If all the EU can offer is blackmail then no deal it will be
Again, read the article (admittedly behind a paywall). I’m not clear how you are construing this blackmail.
Many will
Not many read the FT. I thought also you had your own mind.
I have and to be honest the rhetoric from both sides needs dialing down
However, if it is no deal I cannot understand why so many think it is OK for the illegal operation of fishing boats in UK waters or indeed Norwegian and Iceland
The story in the article (which you claim is tantamount to blackmail) does not even mention fishing. Go to bed.
Maybe you need to show at least some courtesy even when disagreeing but is this the way Lib Dems expect to win over support
How many mps have you got in the HOC these days
I have no idea. But I am content that I did not vote to humiliate and dismember the country, as you fear you might have done during your wibbly moments.
I voted remain and not for Boris
I’m pretty sure you voted Tory in 2019. If not I apologise. Sadly, those who did voted to perpetuate disaster.
And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?
A big recovery of the coastal ecosystem.
If the damage trawling did was immediately visible it would have been banned years ago.
You think the message these Tory MPs are looking to sell to the fishing communities is "good news guys, we've got rid of the French, but don't get ahead of yourselves thinking you'll be able to take their place"?
The british fishing fleet will take several years to rebuild, if during that time fish stocks get a recovery period due to the lack of eu factory ships by the time its in place there will have been a significant increase in fish stocks. It is simple to work out apart from for you it seems
Surely British fishermen will do what they've always done: they'll get quotas and then rent them out to foreign firms. That's by far the easiest way to make money.
If I may use an anecdote here, there were two types of people in britain that sold quota's. Large corporations with fishing fleets. The other were boats like mine with a skipper who owned the boat. After we joined the cfp in the 70's the quota's we were given went ever downwards with the uk doing strict enforcement on us while spanish, french and belgian fisherman seemed to have a blind eye from their countries. When he sold his quota we had got down to being allowed to fish 6 weeks a year. His boat was no longer financially viable because instead of being able to catch 100% of the fish that was sustainable in british waters we had our share of about 18%.
And that happened to my brother in laws and other family members
So what?
Shall we reopen all the mines so you guys can relive your childhoods too?
Fishing as you remember it is the past and will remain in the past.
No it is not by any stretch of the imagination and frankly your remarks are absurd
This happened when we joined the EU and after and most certainly was not in our childhood
You might want to recall why the evil EU and many other countries around the world imposed fishing quotas. It was called the "collapse of fish stocks". Basically, the fishing fleets of the world hoovered the seas clean of fish.
In the 1970's when british had there own waters they were recovering and 10% of fish species were classed by scientists as over fished. By 2020 after years of the cfp 95% of fish species are over fished
“The track record of fisheries managment in Europe has been disasterous. The number of fish stocks classified as seriously overfished rose from 10 per cent in 1970 to 50 per cent by 2000. With so much expertise, how did things go so badly wrong?” (p 346)
Did I ever claim we didn't do stuff wrong and the cod wars were during the period when fishing limits were defined as 200 miles and had been raging since the 14th century
If all the EU can offer is blackmail then no deal it will be
Again, read the article (admittedly behind a paywall). I’m not clear how you are construing this blackmail.
Many will
Not many read the FT. I thought also you had your own mind.
I have and to be honest the rhetoric from both sides needs dialing down
However, if it is no deal I cannot understand why so many think it is OK for the illegal operation of fishing boats in UK waters or indeed Norwegian and Iceland
Because it's laughable we're even in this position. It's especially laughable that the reaction of those who said it was "all going to be fine" in 2016 is not "let's rationally sort this out" but instead "fire up the Royal Navy".
It's the continued WW2 war fantasy on steroids and it's frankly pathetic.
It’s pathetic and sickening that the Mail should publish a headline about gunboats on the eve of a critical deal with the EU.
Were you saying the same thing yesterday when the EU threatened to ground all our planes unless we gave them unilateral access to our fishing waters in the event of No Deal?
Except the EU didn't "threaten to ground all our planes".
I can't believe you lot are still peddling nonsense like this.
I understand that most of the fish caught in British waters is consumed abroad in the EU and elsewhere. Conversely most of the fish we eat, comes from the EU catch. Surely that was also true pre-1973! How did we manage then?
A handy guide to food post Brexit in the Daily Mail
That's a really stupid graphic. The two immediate idiocies that spring to mind are:
We don't import bananas or avocados from the EU so there is no reason for them to be affected by the type of Brexit we have. Indeed the vast majority of avocados are imported from Israel and we already have a trade deal signed with them which will reduce tariffs compared to the current EU tariffs.
Norway and Iceland are not in the EU and particularly are not in the Customs Union so do not have to abide by any EU/UK tariff regime. More to the point the UK, Iceland and Norway have already signed a deal to continue to trade in exactly the same way as they do now until a proper trade deal is concluded next year.
Two immediate idiocies in what you have posted. We almost certainly import bananas and avocados from Belgium rather than from Israel or Ivory Coast. The EU is a vast market, so bulk imports come into a port for warehousing and then onward distribution to the final market like the UK. The Daily Mail puts these on their list because they are EU imports.
Yes we can set up direct import routes for Bananas and Avocados and Oranges and everything else that we import via the EU but it will be low volume high cost additions to the current business model and that will bang the unit price up.
As for fish, the point the Mail is making is that according to our government there is going to be major disruption to our ports. And quite frankly they're trying to educate the wazzocks who think that saving British Fishing liberates Fish and Chips.
'Yes that is a chippy. Yes those are fishing boats. No they haven't caught the cod the chippy across the road is preparing for you because Cod don't swing in these waters you dumb bastards.'
There may be some modest price rises because bananas and avocados now have to go direct to Felixstowe in a different boat rather than to Rotterdam and then Felixstowe in the same boat but there will be no problems with supply as we have free trade deals with all the source countries.
My view is the market will find the most efficient route to keep costs down to a minimum.
Honestly it's a silly thing to hang your hat on. If you're going to take umbrage at No Deal then focus on the EU perishable food products that are really effected.
Is there anything we can't source from elsewhere except tulips ?
What this boils down to is a few months disruption whilst the new supply lines bed in and establish and we adjust to the new systems, general price rises of 2-5% and a mixture of medium-high tarrifs on exclusive EU products, which will mean people will generally buy much less of them and start buying them elsewhere - unless speciality.
Far from ideal but not the end of the world either.
I would prefer a decent deal personally but I dont think we should rule out walking away
If all the EU can offer is blackmail then no deal it will be
Again, read the article (admittedly behind a paywall). I’m not clear how you are construing this blackmail.
Many will
Not many read the FT. I thought also you had your own mind.
I have and to be honest the rhetoric from both sides needs dialing down
However, if it is no deal I cannot understand why so many think it is OK for the illegal operation of fishing boats in UK waters or indeed Norwegian and Iceland
The story in the article (which you claim is tantamount to blackmail) does not even mention fishing. Go to bed.
Maybe you need to show at least some courtesy even when disagreeing but is this the way Lib Dems expect to win over support
How many mps have you got in the HOC these days
I have no idea. But I am content that I did not vote to humiliate and dismember the country, as you fear you might have done during your wibbly moments.
I voted remain and not for Boris
I’m pretty sure you voted Tory in 2019. If not I apologise. Sadly, those who did voted to perpetuate disaster.
I did vote Conservative but I did not vote for Boris in the election to office
If all the EU can offer is blackmail then no deal it will be
Again, read the article (admittedly behind a paywall). I’m not clear how you are construing this blackmail.
Many will
Not many read the FT. I thought also you had your own mind.
I have and to be honest the rhetoric from both sides needs dialing down
However, if it is no deal I cannot understand why so many think it is OK for the illegal operation of fishing boats in UK waters or indeed Norwegian and Iceland
Because it's laughable we're even in this position. It's especially laughable that the reaction of those who said it was "all going to be fine" in 2016 is not "let's rationally sort this out" but instead "fire up the Royal Navy".
It's the continued WW2 war fantasy on steroids and it's frankly pathetic.
It’s pathetic and sickening that the Mail should publish a headline about gunboats on the eve of a critical deal with the EU.
