Brexit discussion thread XIV (Please read OP before posting)

moon2

Widdensushi wrote: »

Plenty of haddock and cod in British waters, the vast majority of British fishermen are happy with no deal, it means a better market for their fish and better fishing in their waters, the big loser was the kirkella, easy to Google, mainly Dutch owned.

Where did you get that idea from? Pretty much all reporting of this has come to the opposite conclusion.

Specifically, Norwegian boats are only slightly impacted, and British boats are heavily impacted and will be unable to catch sufficient cod in their own waters.

Better fishing in "their waters" isn't useful if "their waters" don't have the fish they need.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-56940914

Widdensushi

moon2 wrote: »

Where did you get that idea from? Pretty much all reporting of this has come to the opposite conclusion.

Specifically, Norwegian boats are only slightly impacted, and British boats are heavily impacted and will be unable to catch sufficient cod in their own waters.

Better fishing in "their waters" isn't useful if "their waters" don't have the fish they need.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-56940914

Speaking to British fishermen I know, that article focuses on the one big loser which is dutch owned, they see the lack of a deal as Britain supporting British owned fishing fishing boats, who will benefit from extra fish in their waters and a better market.

Seth Brundle

Widdensushi wrote: »

Speaking to British fishermen I know, that article focuses on the one big loser which is dutch owned, they see the lack of a deal as Britain supporting British owned fishing fishing boats, who will benefit from extra fish in their waters and a better market.

Notn sure how many fishermen you know out of the thousands of them but the industry as a whole is furious: UK fishing industry furious over failure to strike Norway deal

timetogo1

Widdensushi wrote: »

Speaking to British fishermen I know, that article focuses on the one big loser which is dutch owned, they see the lack of a deal as Britain supporting British owned fishing fishing boats, who will benefit from extra fish in their waters and a better market.

Wonder why the reporters don't interview the happy fishermen. Even the Express & Mail are saying this is bad for fisherman and they'd normally be happy if they can blame foreigners.

Widdensushi

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Notn sure how many fishermen you know out of the thousands of them but the industry as a whole is furious: UK fishing industry furious over failure to strike Norway deal

Statement from Shetland Fishermen’s Association

Failed UK-Norway fishing deal

Fishermen in Shetland today welcomed the Scottish and UK negotiating team’s refusal to renew past access and quota transfer agreements with Norway.

These, they pointed out, had been brokered by the European Union and were heavily skewed against the local pelagic and demersal fleets.

Simon Collins, executive officer of the Shetland Fishermen’s Association (SFA), said: “This bring a long-awaited end to past practice in which the EU used to hand substantial amounts of Scottish quota to Norway largely to the benefit of a single foreign multinational that claimed to be English.

“Since the announcement that there will be no deal, we have had predictable squealing from that one company. This in no way reflects the mood of the Scottish family-owned fleet.

“In practical terms, Norway’s loss of access to our waters this year will remove a substantial presence of their pelagic fleet during the autumn mackerel fishery in particular.”

SFA chairman and whitefish skipper James Anderson added that the inability of Norwegian vessels to fish for demersal stocks in the UK zone would lift the pressure of a highly active gillnet and longliner fleet to the east of Shetland.

“We are convinced that mutually advantageous annual agreements on access and quota transfers can be struck with Norway in the future. But Norway has to understand that we are not going to cave in, Commission-style, to the detriment of Scottish businesses. It is far better to make that clear at the outset, and we are glad that this has been done.

“We appreciate the efforts of the highly influential Scottish negotiators, who worked closely with industry and listened carefully to our concerns throughout four months of very difficult talks.”

https://scottishpelagic.co.uk/failed-fisheries-deal-with-norway/

CelticRambler

Widdensushi wrote: »

Simon Collins, executive officer of the Shetland Fishermen’s Association (SFA), said: “This bring a long-awaited end to past practice in which the EU used to hand substantial amounts of Scottish quota to Norway largely to the benefit of a single foreign multinational that claimed to be English. "

Mr Collins might want to review his information. The EU does not/did not distribute Scottish quota to anyone - that was done by the English, operating as the governing Tory party.

It's just another example of blaming "Brussels" for decisions made by the British, primarily the Tory party, because they couldn't be bothered to apply the rules like other EU countries ... or perhaps because it suited their wealthy buddies to allocate profitable quotas to non-British holding companies.

