Macron v UK + EU

[Barry]

Quite simply because I live in a village with inshore fishermen in it. They are friends and neighbours.  If they all go bankrupt (as is looking likely,) it will effect far more than just them.

Cornwall voted 56.5% LEAVE.

[BeElBeeBub]

The price of fish.

So how could the UK have avoided the same fate if we "controlled our waters"?

The argument is the UK fishing decline was caused by the EU and the way to reverse it is to leave.

Yet no EU Norway has had greater decline it is unable to reverse despite not being in the EU.

[BeElBeeBub]

Well you finally concede,but then go on to say

Well it's one of so many reasons,and where we are able to make our own decisions now we've left.

You still get the slurs of the UK being a rule giver and not taker,many of the problems with the eu has been that we stick to the letter of the law where others give a nod to its existence and turn a blind eye to non compliance.

Ah so you go from acknowledgement to  it will all be a disaster......no change there then and you aren't bothered about animal welfare.

And the difference is we couldn't stop live export,now we can,as far as accepting chlorinated chicken or gm meat people are free to vote with their wallets/ purses there will be no rule that we have to buy it.

And finally as is usual with your posts there is the undercurrent that whatever argument is presented to you is because we are brainwashed,old,uneducated and couldn't care less about our countries future......the reverse is true.

On the matter of live animal exports, I'm fairly neutral.  We already ship animals all over the UK. A sheep could go from South Wales to market in England before being transported to Scotland or NI.

I don't want the animals to suffer and we should (and do) control the conditions of transit

As long as the conditions of transit are no worse for a UK to France or Spain trip I don't see the why, logically, we should be fine with one and not the other.

I do see an issue with shipping aboard for practices we ban in the UK. However I would argue if you are against veal crates the better path is to try and end the practice EU wide rather than just in the UK (where it is banned anyway).

My question was what are the benefits given it was admitted (can't remember by who) that the UK "may have it's arse hanging out" (or similar).

You pointed to the live export ban (and it will be interesting to see how they actually legislate for that) as a benefit to outweigh the economic costs.  I pointed out the ban was probably going to be superfluous anyway because exports of lamb will more or less stop.

The conservatives have resisted tightening up on live export conditions (which they could have done) presumably because of the economic cost of doing so. I believe they are cynically proposing a ban because there is no longer an economic cost. Very much making lemonade out of lemons.

You mention people being free to vote with their wallets/purses but one of the many conditions the US likes to apply in it's FTAs is "CoOL", Country of Origin Labeling. In short they regard stuff like "made in USA" or "chlorinated chicken" labels as discrimination and include clauses to ban it.  In short consumers will have less information to make that choice.

I don't think some here are uneducated or couldn't care less about the UK (accusations frequently leveled at remainers, you have to agree).

I think you have been fed misinformation for a long time and so what appears to be a decision that is in the UKs best interests is in fact not.

Of course (as I said) remainers could be accused of the same.

We have spent 4 bad tempered years arguing about what *actually* will happen on 1st Jan 2021.

Remainers like me think that it will mean much increased bureaucracy and cost at the border. Reduced competitiveness for the UK, a loss of influence on the world stage and (in this specific instance) more problems for the UK fishing industry

Leavers have pitched an economically resurgent UK, other countries flocking to do deals with us, no change to our access to the EU market, cheaper food, a booming fishing industry etc etc.

Well we only have a month or so to find out who was right.

I hope it's you. I fear it's me.

You dont speak for the fishing industry. Many fishermen wanted to leave the eu , and still do. Not because they were brainwashed into anything , simply because as you have been told time and again they dont want to be part of it.

I included a literal quite from a fisherman.  I'm sure he doesn't speak for every single one, but he (and others in the article) were keen brexiters who have shifted now the reality is becoming clearer.

[T00ts]

And I fear Brexit will hit the fishermen hard and they will be worse off than before.

They were lied to and told the source of their woes was the EU and not other factors.

If the EU is the reason the number of British fishermen's and boats has fallen and not say overfishing or industrialisation how do you explain the greater reduction in Norway's fishermen and boats despite the fact they "control their waters"?

Do you circumvent the argument just for the fun of it? It's not the fish we need to rule but our waters? Why on earth would anyone happily give away rights to our territorial waters? I am so glad you weren't around when the Armada was on the horizon. Macron doesn't care about the French fishermen - only their votes. Stand back and watch Merkel bring him into line. They have enough other problems within the EU most of which will land on the German coffers without pandering to Macron's vanity. I do believe Macron is close to ending his acting career.

[papasmurf]

how do you explain the greater reduction in Norway's fishermen and boats despite the fact they "control their waters"?

The price of fish.

[Thomas]

And I fear Brexit will hit the fishermen hard and they will be worse off than before.

They were lied to and told the source of their woes was the EU and not other factors.

If the EU is the reason the number of British fishermen's and boats has fallen and not say overfishing or industrialisation how do you explain the greater reduction in Norway's fishermen and boats despite the fact they "control their waters"?

You dont speak for the fishing industry. Many fishermen wanted to leave the eu , and still do. Not because they were brainwashed into anything , simply because as you have been told time and again they dont want to be part of it.

You have a cheek to infer fishermen were lied to by brexiters when only last week it was announced  remainer carole cadwalladr had been lying non stop about the russians financing brexit and all the other horseshit she has been running her mouth off about.

You are a bad loser beelbeeb , and you arent stopping brexit one way or the other.

Sometimes you just have to accept you are in a minority view..........you have had your chance non stop over the last 4 half years to stop brexit , and each time you had the vote , your side lost time and again.

[Sheepy]

And I fear Brexit will hit the fishermen hard and they will be worse off than before.

They were lied to and told the source of their woes was the EU and not other factors.