Were you saying the same thing yesterday when the EU threatened to ground all our planes unless we gave them unilateral access to our fishing waters in the event of No Deal?
I thought it an inept and unwelcome contribution, if not quite at the gunboats level.
What this boils down to is a few months disruption whilst the new supply lines bed in and establish and we adjust to the new systems, general price rises of 2-5% and a mixture of medium-high tarrifs on exclusive EU products, which will mean people will generally buy much less of them and start buying them elsewhere - unless speciality.
Far from ideal but not the end of the world either.
People called 999 when KFC ran short.
There will be riots
Yes Scott but its people like you that do that not normal people
If all the EU can offer is blackmail then no deal it will be
Again, read the article (admittedly behind a paywall). I’m not clear how you are construing this blackmail.
Many will
Not many read the FT. I thought also you had your own mind.
I have and to be honest the rhetoric from both sides needs dialing down
However, if it is no deal I cannot understand why so many think it is OK for the illegal operation of fishing boats in UK waters or indeed Norwegian and Iceland
Because it's laughable we're even in this position. It's especially laughable that the reaction of those who said it was "all going to be fine" in 2016 is not "let's rationally sort this out" but instead "fire up the Royal Navy".
It's the continued WW2 war fantasy on steroids and it's frankly pathetic.
It’s pathetic and sickening that the Mail should publish a headline about gunboats on the eve of a critical deal with the EU.
Were you saying the same thing yesterday when the EU threatened to ground all our planes unless we gave them unilateral access to our fishing waters in the event of No Deal?
I thought it an inept and unwelcome contribution, if not quite at the gunboats level.
How else do we enforce control of our waters to show we won't accept this?
Look, I want a Deal. It's possible Boris is being totally reckless and disingenuous here (and it wouldn't be the first time) but it's more likely the wider reports that the EU still hasn't compromised on fish are accurate and that needs to happen in the political sweet spot, which is the 30-40% share zone.
I wonder what the ROI of the FPS is going to be. They can come alongside interlopers and give them orders to move away or prepare to be boarded but if they don't' comply? Then what? Johnson does not have the fortitude to sink one.
I understand they can escort them to a UK port
I assume there are serious penalties for illegal fishing including confiscation of boats and equipment but I stand to be corrected
If all the EU can offer is blackmail then no deal it will be
Again, read the article (admittedly behind a paywall). I’m not clear how you are construing this blackmail.
It’s not blackmail, it’s a threat
Do the deal we tell you to now or we will duck you over in January
All they have said is, whilst sovereignty over sea territory and the harvest underneath is disputed, we stay in talks, and we keep the status quo.
The people pushing this blackmail line, the people who have created this crisis in our country and our economy, need to be taken off media and social media just like the anti vaxxers shouldn’t be given air time. Including this site, brexiteers should be suspended for pushing this narrative in the same way the anti vaxxers need to be because they are dangerous in their insanity. We have taken freedom of speech far too far in recent times, so that we are following voices from out the nature state, not civilisation.
There is no sovereignty out there under the oceans on those fish stocks. It’s a fantasy between peoples ears. The science is absolutely black and white. We won’t have enough cod to feed the British appetite without a trade on catches with our neighbours. If you go strictly to sovereignty and not the science, Londoners will have to eat haddock.
Brexit Britain has no choice but to trade. Simples.
Can we therefore remove people like you from all social media and this site as you are giving fake news
Touché
The other day it was said it’s all labours fault for killing May’s deal. Now it’s all EUs fault for their sneaky blackmail. All you are doing is party political deflection, pure and simple.
Put your hands in the air and own up to the truth. We have got into this mess by pursuing a fantasy between people ears that doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. Scrutiny is shouted down on basis 2016 and all that you lost respect democracy. Salient arguments about costs to business, destruction of the UK, threat to security cooperation etc was shouted down in 2016 on basis it was project fear.
And the current negotiators for us, with fantasy between their ears and hemmed in by their lies and silly promises are the last people who should be negotiating a deal for us.
If all the EU can offer is blackmail then no deal it will be
Again, read the article (admittedly behind a paywall). I’m not clear how you are construing this blackmail.
Many will
Not many read the FT. I thought also you had your own mind.
I have and to be honest the rhetoric from both sides needs dialing down
However, if it is no deal I cannot understand why so many think it is OK for the illegal operation of fishing boats in UK waters or indeed Norwegian and Iceland
The story in the article (which you claim is tantamount to blackmail) does not even mention fishing. Go to bed.
Maybe you need to show at least some courtesy even when disagreeing but is this the way Lib Dems expect to win over support
How many mps have you got in the HOC these days
I have no idea. But I am content that I did not vote to humiliate and dismember the country, as you fear you might have done during your wibbly moments.
I voted remain and not for Boris
I’m pretty sure you voted Tory in 2019. If not I apologise. Sadly, those who did voted to perpetuate disaster.
I did vote Conservative but I did not vote for Boris in the election to office
Let me guess, you also did not have sex with Monica Lewinsky.
If all the EU can offer is blackmail then no deal it will be
Again, read the article (admittedly behind a paywall). I’m not clear how you are construing this blackmail.
It’s not blackmail, it’s a threat
Do the deal we tell you to now or we will duck you over in January
All they have said is, whilst sovereignty over sea territory and the harvest underneath is disputed, we stay in talks, and we keep the status quo.
The people pushing this blackmail line, the people who have created this crisis in our country and our economy, need to be taken off media and social media just like the anti vaxxers shouldn’t be given air time. Including this site, brexiteers should be suspended for pushing this narrative in the same way the anti vaxxers need to be because they are dangerous in their insanity. We have taken freedom of speech far too far in recent times, so that we are following voices from out the nature state, not civilisation.
There is no sovereignty out there under the oceans on those fish stocks. It’s a fantasy between peoples ears. The science is absolutely black and white. We won’t have enough cod to feed the British appetite without a trade on catches with our neighbours. If you go strictly to sovereignty and not the science, Londoners will have to eat haddock.
Brexit Britain has no choice but to trade. Simples.
Can we therefore remove people like you from all social media and this site as you are giving fake news
Excuse me? What was Brexit if not a tissue of lies repeated over and over and over?
Those supporting Brexit are giving support to those lies.
If Brexit is not "Fake News" then I do not know what is.
I understand that most of the fish caught in British waters is consumed abroad in the EU and elsewhere. Conversely most of the fish we eat, comes from the EU catch. Surely that was also true pre-1973! How did we manage then?
And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?
A big recovery of the coastal ecosystem.
If the damage trawling did was immediately visible it would have been banned years ago.
You think the message these Tory MPs are looking to sell to the fishing communities is "good news guys, we've got rid of the French, but don't get ahead of yourselves thinking you'll be able to take their place"?
The british fishing fleet will take several years to rebuild, if during that time fish stocks get a recovery period due to the lack of eu factory ships by the time its in place there will have been a significant increase in fish stocks. It is simple to work out apart from for you it seems
Surely British fishermen will do what they've always done: they'll get quotas and then rent them out to foreign firms. That's by far the easiest way to make money.
If I may use an anecdote here, there were two types of people in britain that sold quota's. Large corporations with fishing fleets. The other were boats like mine with a skipper who owned the boat. After we joined the cfp in the 70's the quota's we were given went ever downwards with the uk doing strict enforcement on us while spanish, french and belgian fisherman seemed to have a blind eye from their countries. When he sold his quota we had got down to being allowed to fish 6 weeks a year. His boat was no longer financially viable because instead of being able to catch 100% of the fish that was sustainable in british waters we had our share of about 18%.
And that happened to my brother in laws and other family members
Yes people make it sound like fisherman were queuing up to sell, I know our skipper was in tears the day he told us. His family had been running a boat for generations but the amount we were allowed to catch would no longer even pay to maintain the boat let alone pay of the crew on a voyage
It was deeply traumatic and accounts in a large way to the anger towards the EU from the Scottish fishing communities
I'm sure you felt the same empathy for the ex-mining communities in the 80s and 90s.
Let's open all the mines and make Britain great again!
There is a very big difference between coal and sustainable fish and fishing
Whatever helps you justify it. With all due respect it is hypocrisy and nothing more.
