How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 9)

[SeeFive]

wc98 said:

Piha said:

Weren't bass numbers at critically low numbers in 2014?

if you have a look at the "data" supporting the low spawning stock biomass conclusion it contains more assumption,extrapolation and mathturbated modeling than any reasonable enquiring mind would accept. typical ices assessments on stocks that have been studied far more vigorously and that are of far more importance commercially can be out by hundreds of percent.

there are multiple issues regarding regional stocks, of that there is no doubt (the biggest being lack of enforcement of the rules, especially in bass nursery areas) but if you look at the current data on bass presented to justify angler take increase last year ,to keep what is seen as a supportive group onside, you will see massive ad hoc adjustments have been made to ssb and recruitment figures with no new information to support said adjustments.

90% of areas supporting populations of bass have not been surveyed so care has to be taken when making any conclusions from what is presented as "data".

Yeh, exactly, that’s wot I meant to say to him and Nick too

Fair to say that a lot of that is way over my head as a layman, but you seem to understand your stuff. I tend to think we would be better off managing our own fisheries in the UK but from an economic perspective rather than an ecological one.

So as someone with more knowledge than me, do you feel that we would be better able to manage our fish stocks and associated industry and sport without the overarching EU fisheries policy? If you can elaborate a little, I would also be grateful - it’s not something I get informed about too often but please don’t feel compelled as you could get drawn in deeper by the crowd.

TIA. Every day is a school day.

[Tony427]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

17.4 million angry, disillustioned and disgruntled people will make it so.

And remainers have to get the youth out of bed to vote. Good luck with that.

[Piha]

SeeFive said:

wc98 said:

Piha said:

Weren't bass numbers at critically low numbers in 2014?

if you have a look at the "data" supporting the low spawning stock biomass conclusion it contains more assumption,extrapolation and mathturbated modeling than any reasonable enquiring mind would accept. typical ices assessments on stocks that have been studied far more vigorously and that are of far more importance commercially can be out by hundreds of percent.

there are multiple issues regarding regional stocks, of that there is no doubt (the biggest being lack of enforcement of the rules, especially in bass nursery areas) but if you look at the current data on bass presented to justify angler take increase last year ,to keep what is seen as a supportive group onside, you will see massive ad hoc adjustments have been made to ssb and recruitment figures with no new information to support said adjustments.

90% of areas supporting populations of bass have not been surveyed so care has to be taken when making any conclusions from what is presented as "data".

Yeh, exactly, that’s wot I meant to say to him and Nick too

Fair to say that a lot of that is way over my head as a layman, but you seem to understand your stuff. I tend to think we would be better off managing our own fisheries in the UK but from an economic perspective rather than an ecological one.

So as someone with more knowledge than me, do you feel that we would be better able to manage our fish stocks and associated industry and sport without the overarching EU fisheries policy? If you can elaborate a little, I would also be grateful - it’s not something I get informed about too often but please don’t feel compelled as you could get drawn in deeper by the crowd.

TIA. Every day is a school day.

Am I mistaken or wasn't the agreement made with the approval of the interested parties - United Kingdom, France, Belgium, the Netherlands and Ireland, rather than just some faceless EU fishing quango?

[Piha]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I have to agree with you there. So many Leave voters now seem so angry now they realise they were lied to by Bojo, Farage, JRM, DD & chums.

[wc98]

crankedup said:

Whilst talk of fishing, weren’t the French kicking up merry hell against our fishermen who were exercising thier right to fish for oysters or cockles or some other shellfish.The French don’t like the EU regulations when they go against their own home policies it seems. Club for all my arse.

shellfish species was scallops. it was an agreement they themselves were part of negotiating, then they decided they didn't want to play anymore. the agreement pre dates the cfp.

[SeeFive]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Keep thinking that way and please convince others too. It should reduce remain’s effectiveness in being so confidently wrong about why leavers feel disenfranchised.

[Tony427]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Truly pathetic.

[Nickgnome]

SeeFive said:

The problem is the order hasn’t been correct for the two approvals and agreements. There is no room for AiP in that process apparently.

So if parliament by some weird fluke don’t approve the EU granted extension that we said yes to, or May grows a pair and doesn’t push the Witdrawal Act SI through the two houses to save her and her party’s skin in some way, then it bites. That is the QC knowledge, not mine. Interesting though, well for me anyway.

I am comfortable that the majority of MPs are intelligent and hard working. I do not subcribe to the view that they are in it for profit. I’m damed if I’d have been one even with the allowances.

