Life After Brexit

[Kendhni]

I read something today where Barmier has said we can have control of our waters but not the fish in them…what’s he going to do… ‘shoo’ them all over to France?

If you have any complaints about fishing rights then you need to take a two pronged approach.

Ask the MEP that was responsible for looking after British Fishing rights why he was so incompetent, and showed a total lack of respect or caring about British fisherman when it was his job to deal with them, he didn't even bother turning up at the meetings (generally he was too busy filling in his expenses and misappropriating money from the EU) - his name is Farage. Also ask your MEP, Farage, why he failed to vote in favour of improving fishing legislation on multiple occasions.

The distribution of national quotas has never been the responsibility of the EU it has always been the responsibility of each national government ... so, you will also have to ask why British companies that held the quotas CHOSE to sell the majority of them to foreign fishing companies and vessels - some on long term leases ... so that brexit will actually make little difference to who actually does the fishing - unless of course the UK wants to show more bad faith by backing out of the contracts, something that will cost them a lot of money. Brexit will have little affect on boats such as Cornelis Vrolijk that catches an estimated 23% of England's entire fishing quota. Remember it was the UK that promoted and supported the principle of "Open Seas" (how the tide has turned).

How have we come to the point that some are going on and on about fishing when it accounts for about 0.6% of GDP. Is that really the most important thing they are capable of thinking of, or is it just that that is the latest thing that they have been programmed to repeat? The big con being that the current government is trying to pass the Fisheries bill through parliament that means that foreign fishing rights will NOT get passed back to British companies, all the foreign company has to do is register the boat in the UK OR land at least 50% of its catch in the UK OR use at least 50% British crew ... basically the current contracts get converted to licenses - aka Boris caving in yet again.

This however is not unexpected. Many fishing organizations are warning against the taking back of quota because they know it will end up in the hands of large companies (mainly international) that will probably price the small fisherman out of the market. In particular there is fear in the main fishing organisations that a no deal brexit means they will lose access to a market that currently takes 70-80% of their catch (fish types that are not consumed in the UK) - the reality is that 'taking back control' could actually bankrupt this industry (responsible for a tiny amount of GDP) and hand it over to large multi-nationals.

[towny44]

I read something today where Barmier has said we can have control of our waters but not the fish in them…what’s he going to do… ‘shoo’ them all over to France?

If you have any complaints about fishing rights then you need to take a two pronged approach.

Ask the MEP that was responsible for looking after British Fishing rights why he was so incompetent, and showed a total lack of respect or caring about British fisherman when it was his job to deal with them, he didn't even bother turning up at the meetings (generally he was too busy filling in his expenses and misappropriating money from the EU) - his name is Farage. Also ask your MEP, Farage, why he failed to vote in favour of improving fishing legislation on multiple occasions.

The distribution of national quotas has never been the responsibility of the EU it has always been the responsibility of each national government ... so, you will also have to ask why British companies that held the quotas CHOSE to sell the majority of them to foreign fishing companies and vessels - some on long term leases ... so that brexit will actually make little difference to who actually does the fishing - unless of course the UK wants to show more bad faith by backing out of the contracts, something that will cost them a lot of money. Brexit will have little affect on boats such as Cornelis Vrolijk that catches an estimated 23% of England's entire fishing quota. Remember it was the UK that promoted and supported the principle of "Open Seas" (how the tide has turned).

How have we come to the point that some are going on and on about fishing when it accounts for about 0.6% of GDP. Is that really the most important thing they are capable of thinking of, or is it just that that is the latest thing that they have been programmed to repeat? The big con being that the current government is trying to pass the Fisheries bill through parliament that means that foreign fishing rights will NOT get passed back to British companies, all the foreign company has to do is register the boat in the UK OR land at least 50% of its catch in the UK OR use at least 50% British crew ... basically the current contracts get converted to licenses - aka Boris caving in yet again.