I really have no idea how supporting a UK fishing industry is hypocrisy when coal is a fossil fuel
Because you're crying about how the CFP "devastated" fishing communities whilst presumably supporting the devastation of mining communities.
And your only justification is "but fossil fuels"?
I have sympathy for former fishing ports and towns especially because my family is literally from one but realistically it's the past. We now do high tech manufacturing and provide services. Fishing is the past at least how you remember it. Likewise mining.
I disagree.
Fishing has a great future, why are the French and Spanish so angry that they are prepared to fish illegally
I understand that most of the fish caught in British waters is consumed abroad in the EU and elsewhere. Conversely most of the fish we eat, comes from the EU catch. Surely that was also true pre-1973! How did we manage then?
A handy guide to food post Brexit in the Daily Mail
That's a really stupid graphic. The two immediate idiocies that spring to mind are:
We don't import bananas or avocados from the EU so there is no reason for them to be affected by the type of Brexit we have. Indeed the vast majority of avocados are imported from Israel and we already have a trade deal signed with them which will reduce tariffs compared to the current EU tariffs.
Norway and Iceland are not in the EU and particularly are not in the Customs Union so do not have to abide by any EU/UK tariff regime. More to the point the UK, Iceland and Norway have already signed a deal to continue to trade in exactly the same way as they do now until a proper trade deal is concluded next year.
Two immediate idiocies in what you have posted. We almost certainly import bananas and avocados from Belgium rather than from Israel or Ivory Coast. The EU is a vast market, so bulk imports come into a port for warehousing and then onward distribution to the final market like the UK. The Daily Mail puts these on their list because they are EU imports.
Yes we can set up direct import routes for Bananas and Avocados and Oranges and everything else that we import via the EU but it will be low volume high cost additions to the current business model and that will bang the unit price up.
As for fish, the point the Mail is making is that according to our government there is going to be major disruption to our ports. And quite frankly they're trying to educate the wazzocks who think that saving British Fishing liberates Fish and Chips.
'Yes that is a chippy. Yes those are fishing boats. No they haven't caught the cod the chippy across the road is preparing for you because Cod don't swing in these waters you dumb bastards.'
There may be some modest price rises because bananas and avocados now have to go direct to Felixstowe in a different boat rather than to Rotterdam and then Felixstowe in the same boat but there will be no problems with supply as we have free trade deals with all the source countries.
My view is the market will find the most efficient route to keep costs down to a minimum.
Honestly it's a silly thing to hang your hat on. If you're going to take umbrage at No Deal then focus on the EU perishable food products that are really effected.
Is there anything we can't source from elsewhere except tulips ?
What this boils down to is a few months disruption whilst the new supply lines bed in and establish and we adjust to the new systems, general price rises of 2-5% and a mixture of medium-high tarrifs on exclusive EU products, which will mean people will generally buy much less of them and start buying them elsewhere - unless speciality.
Far from ideal but not the end of the world either.
What I'd really like for us to do is finalise trade deals with Australia and New Zealand then stick an absolutely horrific tariff on wine, as in punitively high so as to lock nations without trade deals with the UK out of the mass market for wine in this country. It would hurt EU producers very hard and make them squeal to Macron and Conte for relief.
If we're going into a trade war after no deal we need to be prepared to make life as hard as possible for the EU without mercy and without second thought for their economy.
What this boils down to is a few months disruption whilst the new supply lines bed in and establish and we adjust to the new systems, general price rises of 2-5% and a mixture of medium-high tarrifs on exclusive EU products, which will mean people will generally buy much less of them and start buying them elsewhere - unless speciality.
Far from ideal but not the end of the world either.
People called 999 when KFC ran short.
There will be riots
How many people?
17.4 million? Or a few less than that?
I bet it was fewer people than the number of times you've told this story.
And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?
A big recovery of the coastal ecosystem.
If the damage trawling did was immediately visible it would have been banned years ago.
You think the message these Tory MPs are looking to sell to the fishing communities is "good news guys, we've got rid of the French, but don't get ahead of yourselves thinking you'll be able to take their place"?
The british fishing fleet will take several years to rebuild, if during that time fish stocks get a recovery period due to the lack of eu factory ships by the time its in place there will have been a significant increase in fish stocks. It is simple to work out apart from for you it seems
Surely British fishermen will do what they've always done: they'll get quotas and then rent them out to foreign firms. That's by far the easiest way to make money.
If I may use an anecdote here, there were two types of people in britain that sold quota's. Large corporations with fishing fleets. The other were boats like mine with a skipper who owned the boat. After we joined the cfp in the 70's the quota's we were given went ever downwards with the uk doing strict enforcement on us while spanish, french and belgian fisherman seemed to have a blind eye from their countries. When he sold his quota we had got down to being allowed to fish 6 weeks a year. His boat was no longer financially viable because instead of being able to catch 100% of the fish that was sustainable in british waters we had our share of about 18%.
And that happened to my brother in laws and other family members
Yes people make it sound like fisherman were queuing up to sell, I know our skipper was in tears the day he told us. His family had been running a boat for generations but the amount we were allowed to catch would no longer even pay to maintain the boat let alone pay of the crew on a voyage
It was deeply traumatic and accounts in a large way to the anger towards the EU from the Scottish fishing communities
I'm sure you felt the same empathy for the ex-mining communities in the 80s and 90s.
Let's open all the mines and make Britain great again!
There is a very big difference between coal and sustainable fish and fishing
Whatever helps you justify it. With all due respect it is hypocrisy and nothing more.
I really have no idea how supporting a UK fishing industry is hypocrisy when coal is a fossil fuel
Because you're crying about how the CFP "devastated" fishing communities whilst presumably supporting the devastation of mining communities.
And your only justification is "but fossil fuels"?
I have sympathy for former fishing ports and towns especially because my family is literally from one but realistically it's the past. We now do high tech manufacturing and provide services. Fishing is the past at least how you remember it. Likewise mining.
I disagree.
Fishing has a great future, why are the French and Spanish so angry that they are prepared to fish illegally
A "great future" for big industrial fishing, yeah. Not for the lowly captain and his crew of merry men.
If all the EU can offer is blackmail then no deal it will be
Again, read the article (admittedly behind a paywall). I’m not clear how you are construing this blackmail.
Many will
Not many read the FT. I thought also you had your own mind.
I have and to be honest the rhetoric from both sides needs dialing down
However, if it is no deal I cannot understand why so many think it is OK for the illegal operation of fishing boats in UK waters or indeed Norwegian and Iceland
The story in the article (which you claim is tantamount to blackmail) does not even mention fishing. Go to bed.
Maybe you need to show at least some courtesy even when disagreeing but is this the way Lib Dems expect to win over support
How many mps have you got in the HOC these days
I have no idea. But I am content that I did not vote to humiliate and dismember the country, as you fear you might have done during your wibbly moments.
I voted remain and not for Boris
I’m pretty sure you voted Tory in 2019. If not I apologise. Sadly, those who did voted to perpetuate disaster.
I did vote Conservative but I did not vote for Boris in the election to office
Let me guess, you also did not have sex with Monica Lewinsky.
The EU did not threaten to ground planes unless the UK gave the same fishing rights for a year . Each contingency area is separate . If the UK reciprocates on planes the EU will do the same . If the UK refuse on fish it’s irrelevant to the plane issue . I wish people would know what they’re talking about before peddling more anti EU comments !
A handy guide to food post Brexit in the Daily Mail
That's a really stupid graphic. The two immediate idiocies that spring to mind are:
We don't import bananas or avocados from the EU so there is no reason for them to be affected by the type of Brexit we have. Indeed the vast majority of avocados are imported from Israel and we already have a trade deal signed with them which will reduce tariffs compared to the current EU tariffs.
Norway and Iceland are not in the EU and particularly are not in the Customs Union so do not have to abide by any EU/UK tariff regime. More to the point the UK, Iceland and Norway have already signed a deal to continue to trade in exactly the same way as they do now until a proper trade deal is concluded next year.
Two immediate idiocies in what you have posted. We almost certainly import bananas and avocados from Belgium rather than from Israel or Ivory Coast. The EU is a vast market, so bulk imports come into a port for warehousing and then onward distribution to the final market like the UK. The Daily Mail puts these on their list because they are EU imports.