So I am reasonably confident that the necessary legislation will get through the houses with limited prevarication.

[SeeFive]

Nickgnome said:

SeeFive said:

The problem is the order hasn’t been correct for the two approvals and agreements. There is no room for AiP in that process apparently.

So if parliament by some weird fluke don’t approve the EU granted extension that we said yes to, or May grows a pair and doesn’t push the Witdrawal Act SI through the two houses to save her and her party’s skin in some way, then it bites. That is the QC knowledge, not mine. Interesting though, well for me anyway.

I am comfortable that the majority of MPs are intelligent and hard working. I do not subcribe to the view that they are in it for profit. I’m damed if I’d have been one even with the allowances.

So I am reasonably confident that the necessary legislation will get through the houses with limited prevarication.

I agree with you Nick. But let me dream a little

[wc98]

SeeFive said:

Firstly, I am not the worlds expert of fish stock management and haven’t claimed it on here.

I would suggest implementing UK fisheries management of UK stocks which no other nation state or European superstate is allowed to interfere with, some of which is included in my out of my head thoughts below.

1) By eating already dead ones caught before pulling more live ones from the water.

2) By implementing seasonal bans during spawning season (more for stocks that spawn at sea admittedly, some bass spawn in rivers).

3) Where practical, by redistributing over-populated spawning grounds in order to prevent stunting.

4) Improving farming methods.

5) Locally managing quotas, measurement and policing of catches landed. We allocate quotas we choose to other nation states of stock from our waters, not some other organisation. Implement penalties / wired ideas such as redistribution of over quota catch directly to the poor etc to prevent deliberate targeted over fishing masquerading as errors / miscatches

6) Shooting trendy chefs that popularised the species for the table (that could be viewed as a bit extreme).

There’s a bunch more in my head but that is the gist of my non-expert thinking. The important thing is we decide what we do to protect our local resources from ourselves and others. A bit like when a country sits on top of an oil well... oh, hang on a sec...

I may have misread it, but you just accused me in a one liner of whataboutism in your post, I didn’t see a question. Sorry, I always try to do my best to answer people’s questions when they are not completely stupid and pointless. People by and large answer my pointless and stupid ramblings... it helps us all I guess.

I hope I have started to answer this one. Did I miss anything? Important thing was local UK, quickly revisable fisheries policy in line with urgent local industry and stock health needs.

i think you just qualified as an expert. you certainly appear to have more of a clue than some in charge of eu fisheries at the moment.

[wc98]

Nickgnome said:

Neither am I.

1 is a fail though as the fish are already dead and do not increase numbers.
6 Not really a good idea but assume it was tongue in cheek.

The rest all look fine but how is that different from what we do now?

well given the under 10 metre fleet in england are not legally obliged to report catches at the moment i think number 5 is different. there is an ongoing consultation regarding this ongoing at the moment, so a fair chance it might change in the future.

[wc98]

Nickgnome said:

Yes it was.

It was actually wc98 who was playing up that he was not allowed to fish for bass.

He dislikes experts intensely and regularly gets a good spanking in the climate change thread.

i would advise anyone that wants to see me getting a spanking in the climate change thread to go and have a look and make up your own mind. you are telling lies nick, i didn't claim i wasn't allowed to fish for them. i stated, correctly, that i wasn't allowed to retain any bass to eat.

[SeeFive]

wc98 said:

i think you just qualified as an expert. you certainly appear to have more of a clue than some in charge of eu fisheries at the moment.

I honestly doubt that but thank you for the kind comment whilst making your point about the apparently useless EU fisheries folks.

Living where I do, I meet a lot of ex fishermen forced into in new trades to support their families, and to a man they all condemn the EU fisheries policy as the reason. I guess it could have a bit of cronyism or “Thatcher and miners” in there too, but it really seems to be a common and very strongly held view in their declining profession.

[NoNeed]

Piha said:

johnxjsc1985 said:

crankedup said:

It is extremely sad to see such apparent excitement over an online poll. Still it’s all harmless and inconsequential.

just allow them this moment its going to be short lived.

This is quite an interesting link to the petition you're all talking about.....

https://splasho.com/petitions/index.php?petition=2...

I wonder how many bots are running

[Nickgnome]

wc98 said:

well given the under 10 metre fleet in england are not legally obliged to report catches at the moment i think number 5 is different. there is an ongoing consultation regarding this ongoing at the moment, so a fair chance it might change in the future.

Thanks. I understand there are Eu draft plans but not read them.

