How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 13)

[Stay in Bed Instead]

Vanden Saab said:

Why is that relevant ?

Because they do now, and in many cases they will have paid the UK fisherman for the quota to do so.

But at the end of the day it's all part of the negotiation, the UK does not have to agree to it. But then of course the French/Spanish/whoever don't have to buy the fish that we will catch.

[Tuna]

Mrr T said:

Having announced the UK would move away from regulatory alignment with the EU it seems there has been a change of plan.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-51228818

Good to know we have a government which knows what it is doing.

Newspapers hype up a fairly obvious statement. Minister then clarifies the fairly obvious statement, which the newspapers duly report in the context of their own made up hysteria.

Love that Helicopter has pounced on this, after the last week of good news on PMI, economic predictions from the IMF and the Brexit bill being passed, he must have been desperate for some bad news to report. If only this was actually bad news...

[anonymous-user]

Stay in Bed Instead said:

Because they do now, and in many cases they will have paid the UK fisherman for the quota to do so.

But at the end of the day it's all part of the negotiation, the UK does not have to agree to it. But then of course the French/Spanish/whoever don't have to buy the fish that we will catch.

You tried Basa?

[Mrr T]

Stay in Bed Instead said:

Because they do now, and in many cases they will have paid the UK fisherman for the quota to do so.

But at the end of the day it's all part of the negotiation, the UK does not have to agree to it. But then of course the French/Spanish/whoever don't have to buy the fish that we will catch.

The question is does the UK have to pay compensation if it takes back the rights. Its not clear legally but effectively taking away a right which has been paid for with out compensation set a very bad precedent.

So the fishermans plan for brexit is the UK takes back the fishing quota UK fishermen have sold to EU fishermen, pays compensation to the EU fishermen and then gives the quota back to the UK fishermen. No wonder UK fishermen voted for brexit.

[gooner1]

catweasle said:

Stay in Bed Instead said:

Because they do now, and in many cases they will have paid the UK fisherman for the quota to do so.

But at the end of the day it's all part of the negotiation, the UK does not have to agree to it. But then of course the French/Spanish/whoever don't have to buy the fish that we will catch.

You tried Basa?

Would that be the fish previously known as Cobbler?
Bred in some decidedly iffy waters iirc. Think I'll stick with the Chlori Chicken, ta.

[hutchst]

Mrr T said:

The question is does the UK have to pay compensation if it takes back the rights. Its not clear legally but effectively taking away a right which has been paid for with out compensation set a very bad precedent.

So the fishermans plan for brexit is the UK takes back the fishing quota UK fishermen have sold to EU fishermen, pays compensation to the EU fishermen and then gives the quota back to the UK fishermen. No wonder UK fishermen voted for brexit.

You do realise that you made all that up, don't you?

[Stay in Bed Instead]

Mrr T said:

The question is does the UK have to pay compensation if it takes back the rights. Its not clear legally but effectively taking away a right which has been paid for with out compensation set a very bad precedent.

So the fishermans plan for brexit is the UK takes back the fishing quota UK fishermen have sold to EU fishermen, pays compensation to the EU fishermen and then gives the quota back to the UK fishermen. No wonder UK fishermen voted for brexit.

I would hope the government sell the quota to the UK fisherman. Maybe they will keep hold of them this time.

[gooner1]

Helicopter123 said:

I thought that there would only be winners??

j

Did you, really ?

[Sway]

Stay in Bed Instead said:

Sway said:

Of course. If they were willing to register vessels in Canadian ports, and land their catches in Canadian facilities - and meet Canadian regs and stock management rules...

That would be a no then.

So you are not comparing like with like.

Of course I am. Are European owned vessels able to fish in Canadian waters? Yes.

[Sway]

Stay in Bed Instead said:

Vanden Saab said:

Why is that relevant ?

Because they do now, and in many cases they will have paid the UK fisherman for the quota to do so.

But at the end of the day it's all part of the negotiation, the UK does not have to agree to it. But then of course the French/Spanish/whoever don't have to buy the fish that we will catch.

There's no need for the quota they've bought to be obsolete.

Merely that the terms of how they process that quota could change. Which is hardly unprecedented - similar changes happen all the time in Industry.

[Stay in Bed Instead]

Sway said:

There's no need for the quota they've bought to be obsolete.

Merely that the terms of how they process that quota could change. Which is hardly unprecedented - similar changes happen all the time in Industry.

They are British fish, the EU can't have them.

[Sway]

hutchst said:

You do realise that you made all that up, don't you?

Indeed.

It's like saying "I wonder if the government will have to pay compensation to haulage firms operating vehicles non compliant with new ULEZ...?"

No. The answer is no.

As for what nationality the vessels are, or where they're owned - zero fks given. As long as the regs, quotas, practices and landings occur in the UK, with UK body oversight.

Then we're far less likely to see a couple of dozen dolphin washing up dead on Sussex and Hampshire's beaches in the last few weeks...

[Mrr T]

Stay in Bed Instead said:

Sway said:

There's no need for the quota they've bought to be obsolete.

Merely that the terms of how they process that quota could change. Which is hardly unprecedented - similar changes happen all the time in Industry.

They are British fish, the EU can't have them.

Will they all be getting shiny new blue waterproof passports?

[Stay in Bed Instead]

Mrr T said:

Will they all be getting shiny new blue waterproof passports?

Only if they swear allegiance to the Queen.

[anonymous-user]

Stay in Bed Instead said:

Mrr T said:

Will they all be getting shiny new blue waterproof passports?

Only if they swear allegiance to the Queen.

That could soon mean codface Camilla.

[anonymous-user]

catweasle said:

That could soon mean codface Camilla.

She wont be queen, just as Philip isn't king.

[anonymous-user]

jsf said:

catweasle said:

That could soon mean codface Camilla.

She wont be queen, just as Philip isn't king.

Doubt fish will have passports of any colour either.

[Dont like rolls]

catweasle said:

jsf said:

catweasle said:

That could soon mean codface Camilla.

She wont be queen, just as Philip isn't king.

Doubt fish will have passports of any colour either.

And the fake ones on offer are a bit fishy to say the least.

Remains now care about fish, what will Saint Bob say ?

[Mrr T]

Some reading for those interested.

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/h...

[Sway]

Oh st.

Any article referring to the CFP determination of quotas, is fking nonsense.

Bass stocks decimation. Death of dolphins - all enabled due to CFP mechanisms. Hence even though the UK have taken measures on the South Coast - even so far as to require catch and release of bass by recreational fishermen, and setting exclusion zones for small boat commercial, there are two super trawlers sitting just outside the UK controlled zone (but inside UK waters) pulling out thousands of tonnes - and throwing dead porpoise and dolphin overboard.

Two separate issues - determination of quotas, and allocation to fleets/permissible tackle. As usual, a biased article tries to conflate the two, and suggest things will get worse.

Utter tosh.