Yes we can set up direct import routes for Bananas and Avocados and Oranges and everything else that we import via the EU but it will be low volume high cost additions to the current business model and that will bang the unit price up.
As for fish, the point the Mail is making is that according to our government there is going to be major disruption to our ports. And quite frankly they're trying to educate the wazzocks who think that saving British Fishing liberates Fish and Chips.
'Yes that is a chippy. Yes those are fishing boats. No they haven't caught the cod the chippy across the road is preparing for you because Cod don't swing in these waters you dumb bastards.'
There may be some modest price rises because bananas and avocados now have to go direct to Felixstowe in a different boat rather than to Rotterdam and then Felixstowe in the same boat but there will be no problems with supply as we have free trade deals with all the source countries.
My view is the market will find the most efficient route to keep costs down to a minimum.
Honestly it's a silly thing to hang your hat on. If you're going to take umbrage at No Deal then focus on the EU perishable food products that are really effected.
Is there anything we can't source from elsewhere except tulips ?
What this boils down to is a few months disruption whilst the new supply lines bed in and establish and we adjust to the new systems, general price rises of 2-5% and a mixture of medium-high tarrifs on exclusive EU products, which will mean people will generally buy much less of them and start buying them elsewhere - unless speciality.
Far from ideal but not the end of the world either.
What I'd really like for us to do is finalise trade deals with Australia and New Zealand then stick an absolutely horrific tariff on wine, as in punitively high so as to lock nations without trade deals with the UK out of the mass market for wine in this country. It would hurt EU producers very hard and make them squeal to Macron and Conte for relief.
If we're going into a trade war after no deal we need to be prepared to make life as hard as possible for the EU without mercy and without second thought for their economy.
So now you want a trade war.
Christ on a bike. None of this was on the side of that bus.
And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?
A big recovery of the coastal ecosystem.
If the damage trawling did was immediately visible it would have been banned years ago.
You think the message these Tory MPs are looking to sell to the fishing communities is "good news guys, we've got rid of the French, but don't get ahead of yourselves thinking you'll be able to take their place"?
The british fishing fleet will take several years to rebuild, if during that time fish stocks get a recovery period due to the lack of eu factory ships by the time its in place there will have been a significant increase in fish stocks. It is simple to work out apart from for you it seems
Surely British fishermen will do what they've always done: they'll get quotas and then rent them out to foreign firms. That's by far the easiest way to make money.
If I may use an anecdote here, there were two types of people in britain that sold quota's. Large corporations with fishing fleets. The other were boats like mine with a skipper who owned the boat. After we joined the cfp in the 70's the quota's we were given went ever downwards with the uk doing strict enforcement on us while spanish, french and belgian fisherman seemed to have a blind eye from their countries. When he sold his quota we had got down to being allowed to fish 6 weeks a year. His boat was no longer financially viable because instead of being able to catch 100% of the fish that was sustainable in british waters we had our share of about 18%.
And that happened to my brother in laws and other family members
Yes people make it sound like fisherman were queuing up to sell, I know our skipper was in tears the day he told us. His family had been running a boat for generations but the amount we were allowed to catch would no longer even pay to maintain the boat let alone pay of the crew on a voyage
It was deeply traumatic and accounts in a large way to the anger towards the EU from the Scottish fishing communities
I'm sure you felt the same empathy for the ex-mining communities in the 80s and 90s.
Let's open all the mines and make Britain great again!
As I have said before I find it ironic that the same people who attacked the closure of the mines are now immersed in the attacks on fossil fuels.
For the avoidance of doubt, I don't actually want the mines to reopen...
The difference is mines were not economic and needed public subsidy compared to imports whereas british fishing was both profitable and flourishing until politicians gave the rights of 80% of our fish away to the eec in the 70's
If all the EU can offer is blackmail then no deal it will be
Again, read the article (admittedly behind a paywall). I’m not clear how you are construing this blackmail.
It’s not blackmail, it’s a threat
Do the deal we tell you to now or we will duck you over in January
All they have said is, whilst sovereignty over sea territory and the harvest underneath is disputed, we stay in talks, and we keep the status quo.
The people pushing this blackmail line, the people who have created this crisis in our country and our economy, need to be taken off media and social media just like the anti vaxxers shouldn’t be given air time. Including this site, brexiteers should be suspended for pushing this narrative in the same way the anti vaxxers need to be because they are dangerous in their insanity. We have taken freedom of speech far too far in recent times, so that we are following voices from out the nature state, not civilisation.
There is no sovereignty out there under the oceans on those fish stocks. It’s a fantasy between peoples ears. The science is absolutely black and white. We won’t have enough cod to feed the British appetite without a trade on catches with our neighbours. If you go strictly to sovereignty and not the science, Londoners will have to eat haddock.
Brexit Britain has no choice but to trade. Simples.
Can we therefore remove people like you from all social media and this site as you are giving fake news
Touché
The other day it was said it’s all labours fault for killing May’s deal. Now it’s all EUs fault for their sneaky blackmail. All you are doing is party political deflection, pure and simple.
Put your hands in the air and own up to the truth. We have got into this mess by pursuing a fantasy between people ears that doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. Scrutiny is shouted down on basis 2016 and all that you lost respect democracy. Salient arguments about costs to business, destruction of the UK, threat to security cooperation etc was shouted down in 2016 on basis it was project fear.
And the current negotiators for us, with fantasy between their ears and hemmed in by their lies and silly promises are the last people who should be negotiating a deal for us.
Respect for democracy is respecting the referendum we had Threat to security cooperation is hollow there is a reason we always supplied more intel than we got and there is a reason no one talks to some of the european intel agencies as they leak like a sieve
And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?
A big recovery of the coastal ecosystem.
If the damage trawling did was immediately visible it would have been banned years ago.
You think the message these Tory MPs are looking to sell to the fishing communities is "good news guys, we've got rid of the French, but don't get ahead of yourselves thinking you'll be able to take their place"?
The british fishing fleet will take several years to rebuild, if during that time fish stocks get a recovery period due to the lack of eu factory ships by the time its in place there will have been a significant increase in fish stocks. It is simple to work out apart from for you it seems
Surely British fishermen will do what they've always done: they'll get quotas and then rent them out to foreign firms. That's by far the easiest way to make money.
If I may use an anecdote here, there were two types of people in britain that sold quota's. Large corporations with fishing fleets. The other were boats like mine with a skipper who owned the boat. After we joined the cfp in the 70's the quota's we were given went ever downwards with the uk doing strict enforcement on us while spanish, french and belgian fisherman seemed to have a blind eye from their countries. When he sold his quota we had got down to being allowed to fish 6 weeks a year. His boat was no longer financially viable because instead of being able to catch 100% of the fish that was sustainable in british waters we had our share of about 18%.
And that happened to my brother in laws and other family members
Yes people make it sound like fisherman were queuing up to sell, I know our skipper was in tears the day he told us. His family had been running a boat for generations but the amount we were allowed to catch would no longer even pay to maintain the boat let alone pay of the crew on a voyage
It was deeply traumatic and accounts in a large way to the anger towards the EU from the Scottish fishing communities
I'm sure you felt the same empathy for the ex-mining communities in the 80s and 90s.
Let's open all the mines and make Britain great again!
As I have said before I find it ironic that the same people who attacked the closure of the mines are now immersed in the attacks on fossil fuels.
For the avoidance of doubt, I don't actually want the mines to reopen...
The difference is mines were not economic and needed public subsidy compared to imports whereas british fishing was both profitable and flourishing until politicians gave the rights of 80% of our fish away to the eec in the 70's
People who support the mines use the same rubbish argument. "bUt tHEy wERe PrOfITable"
The fact is that Thatcher, despite her many faults, moved us on as a nation to bigger and better things than fishing and mining.
Hang on - some of them WERE profitable. They weren't shut to benefit the environment. We shifted to coal imported half way round the world. Its only in recent years that the coal power stations have stopped burning foreign coal.
If all the EU can offer is blackmail then no deal it will be
Again, read the article (admittedly behind a paywall). I’m not clear how you are construing this blackmail.