Professor Moriarty

Widdensushi wrote: »

Statement from Shetland Fishermen’s Association

Failed UK-Norway fishing deal

Fishermen in Shetland today welcomed the Scottish and UK negotiating team’s refusal to renew past access and quota transfer agreements with Norway.

These, they pointed out, had been brokered by the European Union and were heavily skewed against the local pelagic and demersal fleets.

Simon Collins, executive officer of the Shetland Fishermen’s Association (SFA), said: “This bring a long-awaited end to past practice in which the EU used to hand substantial amounts of Scottish quota to Norway largely to the benefit of a single foreign multinational that claimed to be English.

“Since the announcement that there will be no deal, we have had predictable squealing from that one company. This in no way reflects the mood of the Scottish family-owned fleet.

“In practical terms, Norway’s loss of access to our waters this year will remove a substantial presence of their pelagic fleet during the autumn mackerel fishery in particular.”

SFA chairman and whitefish skipper James Anderson added that the inability of Norwegian vessels to fish for demersal stocks in the UK zone would lift the pressure of a highly active gillnet and longliner fleet to the east of Shetland.

“We are convinced that mutually advantageous annual agreements on access and quota transfers can be struck with Norway in the future. But Norway has to understand that we are not going to cave in, Commission-style, to the detriment of Scottish businesses. It is far better to make that clear at the outset, and we are glad that this has been done.

“We appreciate the efforts of the highly influential Scottish negotiators, who worked closely with industry and listened carefully to our concerns throughout four months of very difficult talks.”

https://scottishpelagic.co.uk/failed-fisheries-deal-with-norway/

"...we are not going to cave in, Commission-style..."

Obviously unbiased and without a hint of a political agenda.

BlitzKrieg

Widdensushi wrote: »

Plenty of haddock and cod in British waters, the vast majority of British fishermen are happy with no deal, it means a better market for their fish and better fishing in their waters, the big loser was the kirkella, easy to Google, mainly Dutch owned.

http://www.seaaroundus.org/data/#/eez/826?chart=catch-chart&dimension=taxon&measure=tonnage&limit=10

breakdown of the fish in British water that is caught

In British waters the amount of atlantic Cod, that lovely scummy fish that is the staple of British fish and Chips is one of the smallest catches in the area


Here is Norway

http://www.seaaroundus.org/data/#/eez/578?chart=catch-chart&dimension=taxon&measure=tonnage&limit=10

Thats a lot more Cod

As for the Scottish Pelagic Fishermen’s Association, well they said it themselves

They fish Mackerel

not Cod


They're not upset purely on fishing terms because, Mackerel is a fish Scotland has plenty of so it would benefit them not to compete with norweigan ships for mackerel in exchange for Cod that they dont themselves fish.

Which might be good for Brexit except you know the biggest share of Mackerel consumption is Germany (https://www.globaltrademag.com/germany-consumes-most-of-preserved-mackerel-in-the-eu/#:~:text=The%20countries%20with%20the%20highest,51%25%20share%20of%20total%20consumption.&text=The%20countries%20with%20the%20highest,51%25%20share%20of%20total%20consumption.)

Mackerel that is processed in the netherlands after being exported from the UK

which is why the netherlands is the UK's biggest export market of mackerel

The largest share of mackerel exports went to the Netherlands (19 thousand tonnes)

source: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/920679/UK_Sea_Fisheries_Statistics_2019_-_access_checked-002.pdf)

In fact the Netherlands imports more British Mackerel then the rest of non EU markets combined. It's almost 3 times bigger.



From what I've read if you fish haddock or Cod Brexit has been a disaster

If you deal with Eels or shellfish Brexit has been a disaster

If you fish Mackerel Brexit is up in the air, you can fish more of it, but your biggest market is in the EU which has proven difficult to maintain the same level of access to due to how bad the brexit deal is.

joeysoap

I'm just trying to get my around the EU distributing a quota to a non EU country

Peregrinus

joeysoap wrote: »

I'm just trying to get my around the EU distributing a quota to a non EU country

Norway and the EU have made a deal under which each party's fishers have (limited) access to the other's waters.

Why would Norway make this deal? Because part of the deal is that Norway gets access to EU markets to sell its fish. This is a big deal for Norway because it has a lot of fish to catch but not a lot of Norwegians to eat them.

But comparable access to the UK market is not so interesting to Norway because (1) it's a much smaller market, and (2) because Norwegian and UK waters are both in the North Sea, they catch similar type of fish, and the UK market is oversupplied with those types of fish (especially now).