If the EU is the reason the number of British fishermen's and boats has fallen and not say overfishing or industrialisation how do you explain the greater reduction in Norway's fishermen and boats despite the fact they "control their waters"?

No, you mean you hope it does beelblubber.

[BeElBeeBub]

Quite simply because I live in a village with inshore fishermen in it. They are friends and neighbours.  If they all go bankrupt (as is looking likely,) it will effect far more than just them.
As for Sunderland and Swindon the damage to jobs will be nationwide, not just them.

And I fear Brexit will hit the fishermen hard and they will be worse off than before.

They were lied to and told the source of their woes was the EU and not other factors.

If the EU is the reason the number of British fishermen's and boats has fallen and not say overfishing or industrialisation how do you explain the greater reduction in Norway's fishermen and boats despite the fact they "control their waters"?

[cromwell]

That's actually a genuine reason.

Well you finally concede,but then go on to say

Hands up if that was a reason you voted for brexit.

Well it's one of so many reasons,and where we are able to make our own decisions now we've left.

You still get the slurs of the UK being a rule giver and not taker,many of the problems with the eu has been that we stick to the letter of the law where others give a nod to its existence and turn a blind eye to non compliance.

However, as with much of brexit, not all is as it seems.

The vast majority of exported live animals are sheep.

The sheep export trade is likely to fall off a cliff in January because of increased shipping/bureaucracy costs in the case of an agreement and increased shipping/bureaucracy costs *and* 40% tariffs (in the case of no agreement).

Even without a formal ban, the export of live animals is likely to more or less cease in January.

Ah so you go from acknowledgement to  it will all be a disaster......no change there then and you aren't bothered about animal welfare.

Seeing as you're so invested in animal welfare it's worth noting that the UK was one of the drivers of higher standards across the EU. In doing so not only did we improve the conditions of vastly more animals than are reared in the UK alone, but also ensured that the higher standards we held our farmers to weren't undercut by European farmers.

And that US FTA that was the golden prize of brexit.  If you care about animal welfare you wouldn't want that

And the difference is we couldn't stop live export,now we can,as far as accepting chlorinated chicken or gm meat people are free to vote with their wallets/ purses there will be no rule that we have to buy it.

And finally as is usual with your posts there is the undercurrent that whatever argument is presented to you is because we are brainwashed,old,uneducated and couldn't care less about our countries future......the reverse is true.

[papasmurf]

And why are you so invested in the welfare of the fishermen and not the plight of communities like Sunderland or Swindon where vastly more jobs are going to be lost?

Quite simply because I live in a village with inshore fishermen in it. They are friends and neighbours.  If they all go bankrupt (as is looking likely,) it will effect far more than just them.
As for Sunderland and Swindon the damage to jobs will be nationwide, not just them.

[BeElBeeBub]

I am not happy for you to trade away the prosperity of UK fishermen for your self interest.

Your greater good is not their greater good.

In preference, I suggest that the UK offers the EU 80% of your business.
Which will only be a tiny part of UK GDP and not matter so much.
Since you are so happy to sacrifice peoples livelihoods for the greater prosperity and security of the nation, I see no reason not to do so.

I'm not happy with you trading away the prosperity of our fishermen either.

Brexit will harm the sector.  They will be worse off.

Aside from the processing industry being decimated, Brexit cuts access to UK fishermen's biggest market.

Our biggest catches are herring an mackerel and almost all is exported.

Sure, we may have control over who catches fish in our waters but that is useless if nobody wants to buy the fish.

The fishing industry is finally waking up to the folly.

"If the tariff was only 5% we would be killed," said Mr Perkes. In fact, if trade talks collapse, the EU will start levying tariffs of 20% in January.

"I wish I hadn't voted for Brexit" he said.
"I never looked at the implications....I was brainwashed."

(from the FT)

And why are you so invested in the welfare of the fishermen and not the plight of communities like Sunderland or Swindon where vastly more jobs are going to be lost?

[BeElBeeBub]

Ban the live export of animals,there was a thread on here in this section,perhaps you missed it.

That's actually a genuine reason.

Hands up if that was a reason you voted for brexit.

However, as with much of brexit, not all is as it seems.

The vast majority of exported live animals are sheep.

The sheep export trade is likely to fall off a cliff in January because of increased shipping/bureaucracy costs in the case of an agreement and increased shipping/bureaucracy costs *and* 40% tariffs (in the case of no agreement).

Even without a formal ban, the export of live animals is likely to more or less cease in January.

Seeing as you're so invested in animal welfare it's worth noting that the UK was one of the drivers of higher standards across the EU. In doing so not only did we improve the conditions of vastly more animals than are reared in the UK alone, but also ensured that the higher standards we held our farmers to weren't undercut by European farmers.

And that US FTA that was the golden prize of brexit.  If you care about animal welfare you wouldn't want that

[papasmurf]

I am not happy for you to trade away the prosperity of UK fishermen for your self interest.

What prosperity? (Seriously.)  Locally as it is some are being referred to food banks.

[Baff]

Tell me more about this freedom you are happy to sell our prosperity and security for.

I am not happy for you to trade away the prosperity of UK fishermen for your self interest.

Your greater good is not their greater good.

In preference, I suggest that the UK offers the EU 80% of your business.
Which will only be a tiny part of UK GDP and not matter so much.
Since you are so happy to sacrifice peoples livelihoods for the greater prosperity and security of the nation, I see no reason not to do so.

[Baff]

And if the "payment" was access to their waters plus (say) reduced paperwork and tariffs for importing the catch to their market? 

If the UK parliament decided that was a fair "price" would that not be the definition of exercising soveriegnty.

That rather depends.
If they traded the right to issue licensing and quota away to another government, that would be surrendering sovereignty.

If they agreed to issue quota and lisences to foreign vessels, that would not.