Many will
Not many read the FT. I thought also you had your own mind.
I have and to be honest the rhetoric from both sides needs dialing down
However, if it is no deal I cannot understand why so many think it is OK for the illegal operation of fishing boats in UK waters or indeed Norwegian and Iceland
Because it's laughable we're even in this position. It's especially laughable that the reaction of those who said it was "all going to be fine" in 2016 is not "let's rationally sort this out" but instead "fire up the Royal Navy".
It's the continued WW2 war fantasy on steroids and it's frankly pathetic.
It’s pathetic and sickening that the Mail should publish a headline about gunboats on the eve of a critical deal with the EU.
Were you saying the same thing yesterday when the EU threatened to ground all our planes unless we gave them unilateral access to our fishing waters in the event of No Deal?
I thought it an inept and unwelcome contribution, if not quite at the gunboats level.
How else do we enforce control of our waters to show we won't accept this?
Look, I want a Deal. It's possible Boris is being totally reckless and disingenuous here (and it wouldn't be the first time) but it might be that the EU still hasn't comprised on fish in the political sweet spot, which is the 30-40% share zone.
I posted on Wednesday? morning that the current deal offered by the EU was unacceptable. This was based on my reading of some FT articles.
It is v hard to see what is happening in inside the negotiation, but I agree generally with your take.
However, I am fed up with the cavalier rhetoric from the Brexit mob, as well as the flat lying (wondrous deal, Australian deal etc) from our supposed PM.
I understand that most of the fish caught in British waters is consumed abroad in the EU and elsewhere. Conversely most of the fish we eat, comes from the EU catch. Surely that was also true pre-1973! How did we manage then?
A handy guide to food post Brexit in the Daily Mail
That's a really stupid graphic. The two immediate idiocies that spring to mind are:
We don't import bananas or avocados from the EU so there is no reason for them to be affected by the type of Brexit we have. Indeed the vast majority of avocados are imported from Israel and we already have a trade deal signed with them which will reduce tariffs compared to the current EU tariffs.
Norway and Iceland are not in the EU and particularly are not in the Customs Union so do not have to abide by any EU/UK tariff regime. More to the point the UK, Iceland and Norway have already signed a deal to continue to trade in exactly the same way as they do now until a proper trade deal is concluded next year.
Two immediate idiocies in what you have posted. We almost certainly import bananas and avocados from Belgium rather than from Israel or Ivory Coast. The EU is a vast market, so bulk imports come into a port for warehousing and then onward distribution to the final market like the UK. The Daily Mail puts these on their list because they are EU imports.
Yes we can set up direct import routes for Bananas and Avocados and Oranges and everything else that we import via the EU but it will be low volume high cost additions to the current business model and that will bang the unit price up.
As for fish, the point the Mail is making is that according to our government there is going to be major disruption to our ports. And quite frankly they're trying to educate the wazzocks who think that saving British Fishing liberates Fish and Chips.
'Yes that is a chippy. Yes those are fishing boats. No they haven't caught the cod the chippy across the road is preparing for you because Cod don't swing in these waters you dumb bastards.'
There may be some modest price rises because bananas and avocados now have to go direct to Felixstowe in a different boat rather than to Rotterdam and then Felixstowe in the same boat but there will be no problems with supply as we have free trade deals with all the source countries.
My view is the market will find the most efficient route to keep costs down to a minimum.
Honestly it's a silly thing to hang your hat on. If you're going to take umbrage at No Deal then focus on the EU perishable food products that are really effected.
Is there anything we can't source from elsewhere except tulips ?
What this boils down to is a few months disruption whilst the new supply lines bed in and establish and we adjust to the new systems, general price rises of 2-5% and a mixture of medium-high tarrifs on exclusive EU products, which will mean people will generally buy much less of them and start buying them elsewhere - unless speciality.
Far from ideal but not the end of the world either.
What I'd really like for us to do is finalise trade deals with Australia and New Zealand then stick an absolutely horrific tariff on wine, as in punitively high so as to lock nations without trade deals with the UK out of the mass market for wine in this country. It would hurt EU producers very hard and make them squeal to Macron and Conte for relief.
If we're going into a trade war after no deal we need to be prepared to make life as hard as possible for the EU without mercy and without second thought for their economy.
So now you want a trade war.
Christ on a bike. None of this was on the side of that bus.
I don't want a trade war, no deal becomes a trade war, or didn't you see the veiled threats from the EU over landing rights for UK planes? The nation must be ready to use whatever means we have available to us and that means being absolutely unsentimental about it.
A handy guide to food post Brexit in the Daily Mail
That's a really stupid graphic. The two immediate idiocies that spring to mind are:
We don't import bananas or avocados from the EU so there is no reason for them to be affected by the type of Brexit we have. Indeed the vast majority of avocados are imported from Israel and we already have a trade deal signed with them which will reduce tariffs compared to the current EU tariffs.
Norway and Iceland are not in the EU and particularly are not in the Customs Union so do not have to abide by any EU/UK tariff regime. More to the point the UK, Iceland and Norway have already signed a deal to continue to trade in exactly the same way as they do now until a proper trade deal is concluded next year.
Two immediate idiocies in what you have posted. We almost certainly import bananas and avocados from Belgium rather than from Israel or Ivory Coast. The EU is a vast market, so bulk imports come into a port for warehousing and then onward distribution to the final market like the UK. The Daily Mail puts these on their list because they are EU imports.
Yes we can set up direct import routes for Bananas and Avocados and Oranges and everything else that we import via the EU but it will be low volume high cost additions to the current business model and that will bang the unit price up.
As for fish, the point the Mail is making is that according to our government there is going to be major disruption to our ports. And quite frankly they're trying to educate the wazzocks who think that saving British Fishing liberates Fish and Chips.
'Yes that is a chippy. Yes those are fishing boats. No they haven't caught the cod the chippy across the road is preparing for you because Cod don't swing in these waters you dumb bastards.'
There may be some modest price rises because bananas and avocados now have to go direct to Felixstowe in a different boat rather than to Rotterdam and then Felixstowe in the same boat but there will be no problems with supply as we have free trade deals with all the source countries.
My view is the market will find the most efficient route to keep costs down to a minimum.
Honestly it's a silly thing to hang your hat on. If you're going to take umbrage at No Deal then focus on the EU perishable food products that are really effected.
Is there anything we can't source from elsewhere except tulips ?
What this boils down to is a few months disruption whilst the new supply lines bed in and establish and we adjust to the new systems, general price rises of 2-5% and a mixture of medium-high tarrifs on exclusive EU products, which will mean people will generally buy much less of them and start buying them elsewhere - unless speciality.
Far from ideal but not the end of the world either.
What I'd really like for us to do is finalise trade deals with Australia and New Zealand then stick an absolutely horrific tariff on wine, as in punitively high so as to lock nations without trade deals with the UK out of the mass market for wine in this country. It would hurt EU producers very hard and make them squeal to Macron and Conte for relief.
If we're going into a trade war after no deal we need to be prepared to make life as hard as possible for the EU without mercy and without second thought for their economy.
So now you want a trade war.
Christ on a bike. None of this was on the side of that bus.
The one thing worse than No Deal, is a Hostile No Deal. BoZo really has screwed us all now.
I understand that most of the fish caught in British waters is consumed abroad in the EU and elsewhere. Conversely most of the fish we eat, comes from the EU catch. Surely that was also true pre-1973! How did we manage then?
You need to read up on some history. Some of which is actually in this thread. Trying unrealistically to propel 2020 back to 1970 is part of the explanation as to why we are in such a mess.
A handy guide to food post Brexit in the Daily Mail
That's a really stupid graphic. The two immediate idiocies that spring to mind are:
We don't import bananas or avocados from the EU so there is no reason for them to be affected by the type of Brexit we have. Indeed the vast majority of avocados are imported from Israel and we already have a trade deal signed with them which will reduce tariffs compared to the current EU tariffs.
Norway and Iceland are not in the EU and particularly are not in the Customs Union so do not have to abide by any EU/UK tariff regime. More to the point the UK, Iceland and Norway have already signed a deal to continue to trade in exactly the same way as they do now until a proper trade deal is concluded next year.