I only ever fish to pass the time of day if we are anchored somewhere. I like the tide to do most of the work.

[A Winner Is You]

NoNeed said:

Piha said:

johnxjsc1985 said:

crankedup said:

It is extremely sad to see such apparent excitement over an online poll. Still it’s all harmless and inconsequential.

just allow them this moment its going to be short lived.

This is quite an interesting link to the petition you're all talking about.....

https://splasho.com/petitions/index.php?petition=2...

I wonder how many bots are running

Still not even 15% of UK voters

[Nickgnome]

wc98 said:

i would advise anyone that wants to see me getting a spanking in the climate change thread to go and have a look and make up your own mind. you are telling lies nick, i didn't claim i wasn't allowed to fish for them. i stated, correctly, that i wasn't allowed to retain any bass to eat.

Apologies. That’s semantics though as why would you fish for a particular species you cannot eat?

I did go look thanks and imop you are not covering yourself in glory.

[Otis Criblecoblis]

Piha said:

I have to agree with you there. So many Leave voters now seem so angry now they realise they were lied to by Bojo, Farage, JRM, DD & chums.

You keep saying this, despite the evidence there's been only a small shift in the way people would now vote, something I'd expect at the crunch point of a negotiations anyway .

Just so we all know, what was the single biggest lie ?

[jonnyb]

Piha said:

Tony427 said:

jonnyb said:

Tony427 said:

crankedup said:

bhstewie said:

I think Tony's hypothesis also assumes people vote on Brexit and only Brexit.

Most don't.

I've said it before but you choose an MP to represent all of your interests and I'd hope to god most people's extend beyond EU membership.

• Care for the elderly
• Mental health care
• Hospitals
• GP waiting times
• Schools
• Taxation
• HS2 or whatever local issue impacts you

There's more to it for most sensible people than "Brexit at all costs".

Of course you are correct in saying that, however brexit is the overriding major policy of any Government since as long as I have been around. All of the issues you mention are back seat awaiting attention thanks to brexit. All MPs will be held to account regarding the outcome of the brexit debate and implementation.

Exactly.

Remember how Leave won the campaign.

They got the people out who normally don't vote as a protest vote against the status quo. Many millions of people who were peed off with the elite were motivated to go out and vote. Then they, in effect, have had their voice and vote stolen from them.

"They are now angry." Not my words but the words of a Midlands MP on TV this lunchtime.

As a result normal election rules no longer apply. The people who hold sway are not the "normal sensible people". These dissaffected voters within the 17.4million others just need motivating again, and anger is a brilliant motivator.

In effect what the new parties have to say is " You hit them once and they didn't listen. Hit them again. But harder"

The niceties of considering each manifesto's options, tax policies, national debt policies, education policies, etc, etc wont mean a thing.

It will be tribal. You fecked us, so we are going to feck you back.

"Welcome to Strictly, Evette Cooper." A husband and wife team, a first.

She will not be the only Remain MP in a Leave Constituency looking for a job. Or a victim of Momentum. Double whammy for Labour MP's.

So Remainers, when we have 3 or 4 election cycles with various degrees of nutters in coalition governments just have a think on how we got there.

And if you think this wont happen here, look to Europe.

Then just wait until Target Two hits.

Cheers,

Tony

That’s what people said about the last election and it turned out not to be true. The only party to try and fight on purely brexit grounds were the Lib Dem’s.

I’m not sure the vast majority of the population actually cares anymore.

???

I think you may find that in the last election both main parties promised to honour the results of the Referendum.

If Remain was a strongly held belief the LIb Dems as you point out should have won by a landslide.

Most people believed that the MP's would carry out the instructions of the referendum as promised in the Government leaflet that was sent to every household to put them off voting Leave.

Because the MP's have steadfastly refused to implement the results of the referendum they will get a really good kicking in the next election probably by some right wing barely sensible party.

If you are a Remain Corbyn hating Labour MP in a Leave constituency you might as well start filling in application forms for Maccy D's now.

I really find it difficult to put it any simpler than this.

Oh, and Tom Watson is positioning himself as the Leader of the new " New Labour" party post Corbyn. " Where's Jeremy Corbyn?" the remainer sheep sang.

Where indeed?.

Cheers,

Tony

A General Election isn't a single issue vote.

Yes I agree, the government should fully implement the instructions contained in this leaflet:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/governmen...

If you can find any.

[A Winner Is You]

Otis Criblecoblis said:

Just so we all know, what was the single biggest lie ?

That the outcome of the vote would be respected.