Leave means leave: Has Boris betrayed us over fishing?

[B0ycey]

LOL Boycey you are a laugh a minute. You sound like the Kinnocks who made a killing out of the EU without doing a thing but sit there and vote how they were told. Only the EU can fix us up, except the EU are full of shit.

Sheepy, we are just a small island with a rich history. The days of sending the navy in to get a trade deal sorted are over. "Frosty the no man" would never just hand anything back unless he had to. If Brexit isn't working out as you were told then perhaps question why you accepted the lie to begin with. When we can't even sell sausages to the Northern Irish because BoJo didn't understand what he signed up to and now we are sending Truss in to woo Sefcovic with a tour of Kent just to try and sort out the clusterfuck you have to question the sanity of Brexiteers for their brief the EU was going to bend over and take whatever shit we threw at them.

[papasmurf]

the EU are full of shit.

So is the Conservative government.

[Sheepy]

LOL Boycey you are a laugh a minute. You sound like the Kinnocks who made a killing out of the EU without doing a thing but sit there and vote how they were told. Only the EU can fix us up, except the EU are full of shit.

[B0ycey]

I doubt it will ever happen, the EU won't want Britain back, even when the most rabid of Brexiteers realise how bad a mistake Brexit has been.

The EU will have the UK back Pappy. They actually were keeping the door firmly open whilst the Westminster tennis was taken place. In fact the EU was rushing through all the policies the UK were originally blocking at the time on the notion there was a good chance article 50 was to be revoked if the Remainers could stand firm. That didn't happen, but in any case if the UK was to apply once again the application would succeed, without the rebate it should be said. So as it happens, even if the most pro EU campaigner were to becomes PM, it isn't a sure thing that we are going to just be returning back simply because the deal we had was actually a very good one and what we will be asking for in return would be something very shit indeed. And that is laymen to say we are forced to make Brexit work even if that means returning back all our sovereignty back to the EU in all but name.

As for @GerryTs point that we will be back in the club in 50 years, I would say that is a good shout. 50 years is a long time and those who were the biggest remain voice in 2014 are then going to be the core voting demographic to vote rejoin. And that isn't even considering the direction the EU will go and the thirst of the elite for global influence in which our little island lacks now. So sure, Brexit is going to be a thing and isn't going away any time soon. But if polls continue to grow in terms of rejoining and the economy really does take a hit, I rule nothing out in my lifetime and neither should anyone else.

[papasmurf]

Of course landing and exporting are different issues , makes you wonder whos buying all this fish .

Buying "all that fish?"  The problem is compared to before Brexit it is not much fish at all, plus prices have dropped like a stone. There is no way the 95%-98% of the fresh fish/shell fish/bi-valve molluscs catch that used to be exported to the EU can be replaced with the miniscule home market any time soon if ever.

Then there is this, more at link:-
http://blog.through-the-gaps.co.uk/2022/01/government-are-going-to-make-us.html

Monday, 17 January 2022
 The Marine Management Organisation (MMO) the Government's fishing regulator in England, sets the date of 28 February 2022 for the enforcement stage of the Catch-App which could leave them facing prosecutions they cannot avoid.
These new rules will only apply to the smallest fishing boats in England under 10m in length.
Catch-App, a phone app designed to record small vessels catches has so far cost the Government over £2.4m to develop. But fishermen say beyond shortcoming of the app the rules that require all of the catch to be immediately weighed at landing and accurate weights recorded prior to being moved off the quay, even if that is just a few metres from where a fish auction, is unworkable.

the fishing daily advertise with us Brain Tapper who fishes with his son BJ out of Plymouth has grave concerns about the regulations.

He says, "It is impossible to comply with this new regulation, the Government knows that most harbours don't have scales for fishermen to use, and that it is impossible to accurately guess the weight of fish in boxes consistently. Government is going to make us criminals. Meanwhile, all the EU boats of our size that the UK has given licenses to fish in our waters, don't have to use Catch-App".

By contrast larger UK vessels and EU vessels over 10m, licensed to fish English waters that use a different system, Elog, do not have to weigh their fish on quaysides and are allowed to wait for accurate weights from the auctions before declaring the landing weight. Small-scale fishermen believe they are being unlawfully singled out by the Government.