Two immediate idiocies in what you have posted. We almost certainly import bananas and avocados from Belgium rather than from Israel or Ivory Coast. The EU is a vast market, so bulk imports come into a port for warehousing and then onward distribution to the final market like the UK. The Daily Mail puts these on their list because they are EU imports.
Yes we can set up direct import routes for Bananas and Avocados and Oranges and everything else that we import via the EU but it will be low volume high cost additions to the current business model and that will bang the unit price up.
As for fish, the point the Mail is making is that according to our government there is going to be major disruption to our ports. And quite frankly they're trying to educate the wazzocks who think that saving British Fishing liberates Fish and Chips.
'Yes that is a chippy. Yes those are fishing boats. No they haven't caught the cod the chippy across the road is preparing for you because Cod don't swing in these waters you dumb bastards.'
There may be some modest price rises because bananas and avocados now have to go direct to Felixstowe in a different boat rather than to Rotterdam and then Felixstowe in the same boat but there will be no problems with supply as we have free trade deals with all the source countries.
My view is the market will find the most efficient route to keep costs down to a minimum.
Honestly it's a silly thing to hang your hat on. If you're going to take umbrage at No Deal then focus on the EU perishable food products that are really effected.
Is there anything we can't source from elsewhere except tulips ?
What this boils down to is a few months disruption whilst the new supply lines bed in and establish and we adjust to the new systems, general price rises of 2-5% and a mixture of medium-high tarrifs on exclusive EU products, which will mean people will generally buy much less of them and start buying them elsewhere - unless speciality.
Far from ideal but not the end of the world either.
What I'd really like for us to do is finalise trade deals with Australia and New Zealand then stick an absolutely horrific tariff on wine, as in punitively high so as to lock nations without trade deals with the UK out of the mass market for wine in this country. It would hurt EU producers very hard and make them squeal to Macron and Conte for relief.
If we're going into a trade war after no deal we need to be prepared to make life as hard as possible for the EU without mercy and without second thought for their economy.
So now you want a trade war.
Christ on a bike. None of this was on the side of that bus.
I don't want a trade war, no deal becomes a trade war, or didn't you see the veiled threats from the EU over landing rights for UK planes? The nation must be ready to use whatever means we have available to us and that means being absolutely unsentimental about it.
No thank you. I'm not interested in a trade war.
We can end this right now by simply joining the EEA/EFTA as we should have done all along.
A handy guide to food post Brexit in the Daily Mail
That's a really stupid graphic. The two immediate idiocies that spring to mind are:
We don't import bananas or avocados from the EU so there is no reason for them to be affected by the type of Brexit we have. Indeed the vast majority of avocados are imported from Israel and we already have a trade deal signed with them which will reduce tariffs compared to the current EU tariffs.
Norway and Iceland are not in the EU and particularly are not in the Customs Union so do not have to abide by any EU/UK tariff regime. More to the point the UK, Iceland and Norway have already signed a deal to continue to trade in exactly the same way as they do now until a proper trade deal is concluded next year.
Two immediate idiocies in what you have posted. We almost certainly import bananas and avocados from Belgium rather than from Israel or Ivory Coast. The EU is a vast market, so bulk imports come into a port for warehousing and then onward distribution to the final market like the UK. The Daily Mail puts these on their list because they are EU imports.
Yes we can set up direct import routes for Bananas and Avocados and Oranges and everything else that we import via the EU but it will be low volume high cost additions to the current business model and that will bang the unit price up.
As for fish, the point the Mail is making is that according to our government there is going to be major disruption to our ports. And quite frankly they're trying to educate the wazzocks who think that saving British Fishing liberates Fish and Chips.
'Yes that is a chippy. Yes those are fishing boats. No they haven't caught the cod the chippy across the road is preparing for you because Cod don't swing in these waters you dumb bastards.'
There may be some modest price rises because bananas and avocados now have to go direct to Felixstowe in a different boat rather than to Rotterdam and then Felixstowe in the same boat but there will be no problems with supply as we have free trade deals with all the source countries.
My view is the market will find the most efficient route to keep costs down to a minimum.
Honestly it's a silly thing to hang your hat on. If you're going to take umbrage at No Deal then focus on the EU perishable food products that are really effected.
Is there anything we can't source from elsewhere except tulips ?
What this boils down to is a few months disruption whilst the new supply lines bed in and establish and we adjust to the new systems, general price rises of 2-5% and a mixture of medium-high tarrifs on exclusive EU products, which will mean people will generally buy much less of them and start buying them elsewhere - unless speciality.
Far from ideal but not the end of the world either.
What I'd really like for us to do is finalise trade deals with Australia and New Zealand then stick an absolutely horrific tariff on wine, as in punitively high so as to lock nations without trade deals with the UK out of the mass market for wine in this country. It would hurt EU producers very hard and make them squeal to Macron and Conte for relief.
If we're going into a trade war after no deal we need to be prepared to make life as hard as possible for the EU without mercy and without second thought for their economy.
So now you want a trade war.
Christ on a bike. None of this was on the side of that bus.
The one thing worse than No Deal, is a Hostile No Deal. BoZo really has screwed us all now.
And if that tweet earlier is to be believed, he joked and belched his way through dinner with UvdL like Alan Partridge meets Sir Les Patterson.
One of the supposed advantages of Brexit was that it would stop British politicians from blaming Brussels for their own failings, but I can see that there are potentially many decades of that still to come. How very tiresome.
And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?
A big recovery of the coastal ecosystem.
If the damage trawling did was immediately visible it would have been banned years ago.
You think the message these Tory MPs are looking to sell to the fishing communities is "good news guys, we've got rid of the French, but don't get ahead of yourselves thinking you'll be able to take their place"?
The british fishing fleet will take several years to rebuild, if during that time fish stocks get a recovery period due to the lack of eu factory ships by the time its in place there will have been a significant increase in fish stocks. It is simple to work out apart from for you it seems
Surely British fishermen will do what they've always done: they'll get quotas and then rent them out to foreign firms. That's by far the easiest way to make money.
If I may use an anecdote here, there were two types of people in britain that sold quota's. Large corporations with fishing fleets. The other were boats like mine with a skipper who owned the boat. After we joined the cfp in the 70's the quota's we were given went ever downwards with the uk doing strict enforcement on us while spanish, french and belgian fisherman seemed to have a blind eye from their countries. When he sold his quota we had got down to being allowed to fish 6 weeks a year. His boat was no longer financially viable because instead of being able to catch 100% of the fish that was sustainable in british waters we had our share of about 18%.
And that happened to my brother in laws and other family members
Yes people make it sound like fisherman were queuing up to sell, I know our skipper was in tears the day he told us. His family had been running a boat for generations but the amount we were allowed to catch would no longer even pay to maintain the boat let alone pay of the crew on a voyage
It was deeply traumatic and accounts in a large way to the anger towards the EU from the Scottish fishing communities
I'm sure you felt the same empathy for the ex-mining communities in the 80s and 90s.
Let's open all the mines and make Britain great again!
As I have said before I find it ironic that the same people who attacked the closure of the mines are now immersed in the attacks on fossil fuels.
For the avoidance of doubt, I don't actually want the mines to reopen...
The difference is mines were not economic and needed public subsidy compared to imports whereas british fishing was both profitable and flourishing until politicians gave the rights of 80% of our fish away to the eec in the 70's
People who support the mines use the same rubbish argument. "bUt tHEy wERe PrOfITable"
The fact is that Thatcher, despite her many faults, moved us on as a nation to bigger and better things than fishing and mining.
Hang on - some of them WERE profitable. They weren't shut to benefit the environment. We shifted to coal imported half way round the world. Its only in recent years that the coal power stations have stopped burning foreign coal.
What he means by bigger and better thing is services like his don't forget he is training to be a lawyer. A definition of that being someone who produces nothing but tears of fury.
A handy guide to food post Brexit in the Daily Mail
That's a really stupid graphic. The two immediate idiocies that spring to mind are:
We don't import bananas or avocados from the EU so there is no reason for them to be affected by the type of Brexit we have. Indeed the vast majority of avocados are imported from Israel and we already have a trade deal signed with them which will reduce tariffs compared to the current EU tariffs.