This however is not unexpected. Many fishing organizations are warning against the taking back of quota because they know it will end up in the hands of large companies (mainly international) that will probably price the small fisherman out of the market. In particular there is fear in the main fishing organisations that a no deal brexit means they will lose access to a market that currently takes 70-80% of their catch (fish types that are not consumed in the UK) - the reality is that 'taking back control' could actually bankrupt this industry (responsible for a tiny amount of GDP) and hand it over to large multi-nationals.

Ken, if all you say is true then it would be sheer stupidity for the UK to allow the Brexit trade deal to fail because of fishing rights. There is obviously something else that you are not reporting which is resulting in the British intransigence, because however inept you believe the current govt to be, I just don't accept they are so incompetent.

[screwy]

I blame Hancock and Williamson.......they get blamed for everything else....rightly so some may shout.

The alternative....Gardner, Ashworth, Butler and co..

[barney]

I think Ken is slightly obsessed with what was and not what is and what’s going to be.
EU lovers cannot see past their own nose and cannot see the obvious failings of it.
They have publicly stated that they will not allow a trade agreement equal to trade agreements they have already negotiated with others with the U.K. because they are concerned by our geographical position.
It is they who are not negotiating in good faith.
The U.K. is happy to negotiate a fishing agreement with the Eu.
The Eu will accept nothing but the status quo.

Fishing is a tiny bit of the economy but very important strategically for a free independent nation which the U.K. now is.
The Eu position of agree to our terms or no deal has obviously not worked on this current set up.
Most business has factored in no deal.
We’ve committed to purchasing for next year safe in the knowledge that any tariffs imposed will be picked up by the european supplier and not passed on.

[Manoverboard]

.... The distribution of national quotas has never been the responsibility of the EU it has always been the responsibility of each national government ... so, you will also have to ask why British companies that held the quotas CHOSE to sell the majority of them to foreign fishing companies and vessels - some on long term leases ...

The EU set and inforce the rules for gross catch weight and type plus size of fish caught.

Mr Gove recently stated on TV that the fisherman of this land ( including his father ) were forced to sell their quotas else scrap their boats due to EU rulings.

[barney]

.... The distribution of national quotas has never been the responsibility of the EU it has always been the responsibility of each national government ... so, you will also have to ask why British companies that held the quotas CHOSE to sell the majority of them to foreign fishing companies and vessels - some on long term leases ...

The EU set and inforce the rules for gross catch weight and type plus size of fish caught.

Mr Gove recently stated on TV that the fisherman of this land ( including his father ) were forced to sell their quotas else scrap their boats due to EU rulings.

Everyone knows that the CFP set the fishing rules for the EU as CAP does for agriculture, limiting competition and keeping prices artificially high.

I hope the Tories will support the Labour Bill of limiting the size of any boats fishing U.K. waters to eliminate the super trawlers fishing our territory.

[Kendhni]

I think Ken is slightly obsessed with what was and not what is and what’s going to be.
EU lovers cannot see past their own nose and cannot see the obvious failings of it.
They have publicly stated that they will not allow a trade agreement equal to trade agreements they have already negotiated with others with the U.K. because they are concerned by our geographical position.
It is they who are not negotiating in good faith.
The U.K. is happy to negotiate a fishing agreement with the Eu.
The Eu will accept nothing but the status quo.

Fishing is a tiny bit of the economy but very important strategically for a free independent nation which the U.K. now is.
The Eu position of agree to our terms or no deal has obviously not worked on this current set up.
Most business has factored in no deal.
We’ve committed to purchasing for next year safe in the knowledge that any tariffs imposed will be picked up by the european supplier and not passed on.

Just correcting a few factual inexactitudes for you Barney.

I think barney is slightly obsessed with what was (long live the Raj) and not what is and what’s going to be.
Brexiteer gullibility means they cannot see past their own nose and cannot see the obvious failings of it.
The British government has signed up to the WA - although some are now trying to back pedal furiously on that. Those that openly laughed and sneered at those that wanted due diligence and scrutiny of the contents of the WA to be carried out are now the same ones crying like babies about its content (e.g. Ian Dunce Smith)
The EU is happy to negotiate a fishing agreement with the UK, although the UK simply says no, no. no while pushing a Fisheries bill through parliament that basically retains the status quo.