[Streetwalker]

Landing fish in the UK is not the same as exporting it to the EU. Which is either impossible, problematic or getting very close to being uneconomic.  (Plus another set or regulations is coming to force in a few weeks that will make inshore/dayboat fishing uneconomic for many of the inshore/dayboat fishermen left in the aftermath of Brexit.)

Of course landing and exporting are different issues , makes you wonder whos buying all this fish . Maybe the Brits are getting a taste for it .

Still the new regs or rather quality control thats coming in is a farce . Fishmongers and the public are more than capable of looking at a fish to see if its fit for eating . You dont need a vet to tell you its recently dead . 

Another unnecessary EU regulation , thank feck we left .  

[papasmurf]

Going back to the EU, now would have to represent something of a disaster. It could only be justified if brexits effects had been a marked failure.

Brexit has been a marked failure and getting worse.

[Good old]

Going back to the EU, now would have to represent something of a disaster. It could only be justified if brexits effects had been a marked failure.
That would only be the beginning, what sort of reception would we get at such a time? We were at the top table , with much more influence than brexiteers would ever admit , the veto alone was a massive power in our hands. The EU does not rely on us for its future , so what sort of deal would a grovelling U.K. get.? It shouldn't take a lot of working out.
I really hope , we never have to do any grovelling. But I  wouldn't hang my hat on it never happening.

[srb7677]

I think they would, certainly the opinion of the UK peoples in Ireland would be that England/Wales are split over membership and that leaving was a knife edge decision, with as many people leaving being unhappy as those happy about the result. On top of that most young people want to remain and most old people want to leave (sweeping generalisation there!) Time will shift that balance. Scotland and NI wanted to remain, not much to say there.
I think most people in the EU would want the UK to hold a referendum and have each country in the UK to have a majority vote above say 70% in each region before electing to seek membership. I wouldn't be happy with the UK looking to rejoin on a 52% majority, who wants that cluster fu@k in the club.

I doubt whether the EU would allow us back to be yet again the club trouble maker as we often were, resisting this and resisting that. The UK being allowed back in is decades away if it ever happens at all.

Basically there would have to be a massive change in public opinion here in favour of membership before they'd consider it. In the long term that is just about possible with Leave sentiment highly concentrated in the older half of the population and Remain sentiment in the  younger half. As older people pass away, if younger people retain their pro-EU views as they grow older and if new adults coming of age continue to be pro-EU, then as time goes by there would eventually be a large pro-EU majority here. However those two "ifs" are very big ifs, and probably depends upon how well we seem to be doing outside as time goes by, versus how well the EU itself is doing.

[Nick]

Like you say Boycey, analysing what impact Brexit has is important so that people can see what affect that decision is having on the UK. It will help future decisions, as in, does the UK really want a lying, cheating, immoral, self serving leader like Johnson again. He must be the worst leader a country has ever had. As for the UK economy, its behind the EU in recovery from Covid & brexit, this highlights the 'masking' you mention as the EU isn't really hit by Brexit. You can see even from 2018 to late 2020 the UK & EU track each other closely but then as brexit happens, the economic recovery diverges.


That's also backed up when you look at the UK v the G20 from q4 2019 to Q2 2021.  This also unveils impending brexit impact. The performance gap just widened.
Some reports have shown that post the fall in GDP the UK recovered by more but that was only because the UK was hit so badly. The truth is Brexit is bad for the economic future.



But as others point out it wasn't all about money, while that's true, part of it was about money, to suggest it was primarily about sovereignty is just a smoke screen. A very large part was:
The 350m a week for the NHS (never happened, in fact brexit has shown to cost about 800m a week).
Another large part was closing the borders and what seems to be happening is less EU nationals are coming and more non EU nationals are coming, is that what people voted for ? 
Then there was leaving the EU courts and now you have part of the UK still under the ECJ jurisdiction and a part outside that, basically a border down the middle of the UK.
All of that is what Johnson calls "getting brexit done"...hum!  It wasn't all about sovereignty, there were many reasons for brexit. If that was all leave were saying in 2016 then you would have got a very different result.

And before Thomas starts banging on about me loving labour and re-joining, neither is true. I don't see the UK re-joining for about 50yrs and at that a lot will need to change. As in adopting the euro, joining Schengen, no optouts and no rebates, probably too hard a pill to swallow for the "rule Britannia" crowd.