Norway and Iceland are not in the EU and particularly are not in the Customs Union so do not have to abide by any EU/UK tariff regime. More to the point the UK, Iceland and Norway have already signed a deal to continue to trade in exactly the same way as they do now until a proper trade deal is concluded next year.
Two immediate idiocies in what you have posted. We almost certainly import bananas and avocados from Belgium rather than from Israel or Ivory Coast. The EU is a vast market, so bulk imports come into a port for warehousing and then onward distribution to the final market like the UK. The Daily Mail puts these on their list because they are EU imports.
Yes we can set up direct import routes for Bananas and Avocados and Oranges and everything else that we import via the EU but it will be low volume high cost additions to the current business model and that will bang the unit price up.
As for fish, the point the Mail is making is that according to our government there is going to be major disruption to our ports. And quite frankly they're trying to educate the wazzocks who think that saving British Fishing liberates Fish and Chips.
'Yes that is a chippy. Yes those are fishing boats. No they haven't caught the cod the chippy across the road is preparing for you because Cod don't swing in these waters you dumb bastards.'
There may be some modest price rises because bananas and avocados now have to go direct to Felixstowe in a different boat rather than to Rotterdam and then Felixstowe in the same boat but there will be no problems with supply as we have free trade deals with all the source countries.
My view is the market will find the most efficient route to keep costs down to a minimum.
Honestly it's a silly thing to hang your hat on. If you're going to take umbrage at No Deal then focus on the EU perishable food products that are really effected.
Is there anything we can't source from elsewhere except tulips ?
What this boils down to is a few months disruption whilst the new supply lines bed in and establish and we adjust to the new systems, general price rises of 2-5% and a mixture of medium-high tarrifs on exclusive EU products, which will mean people will generally buy much less of them and start buying them elsewhere - unless speciality.
Far from ideal but not the end of the world either.
What I'd really like for us to do is finalise trade deals with Australia and New Zealand then stick an absolutely horrific tariff on wine, as in punitively high so as to lock nations without trade deals with the UK out of the mass market for wine in this country. It would hurt EU producers very hard and make them squeal to Macron and Conte for relief.
If we're going into a trade war after no deal we need to be prepared to make life as hard as possible for the EU without mercy and without second thought for their economy.
So now you want a trade war.
Christ on a bike. None of this was on the side of that bus.
And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?
A big recovery of the coastal ecosystem.
If the damage trawling did was immediately visible it would have been banned years ago.
You think the message these Tory MPs are looking to sell to the fishing communities is "good news guys, we've got rid of the French, but don't get ahead of yourselves thinking you'll be able to take their place"?
The british fishing fleet will take several years to rebuild, if during that time fish stocks get a recovery period due to the lack of eu factory ships by the time its in place there will have been a significant increase in fish stocks. It is simple to work out apart from for you it seems
Surely British fishermen will do what they've always done: they'll get quotas and then rent them out to foreign firms. That's by far the easiest way to make money.
If I may use an anecdote here, there were two types of people in britain that sold quota's. Large corporations with fishing fleets. The other were boats like mine with a skipper who owned the boat. After we joined the cfp in the 70's the quota's we were given went ever downwards with the uk doing strict enforcement on us while spanish, french and belgian fisherman seemed to have a blind eye from their countries. When he sold his quota we had got down to being allowed to fish 6 weeks a year. His boat was no longer financially viable because instead of being able to catch 100% of the fish that was sustainable in british waters we had our share of about 18%.
And that happened to my brother in laws and other family members
Yes people make it sound like fisherman were queuing up to sell, I know our skipper was in tears the day he told us. His family had been running a boat for generations but the amount we were allowed to catch would no longer even pay to maintain the boat let alone pay of the crew on a voyage
It was deeply traumatic and accounts in a large way to the anger towards the EU from the Scottish fishing communities
I'm sure you felt the same empathy for the ex-mining communities in the 80s and 90s.
Let's open all the mines and make Britain great again!
As I have said before I find it ironic that the same people who attacked the closure of the mines are now immersed in the attacks on fossil fuels.
For the avoidance of doubt, I don't actually want the mines to reopen...
The difference is mines were not economic and needed public subsidy compared to imports whereas british fishing was both profitable and flourishing until politicians gave the rights of 80% of our fish away to the eec in the 70's
People who support the mines use the same rubbish argument. "bUt tHEy wERe PrOfITable"
The fact is that Thatcher, despite her many faults, moved us on as a nation to bigger and better things than fishing and mining.
Hang on - some of them WERE profitable. They weren't shut to benefit the environment. We shifted to coal imported half way round the world. Its only in recent years that the coal power stations have stopped burning foreign coal.
What he means by bigger and better thing is services like his don't forget he is training to be a lawyer. A definition of that being someone who produces nothing but tears of fury.
I worked in North East manufacturing for nearly 7 years so do not lecture me about the merits of "manufacturing" vs a services career.
And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?
A big recovery of the coastal ecosystem.
If the damage trawling did was immediately visible it would have been banned years ago.
You think the message these Tory MPs are looking to sell to the fishing communities is "good news guys, we've got rid of the French, but don't get ahead of yourselves thinking you'll be able to take their place"?
The british fishing fleet will take several years to rebuild, if during that time fish stocks get a recovery period due to the lack of eu factory ships by the time its in place there will have been a significant increase in fish stocks. It is simple to work out apart from for you it seems
Surely British fishermen will do what they've always done: they'll get quotas and then rent them out to foreign firms. That's by far the easiest way to make money.
If I may use an anecdote here, there were two types of people in britain that sold quota's. Large corporations with fishing fleets. The other were boats like mine with a skipper who owned the boat. After we joined the cfp in the 70's the quota's we were given went ever downwards with the uk doing strict enforcement on us while spanish, french and belgian fisherman seemed to have a blind eye from their countries. When he sold his quota we had got down to being allowed to fish 6 weeks a year. His boat was no longer financially viable because instead of being able to catch 100% of the fish that was sustainable in british waters we had our share of about 18%.
And that happened to my brother in laws and other family members
Yes people make it sound like fisherman were queuing up to sell, I know our skipper was in tears the day he told us. His family had been running a boat for generations but the amount we were allowed to catch would no longer even pay to maintain the boat let alone pay of the crew on a voyage
It was deeply traumatic and accounts in a large way to the anger towards the EU from the Scottish fishing communities
I'm sure you felt the same empathy for the ex-mining communities in the 80s and 90s.
Let's open all the mines and make Britain great again!
As I have said before I find it ironic that the same people who attacked the closure of the mines are now immersed in the attacks on fossil fuels.
For the avoidance of doubt, I don't actually want the mines to reopen...
The difference is mines were not economic and needed public subsidy compared to imports whereas british fishing was both profitable and flourishing until politicians gave the rights of 80% of our fish away to the eec in the 70's
People who support the mines use the same rubbish argument. "bUt tHEy wERe PrOfITable"
The fact is that Thatcher, despite her many faults, moved us on as a nation to bigger and better things than fishing and mining.
Hang on - some of them WERE profitable. They weren't shut to benefit the environment. We shifted to coal imported half way round the world. Its only in recent years that the coal power stations have stopped burning foreign coal.
What he means by bigger and better thing is services like his don't forget he is training to be a lawyer. A definition of that being someone who produces nothing but tears of fury.
Says the poster who quote literally represents himself as a bottom feeder.
If all the EU can offer is blackmail then no deal it will be
Again, read the article (admittedly behind a paywall). I’m not clear how you are construing this blackmail.
Many will
Not many read the FT. I thought also you had your own mind.
I have and to be honest the rhetoric from both sides needs dialing down
However, if it is no deal I cannot understand why so many think it is OK for the illegal operation of fishing boats in UK waters or indeed Norwegian and Iceland
Because it's laughable we're even in this position. It's especially laughable that the reaction of those who said it was "all going to be fine" in 2016 is not "let's rationally sort this out" but instead "fire up the Royal Navy".
It's the continued WW2 war fantasy on steroids and it's frankly pathetic.
It’s pathetic and sickening that the Mail should publish a headline about gunboats on the eve of a critical deal with the EU.