As I said, fishing is a tiny bit of the economy that was totally mishandled by the MEP responsible for looking after it and apart from brexiteers being programmed to bleat on about fishing, it carries little to no real strategic weight in 'pseudo' independent nation which the UK may be in the future.

Most business has factored in no deal - pity that nobody in the UK has ever had the chance to vote on the idea of a no deal. At the time of the referendum not a single party offered 'no deal' as an option (as Gove said "we didn't vote to leave without a deal") - in fact the brexiteer leadership told the faithful that any such suggestion was just 'project fear and they would get us a 'great deal''. But after saying 'F*** business' the sound bite king of a PM has told business to 'prepare for brexit' - so they are, many are 'right sizing' and COVID is a convenient excuse to hide redundancies behind ... similarly some companies are snapping up some of those made redundant to expand.

However, when people mention no deal, requiring exit under WTO terms, I like to think back to what the brexit leadership told us about that strategy .....
"One can say, unequivocally, that the UK could not survive as a trading nation by relying on the WTO Option. It would be an unmitigated disaster, and no responsible government should allow it. The option should be rejected."

[Onelife]

Hi Ken,

Thanks for your insight as to where/and how we got to where we are now. I can’t prove or disprove anything that you have said without doing some research so I’m happy to bow to your greater understanding of fishing legislation.
This is quite a long read but I think it gives a better understanding as to how things started going wrong.

https://unearthed.greenpeace.org/2019/0 ... fleetwood/

Time to redress the balance of who holds the fishing rod me thinks .

[Kendhni]

Hi Ken,

Thanks for your insight as to where/and how we got to where we are now. I can’t prove or disprove anything that you have said without doing some research so I’m happy to bow to your greater understanding of fishing legislation.
This is quite a long read but I think it gives a better understanding as to how things started going wrong.

https://unearthed.greenpeace.org/2019/0 ... fleetwood/

Time to redress the balance of who holds the fishing rod me thinks .

Great article Onelife, and nice to see that it pretty much backs up every point I made. I notice it even mentions the 'open seas' policy when the British wanted to fish in Icelandic waters, strange now the glove is on the other hand how the mind set changes.

I also like the way it describes how the British chose to use British fishing rights as a commodity. As the article says in relation to brexit
"But there’s no guarantee that the UK will win new quota in the Brexit negotiations. Other European member states will fight hard to retain their current access to UK waters, and they have plenty of bargaining chips – not least the access to European markets upon which many British fishermen depend.

Should the hoped-for quota dividend not be won, Brexit currently has little to offer fishermen but a continuation of the status quo."

[towny44]

I think Ken is slightly obsessed with what was and not what is and what’s going to be.
EU lovers cannot see past their own nose and cannot see the obvious failings of it.
They have publicly stated that they will not allow a trade agreement equal to trade agreements they have already negotiated with others with the U.K. because they are concerned by our geographical position.
It is they who are not negotiating in good faith.
The U.K. is happy to negotiate a fishing agreement with the Eu.
The Eu will accept nothing but the status quo.

Fishing is a tiny bit of the economy but very important strategically for a free independent nation which the U.K. now is.
The Eu position of agree to our terms or no deal has obviously not worked on this current set up.
Most business has factored in no deal.
We’ve committed to purchasing for next year safe in the knowledge that any tariffs imposed will be picked up by the european supplier and not passed on.

Just correcting a few factual inexactitudes for you Barney.

I think barney is slightly obsessed with what was (long live the Raj) and not what is and what’s going to be.
Brexiteer gullibility means they cannot see past their own nose and cannot see the obvious failings of it.
The British government has signed up to the WA - although some are now trying to back pedal furiously on that. Those that openly laughed and sneered at those that wanted due diligence and scrutiny of the contents of the WA to be carried out are now the same ones crying like babies about its content (e.g. Ian Dunce Smith)
The EU is happy to negotiate a fishing agreement with the UK, although the UK simply says no, no. no while pushing a Fisheries bill through parliament that basically retains the status quo.