So Norway doesn't have the same incentive to open its fishing grounds to UK fishers as it does to open them to EU fishers.

Strazdas

CelticRambler wrote: »

Mr Collins might want to review his information. The EU does not/did not distribute Scottish quota to anyone - that was done by the English, operating as the governing Tory party.

It's just another example of blaming "Brussels" for decisions made by the British, primarily the Tory party, because they couldn't be bothered to apply the rules like other EU countries ... or perhaps because it suited their wealthy buddies to allocate profitable quotas to non-British holding companies.

I'm sure I read somewhere about figures within the Scottish fishing industry being shady and having links to the Orange Order, the DUP and the English far right (aka the ERG and Vote Leave).....none of this stuff is as innocent as it looks on the surface. These guys would hate Nicola Sturgeon for example and be violently opposed to Scottish independence.

fash

Peregrinus wrote: »

Norway and the EU have made a deal under which each party's fishers have (limited) access to the other's waters.

Why would Norway make this deal? Because part of the deal is that Norway gets access to EU markets to sell its fish. This is a big deal for Norway because it has a lot of fish to catch but not a lot of Norwegians to eat them.

But comparable access to the UK market is not so interesting to Norway because (1) it's a much smaller market, and (2) because Norwegian and UK waters are both in the North Sea, they catch similar type of fish, and the UK market is oversupplied with those types of fish (especially now).

So Norway doesn't have the same incentive to open its fishing grounds to UK fishers as it does to open them to EU fishers.

... Plus didn't the UK already give Norway quota and tariff free access when the UK rolled over the UK-Norway agreement?

Peregrinus

fash wrote: »

... Plus didn't the UK already give Norway quota and tariff free access when the UK rolled over the UK-Norway agreement?

Now that you mention it, yes, they did.

Nody

fash wrote: »

... Plus didn't the UK already give Norway quota and tariff free access when the UK rolled over the UK-Norway agreement?

Only to turn around and say actually we're not going to uphold the agreement we signed in true style for UK after voting for Brexit. Deals with UK means nothing because they will happily break it at any point because they feel like it but as always they don't think that will come back and bite them long term.

Pablo Escobar

Nody wrote: »

Only to turn around and say actually we're not going to uphold the agreement we signed in true style for UK after voting for Brexit. Deals with UK means nothing because they will happily break it at any point because they feel like it but as always they don't think that will come back and bite them long term.

That was always the case, but they held clout when they were an empire and then when in the EU. Now that they're out they're going to be found out. It's actually a great viewing spectacle. It's just a pity about the casualties along the way.

Anyone got that list of benefits yet? We're 4 months post new trade deal now.

Peregrinus

Nody wrote: »

Only to turn around and say actually we're not going to uphold the agreement we signed in true style for UK after voting for Brexit. Deals with UK means nothing because they will happily break it at any point because they feel like it but as always they don't think that will come back and bite them long term.

Various of the usual boneheads have called for this, but — open to correction here — I don't think the UK government has indicated that it intends to violate the Norway & Iceland trade deal in reprise for Norway's failure to accede to UK demands in the negiations for a fishing agreement.

Probably worth reminding ourselves that when the EU insisted that fisheries be dealt with as part of their wider agreement with the UK rather than in a stand-alone fisheing deal, various Brexiters were very critical. Now it is dawning on them that this was in fact a very sensible idea, and one that the UK would have done well to copy in its dealings with Norway.

Peregrinus

Peregrinus wrote: »

Various of the usual boneheads have called for this, but — open to correction here — I don't think the UK government has indicated that it intends to violate the Norway & Iceland trade deal in reprise for Norway's failure to accede to UK demands in the negiations for a fishing agreement.

Probably worth reminding ourselves that when the EU insisted that fisheries be dealt with as part of their wider agreement with the UK rather than in a stand-alone fisheing deal, various Brexiters were very critical. Now it is dawning on them that this was in fact a very sensible idea, and one that the UK would have done well to copy in its dealings with Norway.

That would have been impossible presumably, given that Norway is in the EEA and covered by the omnibus deal with the EU, except for the common fisheries policy, where it has the advantage it seems.

