c. 5.2m people and a GDP of c. €350m. If these figures were to be directly scaled up for the U.K., it would mean a contribution of between €2.8bn and €5.2bn. These figures are likely to decrease as the GDP of the 10 Eastern European states increases in line with the rest of the EU.

Norway and the EU have bilateral fishing agreements. They are somewhat boring, but they do provide limited access to Norwegian waters for other EU countries, in particular its neighbours. One could anticipate that the UK could enter a bilateral agreement on fishing as part of any deal, and that might include different rules for Irish vessels, but it seems to be more open to negotiation.

What is sometimes lost in the arguments about fishing are a number of key facts:

1) fishing stocks have been declining and one of the main aims of CFP is to stop this happening and to increase stocks. Even if most fishermen are against the CFP restrictions on over fishing, most Fishing representative bodies are in favour of them to promote the long term interests of the industry;

2) fishing accounts for approximately 0.03% of EU GDP. It's political importance for costal states is massively disproportionate to its actual value;

3) regardless of who catches the fish and where they catch them, the fish are freely traded in the single market. So without access to the single market, the U.K. fishing industry is going to take a hit even if they EU fishing vessels are excluded from their waters.

Leroy42

A key plank of Theresa May’s “hostile environment” immigration policy has been declared incompatible with human rights law in a damning ruling handed down at the high court, Amelia Hill and Diane Taylor report. The controversial Right to Rent scheme forces private landlords to check the immigration status of tenants and potential tenants. Unlimited fines or even a prison sentence can be levied under the policy to any landlord who rents to undocumented migrants. In a robust judgement, Mr Justice Spencer said the much-criticised policy was unlawful because it caused landlords to discriminate against British citizens from minority ethnic backgrounds and against foreign nationals who have a legal right to rent.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2019/mar/01/brexit-latest-news-theresa-may-faces-further-backlash-over-decision-to-give-mps-vote-on-extending-article-50-politics-live

This ruling blows a major hole the in the plan to let the civilians to the checking on immigration. It was planned that people would continue to come and go as now but that they wouldn't have access to services such as welfare but also that Landlords would effectively become border agents.

In other news Chris Grayling's Dept has announced that they have agreed a settlement of £33m with Eurotunnel after they had threatened to sue on how the contracts for shipping had been handled. This included the contract to the shipping company with no ships!

I have just been listening to Brexitcast and its laughable the level of 'input' from Laura Kuenssberg. She basically stated the TM had played a blinder and that he move (to set up the 3 votes) was not only brilliant but had placed all the pressure back on the EU. TBF to Kate Adler, she basically rubbished Laura idea and said that the EU knew exactly what they had, what they were prepared to give and this changes nothing for them.

The amount of 'oohh' I heard a rumour and 'you heard it too, so it must be true' is quite staggering. I get that the podcast is meant to be less formal but they seem totally removed the actual details. The fact that they continually get caught out by the government moves yet continue to act as if they have some type of 'in' is amazing.

RobMc59

VinLieger wrote: »

I like how your choosing to ignore the two trawlers were breaking regulations that they are well aware of. If irish trawlers did similar snd broke regulations id fully expect them to face the repurcussions of their actions.

Also you are fully aware what is mesnt by native , calling a patrol boat with 3 guns a warship is jingoistic garbage.

I would question who is guilty of jingoistic garbage-it's more a case of Ireland rattling sabres and if you took the time to read the article in question the British arent making a fuss about irish boats fishing within UK waters.

VinLieger

RobMc59 wrote: »

I would question who is guilty of jingoistic garbage-it's more a case of Ireland rattling sabres and if you took the time to read the article in question the British arent making a fuss about irish boats fishing within UK waters.

LOL did you actually just contradict yourself in the same sentence 5 words later?

We are allowed decide who fishes our waters, the two trawlers were aware of this, ignoring the facts and complaining about the unfairness of it all is simply childish

Sam Russell

RobMc59 wrote: »

I would question who is guilty of jingoistic garbage-it's more a case of Ireland rattling sabres and if you took the time to read the article in question the British arent making a fuss about irish boats fishing within UK waters.

Why would they?

The rules for Irish boats have not changed - yet. Gove, the Minister for fish, has said that in the case of a no-deal Brexit, the UK will withdraw from the London Convention of 1964 that allows voisinage, so in one months time those rules will change - for both NI and Irish trawlers.

It is on foot of a Irish Supreme Court ruling that there is no legal basis for voisinage, so it is not legal. Fishery Protection vessels therefore must enforce the rules, so they arrested two trawlers fishing illegally. The politicians cannot interfere with law enforcement due to the separation of powers.

It highlights the effect of a hard border.

RobMc59

Sam Russell wrote: »

Why would they?

The rules for Irish boats have not changed - yet. Gove, the Minister for fish, has said that in the case of a no-deal Brexit, the UK will withdraw from the London Convention of 1964 that allows voisinage, so in one months time those rules will change - for both NI and Irish trawlers.

It is on foot of a Irish Supreme Court ruling that there is no legal basis for voisinage, so it is not legal. Fishery Protection vessels therefore must enforce the rules, so they arrested two trawlers fishing illegally. The politicians cannot interfere with law enforcement due to the separation of powers.

It highlights the effect of a hard border.

No-You are wrong-the treaty which expired in 2016 was an informal agreement between Ireland and NI that they could fish each others waters.The UK is still allowing Irish vessels to fish in its waters and the reactivation ot the treaty is awaiting irish parliamentary approval

Sam Russell

RobMc59 wrote: »

No-You are wrong-the treaty which expired in 2016 was an informal agreement between Ireland and NI that they could fish each others waters.The UK is still allowing Irish vessels to fish in its waters and the reactivation ot the treaty is awaiting irish parliamentary approval

It was a Supreme Court ruling that said the voisinage was an informal agreement that was not backed by law. That meant that the part applying to Irish waters was not legal and therefore the NI trawlers were fishing illegally. The Irish Gov have prepared a bill to correct the situation but it has run aground.