As I said, fishing is a tiny bit of the economy that was totally mishandled by the MEP responsible for looking after it and apart from brexiteers being programmed to bleat on about fishing, it carries little to no real strategic weight in 'pseudo' independent nation which the UK may be in the future.

Most business has factored in no deal - pity that nobody in the UK has ever had the chance to vote on the idea of a no deal. At the time of the referendum not a single party offered 'no deal' as an option (as Gove said "we didn't vote to leave without a deal") - in fact the brexiteer leadership told the faithful that any such suggestion was just 'project fear and they would get us a 'great deal''. But after saying 'F*** business' the sound bite king of a PM has told business to 'prepare for brexit' - so they are, many are 'right sizing' and COVID is a convenient excuse to hide redundancies behind ... similarly some companies are snapping up some of those made redundant to expand.

However, when people mention no deal, requiring exit under WTO terms, I like to think back to what the brexit leadership told us about that strategy .....
"One can say, unequivocally, that the UK could not survive as a trading nation by relying on the WTO Option. It would be an unmitigated disaster, and no responsible government should allow it. The option should be rejected."

What was the exactly text in WA regarding fisheries Ken, and is the British govt trying to renege on this or not?

[Kendhni]

.... The distribution of national quotas has never been the responsibility of the EU it has always been the responsibility of each national government ... so, you will also have to ask why British companies that held the quotas CHOSE to sell the majority of them to foreign fishing companies and vessels - some on long term leases ...

The EU set and inforce the rules for gross catch weight and type plus size of fish caught.

I was very clear to mention 'national' making the distinction between the rules as laid out by the EU and how those rules are enforced within the UK. The biggest stumbling block is that UK wanted to include catch from waters it claimed under the 'open seas' policy that did not actually belong to it as part of its quota -that failed.

Mr Gove recently stated on TV that the fisherman of this land ( including his father ) were forced to sell their quotas else scrap their boats due to EU rulings.

The bit that you have left out is that it was much more profitable for the fishermen [including my uncle, a third generation boat owner and captain] to sell their quotas than to actually fish them.

[Kendhni]

I think Ken is slightly obsessed with what was and not what is and what’s going to be.
EU lovers cannot see past their own nose and cannot see the obvious failings of it.
They have publicly stated that they will not allow a trade agreement equal to trade agreements they have already negotiated with others with the U.K. because they are concerned by our geographical position.
It is they who are not negotiating in good faith.
The U.K. is happy to negotiate a fishing agreement with the Eu.
The Eu will accept nothing but the status quo.

Fishing is a tiny bit of the economy but very important strategically for a free independent nation which the U.K. now is.
The Eu position of agree to our terms or no deal has obviously not worked on this current set up.
Most business has factored in no deal.
We’ve committed to purchasing for next year safe in the knowledge that any tariffs imposed will be picked up by the european supplier and not passed on.

Just correcting a few factual inexactitudes for you Barney.

I think barney is slightly obsessed with what was (long live the Raj) and not what is and what’s going to be.
Brexiteer gullibility means they cannot see past their own nose and cannot see the obvious failings of it.
The British government has signed up to the WA - although some are now trying to back pedal furiously on that. Those that openly laughed and sneered at those that wanted due diligence and scrutiny of the contents of the WA to be carried out are now the same ones crying like babies about its content (e.g. Ian Dunce Smith)
The EU is happy to negotiate a fishing agreement with the UK, although the UK simply says no, no. no while pushing a Fisheries bill through parliament that basically retains the status quo.

As I said, fishing is a tiny bit of the economy that was totally mishandled by the MEP responsible for looking after it and apart from brexiteers being programmed to bleat on about fishing, it carries little to no real strategic weight in 'pseudo' independent nation which the UK may be in the future.