Q2 2021? We are in 12022 now, and have the fastest growing economy in the G7. How about you get with the program Gerry and stop spitting out 8 month old numbers. The fact is, the EU need us to suffer and we aren't. 

[GerryT]

I doubt it will ever happen, the EU won't want Britain back, even when the most rabid of Brexiteers realise how bad a mistake Brexit has been.

I think they would, certainly the opinion of the UK peoples in Ireland would be that England/Wales are split over membership and that leaving was a knife edge decision, with as many people leaving being unhappy as those happy about the result. On top of that most young people want to remain and most old people want to leave (sweeping generalisation there!) Time will shift that balance. Scotland and NI wanted to remain, not much to say there.
I think most people in the EU would want the UK to hold a referendum and have each country in the UK to have a majority vote above say 70% in each region before electing to seek membership. I wouldn't be happy with the UK looking to rejoin on a 52% majority, who wants that cluster fu@k in the club.

[papasmurf]

 I don't see the UK re-joining for about 50yrs

I doubt it will ever happen, the EU won't want Britain back, even when the most rabid of Brexiteers realise how bad a mistake Brexit has been.

[papasmurf]

Yes I read it ,  the point being regardless of who's doing the paper work we are landing fish in the UK . Which rather goes against previous opinion that  we have to have  to land fish in the EU to have a successful fishing industry .

Landing fish in the UK is not the same as exporting it to the EU. Which is either impossible, problematic or getting very close to being uneconomic.  (Plus another set or regulations is coming to force in a few weeks that will make inshore/dayboat fishing uneconomic for many of the inshore/dayboat fishermen left in the aftermath of Brexit.)

[GerryT]

Sure @Thomas, if I could convince hard-core Brexiteers I would be more gentle in my tone, but my aim isn't to do that but have it on record for lurkers that Brexit isn't a success and show them an article or two where they can read up on what a clusterfuck it is.

But in any case it should be said that polls suggest there is a movement towards rejoining but not enough to expect EURef2 any time soon. As long as more people are aware of what Brexit truly means, the quicker a possible referendum could happen. But even so that is independent to BoJo and his fate. However what I will say is his realistic possible successors, one is Truss who voted Remain and the second is an economists who must know the impact of Brexit and want to rectify that with policy and arrangements.

Like you say Boycey, analysing what impact Brexit has is important so that people can see what affect that decision is having on the UK. It will help future decisions, as in, does the UK really want a lying, cheating, immoral, self serving leader like Johnson again. He must be the worst leader a country has ever had. As for the UK economy, its behind the EU in recovery from Covid & brexit, this highlights the 'masking' you mention as the EU isn't really hit by Brexit. You can see even from 2018 to late 2020 the UK & EU track each other closely but then as brexit happens, the economic recovery diverges.


That's also backed up when you look at the UK v the G20 from q4 2019 to Q2 2021.  This also unveils impending brexit impact. The performance gap just widened.
Some reports have shown that post the fall in GDP the UK recovered by more but that was only because the UK was hit so badly. The truth is Brexit is bad for the economic future.



But as others point out it wasn't all about money, while that's true, part of it was about money, to suggest it was primarily about sovereignty is just a smoke screen. A very large part was:
The 350m a week for the NHS (never happened, in fact brexit has shown to cost about 800m a week).
Another large part was closing the borders and what seems to be happening is less EU nationals are coming and more non EU nationals are coming, is that what people voted for ? 
Then there was leaving the EU courts and now you have part of the UK still under the ECJ jurisdiction and a part outside that, basically a border down the middle of the UK. 
All of that is what Johnson calls "getting brexit done"...hum!  It wasn't all about sovereignty, there were many reasons for brexit. If that was all leave were saying in 2016 then you would have got a very different result.

And before Thomas starts banging on about me loving labour and re-joining, neither is true. I don't see the UK re-joining for about 50yrs and at that a lot will need to change. As in adopting the euro, joining Schengen, no optouts and no rebates, probably too hard a pill to swallow for the "rule Britannia" crowd.

[Streetwalker]

No really. if you bother to read it in full. The onerous mountain of paperwork is being carried out centrally so more fishing boats are landing there. The increase is due to that.

Yes I read it ,  the point being regardless of who's doing the paper work we are landing fish in the UK . Which rather goes against previous opinion that  we have to have  to land fish in the EU to have a successful fishing industry .