Wanderer78

Tried to purchase from a UK retailer, but there's some serious delays in their supply chains, went with an EU retailer instead, I think all will be revealed post covid, and I don't think it's gonna be good for the UK

Going Strong

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Tried to purchase from a UK retailer, but there's some serious delays in their supply chains, went with an EU retailer instead, I think all will be revealed post covid, and I don't think it's gonna be good for the UK

My brother is in construction and, after being stiffed yet again because his usual Irish supplier refuses to change from their UK supplier, he's started ordering materials from Germany.


One particular item which he uses regularly is €34.50 cheaper per unit compared to the exact same UK-sourced one. He's now eagerly checking to see what else he can get for similar savings.

CelticRambler

Michel Barnier, being interviewed on French radio about an hour ago, was asked about the positive sides of Brexit. The only thing, he said, that could conceivably seen as a positive was that the whole saga was a warning for the rest of Europe. No mention of being glad to be rid of a troublesome member, no suggestion that the way is now clear for the creation of a United States of Europe, no gloating at the Franco-German axis being able to stomp on the Brits. "Brexit is a lose-lose situation" he said - as he's said all along.

Peregrinus

Deleted User wrote: »

That would have been impossible presumably, given that Norway is in the EEA and covered by the omnibus deal with the EU, except for the common fisheries policy, where it has the advantage it seems.

Actually, no, I don't think so. Tariff- and quota-free access for Norwegian and Icelandic goods to the UK market (and vice versa) is secured not by the UK/EU TCA but by the Agreement on Trade in Goods between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway, which is a rollover of the relevant provisions of the EEA Agreement, the treaty which governs (among other things) EU/EEA trade.

The thing is, the EEA Agreement doesn't deal with fisheries, so the rollover doesn't include anything on fisheries. There's a separate EU/Norway agreement covering fisheries. This hasn't been rolled over.

The UK could have asked for it to be rolled over, or made it a condition that it be rolled over, at the same time as the trade rollover. But they didn't (so far as we know, anyway — UK trade policy and negotiating positions are shrouded in deep mystery and neither Parliament nor the public are permitted to know anything about them, lest they get ideas above their station like thinking the UK government should be in any way democratically accountable on matters of trade). Of course, they might not have agreed, if asked, but at least if the UK had asked at that time they would have had some leverage.

It turns out that, now, Norway and Iceland don't see any great advantage to themselves in rolling the fishing deal over.

Mr.Wemmick

Some ex-pat friends in Switzerland are delighted to find stocks of cheddar and other previous UK goods have all returned to the shelves in supermarkets - all products are now Irish brands and delicious, they said.

UK is fast disappearing into a black hole of its own making.

redcup342

Mr.Wemmick wrote: »

Some ex-pat friends in Switzerland are delighted to find stocks of cheddar and other previous UK goods have all returned to the shelves in supermarkets - all products are now Irish brands and delicious, they said.

UK is fast disappearing into a black hole of its own making.

Same here in Spain and in Germany, UK Stock is disappearing and Irish stock is replacing it. I guess most of it is coming from the Musgraves Group.

Dealz in Torremolinos now have various products sourced from Ireland instead of the UK.

Peregrinus

Mr.Wemmick wrote: »

Some ex-pat friends in Switzerland are delighted to find stocks of cheddar and other previous UK goods have all returned to the shelves in supermarkets - all products are now Irish brands and delicious, they said.

UK is fast disappearing into a black hole of its own making.

Even before Brexit, Ireland was a bigger exporter of cheese than the UK. (Irish cheese exports: €814m. UK cheese exports: GPB 495m = €570.)

But about half of Irish cheese exports went to the UK and, as it happens, most of that is cheddar. This is likely to be hit when the UK starts operating import controls later this year and, in the longer term, by the steady decline in UK prosperity relative to the EU.

We'll need to pick up a lot of the cheddar market in the EU-26 in order to compensate for the likely hit to our cheddar exports to the UK.

Ireland already dominates the EU-26 market for generic cheddar. UK exports of cheddar have been a bit more up-market. There's an opportunity to take much of that from them, but it will involve more production of speciality cheddars and some fairly aggressive marketing and establishment of brands. That's expensive. On the plus side, there are some big players in the Irish agri-food sector who have the resources to mount that kind of campaign.

Leroy42

Peregrinus wrote: »

Even before Brexit, Ireland was a bigger exporter of cheese than the UK. (Irish cheese exports: €814m. UK cheese exports: GPB 495m = €570.)