Most business has factored in no deal - pity that nobody in the UK has ever had the chance to vote on the idea of a no deal. At the time of the referendum not a single party offered 'no deal' as an option (as Gove said "we didn't vote to leave without a deal") - in fact the brexiteer leadership told the faithful that any such suggestion was just 'project fear and they would get us a 'great deal''. But after saying 'F*** business' the sound bite king of a PM has told business to 'prepare for brexit' - so they are, many are 'right sizing' and COVID is a convenient excuse to hide redundancies behind ... similarly some companies are snapping up some of those made redundant to expand.

However, when people mention no deal, requiring exit under WTO terms, I like to think back to what the brexit leadership told us about that strategy .....
"One can say, unequivocally, that the UK could not survive as a trading nation by relying on the WTO Option. It would be an unmitigated disaster, and no responsible government should allow it. The option should be rejected."

What was the exactly text in WA regarding fisheries Ken, and is the British govt trying to renege on this or not?

I do not have much knowledge on that John, however my understanding is that there is a section in the WA that means the the way that fishing rights are determined would not be affected (one of many similar clauses affecting many areas of agreement). If this is true then it is part of the agreement that UK signed up to, part of the agreement that the brexit leadership steam rollered through the HoP while laughing and sneering at those that asked for time to read, review and carry out due diligence.

I will have a ferret around and see if I can find out any more information on this.

[barney]

Like most EU fanatics, you are so wrapped up in the past and what was.
Time has moved on mate.
Icelandic cod wars is ancient history.
The U.K., as an independent country can set it’s own laws.
Sure, some foreign boats are U.K. registered but they need to comply with rules.
It’s no different to Nissan being a foreign company operating in the U.K..

The bottom line is that we’ve left the Eu and now it’s up to us to make the best of it.
There are many pessimistic people about but fortunately more who know we’ll be fine.
I understand that it must be difficult to be on the losing side and have to accept a situation.
You look for every bit of trivial information that reinforces your view.
I did notice the stop Brexit man was outside Parliament yesterday so someone is still financing him.
I wonder who and why?

Anyway, I’m out on this subject now because those who are wrong will never accept it.

[Kendhni]

Like most EU fanatics, you are so wrapped up in the past and what was.
Time has moved on mate.
Icelandic cod wars is ancient history.
The U.K., as an independent country can set it’s own laws.
Sure, some foreign boats are U.K. registered but they need to comply with rules.
It’s no different to Nissan being a foreign company operating in the U.K..

The bottom line is that we’ve left the Eu and now it’s up to us to make the best of it.
There are many pessimistic people about but fortunately more who know we’ll be fine.
I understand that it must be difficult to be on the losing side and have to accept a situation.
You look for every bit of trivial information that reinforces your view.
I did notice the stop Brexit man was outside Parliament yesterday so someone is still financing him.
I wonder who and why?

Just fixing some more factual inexactitudes

Like most brexiteer fanatics, you are so wrapped up in the past and what was.
Time has moved on mate.
The Raj is ancient history.
The U.K., as a 'pseudo' independent country always has set it’s own laws.
Sure, some foreign boats are U.K. registered but they need to comply with rules.
It’s no different to Nissan being a foreign company operating in the U.K..

The bottom line is that we are in the process of leaving the Eu and now it’s up to the brexiteer leadership to deliver on the contract promised to the British people.
There are many pessimistic people about but sadly many more suffer from cognitive dissonance and have convinced themselves we’ll be fine.
I understand that it must be difficult to have to deliver on all the lies that have been told - but you won, so you need to get over it and start delivering something more than a few soundbites.
You look for every bit of trivial information that reinforces your view.
I did notice a brexit fanbois was posting on this site today and wonder who is financing him



One example of a brexit contract ... others available on request
https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/i ... 1490680551

[Manoverboard]

Mr Gove recently stated on TV that the fisherman of this land ( including his father ) were forced to sell their quotas else scrap their boats due to EU rulings.