The agreement did not expire - it was ruled outside of the law by the Supreme Court - a different thing altogether.

CelticRambler

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I think the middle aged and older people who constitute most of the Leave vote are less likely to use social media.

This is not exactly correct. These days, "middle-aged and older" use social media almost as much as younger people but they are far less circumspect about what they read/believe. There was a study published on this quite recently (just passing through, not going looking for the link right now), which showed that younger people are far more likely to treat stuff they read on the internet as a scam, fake news, a prank or just plain horshoite, whereas older people seem less able to evaluate what's being pushed at them. Anecdotally, my experience confirms this - every nonsense alert or arrgghh-lock-up-your-children article that gets forwarded to me (in all sincerity) comes from the older generation; no such rubbish ever comes from my young friends and acquaintances. I haven't seen the details, but I suspect the majority of the dubious facebook ads were targetted at these older, more gullible voters - that's certainly the way I'd do it if I wanted to manipulate them.

RobMc59

Calina wrote: »

The Irish Navy has pulled in French and Spaniah trawlers too.

NI is not uniquely targeted.

Not part of this treaty though which is awaiting reactivation in the Irish parliament

bobmalooka

RobMc59 wrote: »

Calina wrote: »

The Irish Navy has pulled in French and Spaniah trawlers too.

NI is not uniquely targeted.

Not part of this treaty though which is awaiting reactivation in the Irish parliament

It’s already been explained that it’s not a reactivation, the arrangement was found to be illegal.

An Ciarraioch

http://twitter.com/DanielBoffey/status/1101476592625307653

jm08

RobMc59 wrote: »

Not part of this treaty though which is awaiting reactivation in the Irish parliament

It took them 3 years to do something about it. Presumably these boats continued to illegally fish in Irish waters during those years.


From what I can detect, they are only stopping a certain type of fishing, not all.



Around the time of the Brexit vote, I saw an interview with some fishermen from Kilkeel who were all supporting Brexit. It didn't seem to register with them that 60% of their prawn fishing took place on the Irish side of the border - i.e., in EU waters.

reslfj

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

If the UK remain in some form of short or long term customs union, what happens with fishing? Just reading a bit about it. Seems Norway control their own waters but must pay a tariff. But other countries are not allowed fish in their waters. It remains to be seen what customs union arrangement the UK/EU go for.

I suppose the Common Agricultural Policy and the Common Fisheries Policy are more Single Market issues rather than Customs Union issues. If the UK were to join the EEA, they would have access to the single market but would be excluded from CAP and CFP.

There is a UN treaty that require the total catch for each fish stock is biological sustainable - this gives the total of quotas. There are in 2019 53 stocks in the North Sea Atlantic area being fished at maximum allowed level.

The total quota for each stock has been divided and allocated as quotas to each member state in proportion to traditional catches of these stock by each country. The quotas are restricted to specific named/numbered areas of water.

Traditionally the 3nm and 12nm were the national limits. The 200nm economic zones were agreed internationally after the UK, DK and IE joined the EEC in 1973. The new 200nm border was not considered a problem for fishing within the EU as EU's CFP would apply.

Norway has fishing water shared with the EU (to somewhere between Bergen and Tronheim) and waters share with itself and the Atlantic. The fishing quotas shared with the EU is negotiated and agreed with Norway (Fish is outside the Norwegian SM/EEA, I believe).

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

One could anticipate that the UK could enter a bilateral agreement on fishing as part of a deal.

What is sometimes lost in the arguments about fishing are a number of key facts:

1) fishing stocks have been declining and one of the main aims of CFP is to stop this happening and to increase stocks. Even if most fishermen are against the CFP restrictions on over fishing, most Fishing representative bodies are in favour of them to promote the long term interests of the industry;

2) fishing accounts for approximately 0.03% of EU GDP. It's political importance for costal states is massively disproportionate to its actual value;

3) regardless of who catches the fish and where they catch them, the fish are freely traded in the single market. So without access to the single market, the U.K. fishing industry is going to take a hit even if they EU fishing vessels are excluded from their waters.

Re 1)
As i wrote above to total quota is by an UN treaty. It has allowed more stock to recover somewhat from wild and reckless over fishing.

Re 3)
Fishmen might think it's hard, cold and stormy to catch the fish. It is however relatively easy to catch the fish.
What really matters to the fishing industry is market assess to a large well paying market. This requires frictionless borders without read tape, delays and without 12+ % tariffs.

It is really that simple

The EU has demanded that the CFP be 100% preserved post Brexit for any trade deal to be agreed. The CFP will be renamed - reciprocal access - but it will it will be the same CFP quotas etc.
Without the de facto CFP any FTA will simply not ratify in more EU27 countries.

Lars

RobMc59

bobmalooka wrote: »

It’s already been explained that it’s not a reactivation, the arrangement was found to be illegal.

Perhaps this needs clarifying as the Taoiseach sees things differently.
https://www.lmfm.ie/news/taoiseach-says-the-detaining-of-two-fishing-vessel/

lawred2

RobMc59 wrote: »

Perhaps this needs clarifying as the Taoiseach sees things differently.
https://www.lmfm.ie/news/taoiseach-says-the-detaining-of-two-fishing-vessel/

saying that the law is wrong does not render an illegal act legal.