But about half of Irish cheese exports went to the UK and, as it happens, most of that is cheddar. This is likely to be hit when the UK starts operating import controls later this year and, in the longer term, by the steady decline in UK prosperity relative to the EU.

We'll need to pick up a lot of the cheddar market in the EU-26 in order to compensate for the likely hit to our cheddar exports to the UK.

Ireland already dominates the EU-26 market for generic cheddar. UK exports of cheddar have been a bit more up-market. There's an opportunity to take much of that from them, but it will involve more production of speciality cheddars and some fairly aggressive marketing and establishment of brands. That's expensive. On the plus side, there are some big players in the Irish agri-food sector who have the resources to mount that kind of campaign.

If they bring in import controls. I wouldn't be surprised if they kick that can down the road again. They will still be on a vaccine boost why put that at risk?

Seth Brundle

Pablo Escobar wrote: »

Anyone got that list of benefits yet? We're 4 months post new trade deal now.

The pro-Brexit posters here have told us before that apparently it is too early to tell and we should wait for an undefined period of time before we should expect to see any benefits from Brexit.

Nody

Peregrinus wrote: »

Even before Brexit, Ireland was a bigger exporter of cheese than the UK. (Irish cheese exports: €814m. UK cheese exports: GPB 495m = €570.)

But about half of Irish cheese exports went to the UK and, as it happens, most of that is cheddar. This is likely to be hit when the UK starts operating import controls later this year and, in the longer term, by the steady decline in UK prosperity relative to the EU.

We'll need to pick up a lot of the cheddar market in the EU-26 in order to compensate for the likely hit to our cheddar exports to the UK.

Ireland already dominates the EU-26 market for generic cheddar. UK exports of cheddar have been a bit more up-market. There's an opportunity to take much of that from them, but it will involve more production of speciality cheddars and some fairly aggressive marketing and establishment of brands. That's expensive. On the plus side, there are some big players in the Irish agri-food sector who have the resources to mount that kind of campaign.

It will not be the controls that will stop it; it will be when they lower the standards for cheese and import American "cheese" instead.

CelticRambler

Peregrinus wrote: »

about half of Irish cheese exports went to the UK and, as it happens, most of that is cheddar. This is likely to be hit when the UK starts operating import controls later this year and, in the longer term, by the steady decline in UK prosperity relative to the EU.

We'll need to pick up a lot of the cheddar market in the EU-26 in order to compensate for the likely hit to our cheddar exports to the UK.

Ireland already dominates the EU-26 market for generic cheddar. UK exports of cheddar have been a bit more up-market. There's an opportunity to take much of that from them, but it will involve more production of speciality cheddars and some fairly aggressive marketing and establishment of brands. That's expensive.

It's probably a minor component of the overall cost, but the breaking of the landbridge may also help the smaller Irish speciality brands. Where previously they would have had to compete with each other and the British brands, and price in the cost of transporting relatively small quantities to EU customers, the huge increase in direct traffic to the continent must surely mean there are some good groupage deals to be had on lorries/containers heading back to the Continent?

Of course stories like this make a mockery of the British government's advice to people like the Cheddar Cheese Company to "develop other markets" - it's all very well trying to break into new territory, but there is nothing that makes that easier than being in a common economic and customs union.

And besides, it's only 4 months - way to early to tell if these upstart Irish exporters can stay the distance ... :pac:

Sam Russell

CelticRambler wrote: »

And besides, it's only 4 months - way to early to tell if these upstart Irish exporters can stay the distance ... :pac:

I think that if anyone can take advantage, then Musgraves can. Then add in the Irish dairy companies like Kerry, Dairygold (can't think of their new name - it is so memorable) and opportunities will be taken.

Kerrygold is already a worldwide brand, so watch it stretch across all dairy products - expect Kerrygold Milk Chocolate next.

CelticRambler

Sam Russell wrote: »

I think that if anyone can take advantage, then Musgraves can.

Well, yes, the big companies will always be in a position to move quickly and aggressively, especially with government agencies already primed to develop new markets wherever and whenever they open up. But I'd be really interested to hear of smaller, independent producers/exporters taking advantage of these gaps, and how they do it - on their own account, leveraging existing Continental contacts, or as a cooperative effort with other Irish companies.

For the sake of balance, I haven't experienced any disruption in respect of the three British products that make it into my trolley - Weetabix, Quaker Oats and McVities digestives, presumably because they're "dry" goods and not subject to SPS checks. No change in price either ... yet.