The bit that you have left out is that it was much more profitable for the fishermen [including my uncle, a third generation boat owner and captain] to sell their quotas than to actually fish them.

If I owned a boat and made a good living I would be a happy bunny but when the EU ' adjusted ' the quotas and I realised that I could no longer legally sell my usual catch then I would probably have no option but to sell my boat ... is, I would suggest, the reason for selling them.

[Kendhni]

Just correcting a few factual inexactitudes for you Barney.

I think barney is slightly obsessed with what was (long live the Raj) and not what is and what’s going to be.
Brexiteer gullibility means they cannot see past their own nose and cannot see the obvious failings of it.
The British government has signed up to the WA - although some are now trying to back pedal furiously on that. Those that openly laughed and sneered at those that wanted due diligence and scrutiny of the contents of the WA to be carried out are now the same ones crying like babies about its content (e.g. Ian Dunce Smith)
The EU is happy to negotiate a fishing agreement with the UK, although the UK simply says no, no. no while pushing a Fisheries bill through parliament that basically retains the status quo.

As I said, fishing is a tiny bit of the economy that was totally mishandled by the MEP responsible for looking after it and apart from brexiteers being programmed to bleat on about fishing, it carries little to no real strategic weight in 'pseudo' independent nation which the UK may be in the future.

Most business has factored in no deal - pity that nobody in the UK has ever had the chance to vote on the idea of a no deal. At the time of the referendum not a single party offered 'no deal' as an option (as Gove said "we didn't vote to leave without a deal") - in fact the brexiteer leadership told the faithful that any such suggestion was just 'project fear and they would get us a 'great deal''. But after saying 'F*** business' the sound bite king of a PM has told business to 'prepare for brexit' - so they are, many are 'right sizing' and COVID is a convenient excuse to hide redundancies behind ... similarly some companies are snapping up some of those made redundant to expand.

However, when people mention no deal, requiring exit under WTO terms, I like to think back to what the brexit leadership told us about that strategy .....
"One can say, unequivocally, that the UK could not survive as a trading nation by relying on the WTO Option. It would be an unmitigated disaster, and no responsible government should allow it. The option should be rejected."

What was the exactly text in WA regarding fisheries Ken, and is the British govt trying to renege on this or not?

I do not have much knowledge on that John, however my understanding is that there is a section in the WA that means the the way that fishing rights are determined would not be affected (one of many similar clauses affecting many areas of agreement). If this is true then it is part of the agreement that UK signed up to, part of the agreement that the brexit leadership steam rollered through the HoP while laughing and sneering at those that asked for time to read, review and carry out due diligence.

I will have a ferret around and see if I can find out any more information on this.

Best as I understand it ... the main issue is article 130 of the Withdrawal agreement. Point 4 of that states
"Without prejudice to Article 127(1), the relative stability keys for the allocation of fishing
opportunities referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article shall be maintained."
And the bit in part 1 states
"As regards the fixing of fishing opportunities within the meaning of Article 43(3) TFEU for
any period falling within the transition period, the United Kingdom shall be consulted in respect of
the fishing opportunities related to the United Kingdom, including in the context of the preparation
of relevant international consultations and negotiations."


(This again is my understanding) this basically says that the EU will continue to determine how much fish and of what types can be caught (plus other 'keys'). This basically says that Johnson's government has signed up to this (while denying others the right to check it over). I remember the sneering little creep Ian Smith mocking anybody who demanded scrutiny of the WA, so you need to ask him why he signed up to this.

Another view on it (I know nothing about this website, but the author has significant credibility)
https://conservativewoman.co.uk/on-brex ... e-stuffed/

[towny44]

[quote=towny44 post_id=280655 time=1599131945
What was the exactly text in WA regarding fisheries Ken, and is the British govt trying to renege on this or not?

I do not have much knowledge on that John, however my understanding is that there is a section in the WA that means the the way that fishing rights are determined would not be affected (one of many similar clauses affecting many areas of agreement). If this is true then it is part of the agreement that UK signed up to, part of the agreement that the brexit leadership steam rollered through the HoP while laughing and sneering at those that asked for time to read, review and carry out due diligence.

I will have a ferret around and see if I can find out any more information on this.

Then I recommend you read it before writing such a damning diatribe.
If I understand the very short paragraph correctly, it states that the UK will leave the CFP, but it will work within the fishery protection guidelines about quotas. There is nothing to indicate that the EU should retain any governance on our fishing rights, perhaps you should check your facts first rather than relying on pro EU websites that are working to undermine the Brexit deal.
.

[Kendhni]

[quote=towny44 post_id=280655 time=1599131945
What was the exactly text in WA regarding fisheries Ken, and is the British govt trying to renege on this or not?

I do not have much knowledge on that John, however my understanding is that there is a section in the WA that means the the way that fishing rights are determined would not be affected (one of many similar clauses affecting many areas of agreement). If this is true then it is part of the agreement that UK signed up to, part of the agreement that the brexit leadership steam rollered through the HoP while laughing and sneering at those that asked for time to read, review and carry out due diligence.

I will have a ferret around and see if I can find out any more information on this.

Then I recommend you read it before writing such a damning diatribe.
If I understand the very short paragraph correctly, it states that the UK will leave the CFP, but it will work within the fishery protection guidelines about quotas. There is nothing to indicate that the EU should retain any governance on our fishing rights, perhaps you should check your facts first rather than relying on pro EU websites that are working to undermine the Brexit deal.
.

I was asked for the 'exact wording' which I did not have to hand - but I thought, for the purposes of discussion it might be worthwhile finding out.

So now I would recommend that you read both the agreement and the article I linked to. From my quick glance it appears to be a more brexit favouring site (although I have not dived that deeply into it, but obviously you didn't either before your wee rant). The article was written by someone with solid knowledge of the subject and would appear to back my assessment rather than cognitive bias that you made up.

Curiously Ian Smith seems to also agree with the article, such clauses, and there are several in the WA, are the reason why he was throwing his toys about the other day and desperately trying to back pedal away from the WA that he, and the government he works for, signed up to without doing due diligence. The fact this government now appears to have no idea of what they signed up to shows their total arrogance and incompetence ... THAT is what has been, and continues, to undermine advancement of their brexit deal.

[barney]

Oh dear!
I admire your tenacity.
It’s all irrelevant now as the U.K. has formally left the EU.
I personally would never have agreed the WA and would have left at the time without it.
The WA ends this year with the end of the transition period.Thank God.
Deal or not, we’ve got our country back and dodged a bullet by not having to prop up other EU nations.
We could include some of them on our foreign aid program.

[Manoverboard]

The Foreign Aid budget needs reform and there simply isn't going to be enough left over to worry about failing EU States.

[barney]

The Foreign Aid budget needs reform and there simply isn't going to be enough left over to worry about failing EU States.

I did read (not in the Mail) that our government are going to link foreign aid to trade.
As I understand it, under current legislation, it's use it or lose it for DFID.
I'm happy to keep subsidising our former colonies as we have a historical obligation to them, but feel that until things improve here, then our tax money would be better spent as emergency aid when needed.
No more free handouts to despots.

[Kendhni]

Oh dear!
I admire your tenacity.
It’s all irrelevant now as the U.K. has formally left the EU.
I personally would never have agreed the WA and would have left at the time without it.
The WA ends this year with the end of the transition period.Thank God.
Deal or not, we’ve got our country back and dodged a bullet by not having to prop up other EU nations.
We could include some of them on our foreign aid program.

In a way I agree with you, the only thing now is that the Brexit leadership will be judged on meeting the contract they made with the British people. I am even willing to forgive point 9 of their contract and will even give them until Dec 31st to come up with the many new trade deals they promised would be ready on the day we left (accepting they totally missed the original milestone). I look forward to the promised additional £350million per week for the NHS and the 'exact same benefits' that we would have got if we had have remained.

It is their contract, their words and I will judge the success and their competence based on them delivering their written contract with the British people.

I fear however people are going to wake up to a Britain that is not as prosperous as it once was - and no brexiteer has responded to that concern in any meaningful or credible manner (even Minford with his highly manipulated numbers failed). In fact we were told by a multi-millionaire brexiteer 'it was never about the money' (not what he said during the campaign but probably much closer to the truth).

[towny44]

[quote=towny44 post_id=280655 time=1599131945
What was the exactly text in WA regarding fisheries Ken, and is the British govt trying to renege on this or not?

I do not have much knowledge on that John, however my understanding is that there is a section in the WA that means the the way that fishing rights are determined would not be affected (one of many similar clauses affecting many areas of agreement). If this is true then it is part of the agreement that UK signed up to, part of the agreement that the brexit leadership steam rollered through the HoP while laughing and sneering at those that asked for time to read, review and carry out due diligence.

I will have a ferret around and see if I can find out any more information on this.

Then I recommend you read it before writing such a damning diatribe.
If I understand the very short paragraph correctly, it states that the UK will leave the CFP, but it will work within the fishery protection guidelines about quotas. There is nothing to indicate that the EU should retain any governance on our fishing rights, perhaps you should check your facts first rather than relying on pro EU websites that are working to undermine the Brexit deal.
.

I was asked for the 'exact wording' which I did not have to hand - but I thought, for the purposes of discussion it might be worthwhile finding out.

So now I would recommend that you read both the agreement and the article I linked to. From my quick glance it appears to be a more brexit favouring site (although I have not dived that deeply into it, but obviously you didn't either before your wee rant). The article was written by someone with solid knowledge of the subject and would appear to back my assessment rather than cognitive bias that you made up.

Curiously Ian Smith seems to also agree with the article, such clauses, and there are several in the WA, are the reason why he was throwing his toys about the other day and desperately trying to back pedal away from the WA that he, and the government he works for, signed up to without doing due diligence. The fact this government now appears to have no idea of what they signed up to shows their total arrogance and incompetence ... THAT is what has been, and continues, to undermine advancement of their brexit deal.

The site I looked at was a govt houses of parliament site, from which I quoted the headline information, the detail is clouded in legalese so impossible for a layman to understand, but the headline statement was very clear that the EU would not have any jurisdiction.

[barney]

Oh dear!
I admire your tenacity.
It’s all irrelevant now as the U.K. has formally left the EU.
I personally would never have agreed the WA and would have left at the time without it.
The WA ends this year with the end of the transition period.Thank God.
Deal or not, we’ve got our country back and dodged a bullet by not having to prop up other EU nations.
We could include some of them on our foreign aid program.

In a way I agree with you, the only thing now is that the Brexit leadership will be judged on meeting the contract they made with the British people. I am even willing to forgive point 9 of their contract and will even give them until Dec 31st to come up with the many new trade deals they promised would be ready on the day we left (accepting they totally missed the original milestone). I look forward to the promised additional £350million per week for the NHS and the 'exact same benefits' that we would have got if we had have remained.

It is their contract, their words and I will judge the success and their competence based on them delivering their written contract with the British people.

I fear however people are going to wake up to a Britain that is not as prosperous as it once was - and no brexiteer has responded to that concern in any meaningful or credible manner (even Minford with his highly manipulated numbers failed). In fact we were told by a multi-millionaire brexiteer 'it was never about the money' (not what he said during the campaign but probably much closer to the truth).

I’m not too sure they are too concerned about whether you judge them successful or not.

There was a vote.
The Conservatives, Labour, Liberals, Greens, CBI and big business all lobbied for remain.
They lost.
The Tories then stood on a manifesto of getting Brexit completed. They won a massive majority.
The rest is irrelevant.
Some ( maybe you) are still fighting a war that’s over.

[Mervyn and Trish]

It's good to be knocking Boris for Brexit for a change.

As an alternative to knocking Boris for Covid.