Were you saying the same thing yesterday when the EU threatened to ground all our planes unless we gave them unilateral access to our fishing waters in the event of No Deal?
I thought it an inept and unwelcome contribution, if not quite at the gunboats level.
How else do we enforce control of our waters to show we won't accept this?
Look, I want a Deal. It's possible Boris is being totally reckless and disingenuous here (and it wouldn't be the first time) but it might be that the EU still hasn't comprised on fish in the political sweet spot, which is the 30-40% share zone.
I posted on Wednesday? morning that the current deal offered by the EU was unacceptable. This was based on my reading of some FT articles.
It is v hard to see what is happening in inside the negotiation, but I agree generally with your take.
However, I am fed up with the cavalier rhetoric from the Brexit mob, as well as the flat lying (wondrous deal, Australian deal etc) from our supposed PM.
Ok, that's fair enough.
You're one of the more reasonable and objective Remain posters, despite our sparring.
I thought Johnson was genuinely comfortable with leaving with no deal but not anymore. He looks really scared. it's a look i haven't seen before. Even a little bit manic.
And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?
A big recovery of the coastal ecosystem.
If the damage trawling did was immediately visible it would have been banned years ago.
You think the message these Tory MPs are looking to sell to the fishing communities is "good news guys, we've got rid of the French, but don't get ahead of yourselves thinking you'll be able to take their place"?
The british fishing fleet will take several years to rebuild, if during that time fish stocks get a recovery period due to the lack of eu factory ships by the time its in place there will have been a significant increase in fish stocks. It is simple to work out apart from for you it seems
Surely British fishermen will do what they've always done: they'll get quotas and then rent them out to foreign firms. That's by far the easiest way to make money.
If I may use an anecdote here, there were two types of people in britain that sold quota's. Large corporations with fishing fleets. The other were boats like mine with a skipper who owned the boat. After we joined the cfp in the 70's the quota's we were given went ever downwards with the uk doing strict enforcement on us while spanish, french and belgian fisherman seemed to have a blind eye from their countries. When he sold his quota we had got down to being allowed to fish 6 weeks a year. His boat was no longer financially viable because instead of being able to catch 100% of the fish that was sustainable in british waters we had our share of about 18%.
And that happened to my brother in laws and other family members
Yes people make it sound like fisherman were queuing up to sell, I know our skipper was in tears the day he told us. His family had been running a boat for generations but the amount we were allowed to catch would no longer even pay to maintain the boat let alone pay of the crew on a voyage
It was deeply traumatic and accounts in a large way to the anger towards the EU from the Scottish fishing communities
I'm sure you felt the same empathy for the ex-mining communities in the 80s and 90s.
Let's open all the mines and make Britain great again!
As I have said before I find it ironic that the same people who attacked the closure of the mines are now immersed in the attacks on fossil fuels.
For the avoidance of doubt, I don't actually want the mines to reopen...
The difference is mines were not economic and needed public subsidy compared to imports whereas british fishing was both profitable and flourishing until politicians gave the rights of 80% of our fish away to the eec in the 70's
People who support the mines use the same rubbish argument. "bUt tHEy wERe PrOfITable"
The fact is that Thatcher, despite her many faults, moved us on as a nation to bigger and better things than fishing and mining.
Hang on - some of them WERE profitable. They weren't shut to benefit the environment. We shifted to coal imported half way round the world. Its only in recent years that the coal power stations have stopped burning foreign coal.
What he means by bigger and better thing is services like his don't forget he is training to be a lawyer. A definition of that being someone who produces nothing but tears of fury.
I worked in North East manufacturing for nearly 7 years so do not lecture me about the merits of "manufacturing" vs a services career.
Oooh did baby get his hands dirty doing that nasty making something thing. No wonder you have such a contempt for people who actually produce something and have gone for a trade that makes its money talking and producing little but hot air and confusion.
I understand that most of the fish caught in British waters is consumed abroad in the EU and elsewhere. Conversely most of the fish we eat, comes from the EU catch. Surely that was also true pre-1973! How did we manage then?
You need to read up on some history. Some of which is actually in this thread. Trying unrealistically to propel 2020 back to 1970 is part of the explanation as to why we are in such a mess.
True but that's because international law was different and much of the sea was a bit of a free for all, which wasn't a problem for us at the time as we had a massive navy and a big fishing fleet.
Our waters and rights now are what they are entitled to be and automatically will be under international law on 1st January.
A handy guide to food post Brexit in the Daily Mail
That's a really stupid graphic. The two immediate idiocies that spring to mind are:
We don't import bananas or avocados from the EU so there is no reason for them to be affected by the type of Brexit we have. Indeed the vast majority of avocados are imported from Israel and we already have a trade deal signed with them which will reduce tariffs compared to the current EU tariffs.
Norway and Iceland are not in the EU and particularly are not in the Customs Union so do not have to abide by any EU/UK tariff regime. More to the point the UK, Iceland and Norway have already signed a deal to continue to trade in exactly the same way as they do now until a proper trade deal is concluded next year.
Two immediate idiocies in what you have posted. We almost certainly import bananas and avocados from Belgium rather than from Israel or Ivory Coast. The EU is a vast market, so bulk imports come into a port for warehousing and then onward distribution to the final market like the UK. The Daily Mail puts these on their list because they are EU imports.
Yes we can set up direct import routes for Bananas and Avocados and Oranges and everything else that we import via the EU but it will be low volume high cost additions to the current business model and that will bang the unit price up.
As for fish, the point the Mail is making is that according to our government there is going to be major disruption to our ports. And quite frankly they're trying to educate the wazzocks who think that saving British Fishing liberates Fish and Chips.
'Yes that is a chippy. Yes those are fishing boats. No they haven't caught the cod the chippy across the road is preparing for you because Cod don't swing in these waters you dumb bastards.'
There may be some modest price rises because bananas and avocados now have to go direct to Felixstowe in a different boat rather than to Rotterdam and then Felixstowe in the same boat but there will be no problems with supply as we have free trade deals with all the source countries.
My view is the market will find the most efficient route to keep costs down to a minimum.
Honestly it's a silly thing to hang your hat on. If you're going to take umbrage at No Deal then focus on the EU perishable food products that are really effected.
Is there anything we can't source from elsewhere except tulips ?
What this boils down to is a few months disruption whilst the new supply lines bed in and establish and we adjust to the new systems, general price rises of 2-5% and a mixture of medium-high tarrifs on exclusive EU products, which will mean people will generally buy much less of them and start buying them elsewhere - unless speciality.
Far from ideal but not the end of the world either.
What I'd really like for us to do is finalise trade deals with Australia and New Zealand then stick an absolutely horrific tariff on wine, as in punitively high so as to lock nations without trade deals with the UK out of the mass market for wine in this country. It would hurt EU producers very hard and make them squeal to Macron and Conte for relief.
If we're going into a trade war after no deal we need to be prepared to make life as hard as possible for the EU without mercy and without second thought for their economy.
So now you want a trade war.
Christ on a bike. None of this was on the side of that bus.
I don't want a trade war, no deal becomes a trade war, or didn't you see the veiled threats from the EU over landing rights for UK planes? The nation must be ready to use whatever means we have available to us and that means being absolutely unsentimental about it.
No thank you. I'm not interested in a trade war.
We can end this right now by simply joining the EEA/EFTA as we should have done all along.
This is is the government's doing.
No one wants a war, but being prepared for one is necessary at this point in time. The EU is clearly preparing for one and ready to strike first with economic blockades like stopping flights.
And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?
A big recovery of the coastal ecosystem.
If the damage trawling did was immediately visible it would have been banned years ago.
You think the message these Tory MPs are looking to sell to the fishing communities is "good news guys, we've got rid of the French, but don't get ahead of yourselves thinking you'll be able to take their place"?
The british fishing fleet will take several years to rebuild, if during that time fish stocks get a recovery period due to the lack of eu factory ships by the time its in place there will have been a significant increase in fish stocks. It is simple to work out apart from for you it seems
Surely British fishermen will do what they've always done: they'll get quotas and then rent them out to foreign firms. That's by far the easiest way to make money.
If I may use an anecdote here, there were two types of people in britain that sold quota's. Large corporations with fishing fleets. The other were boats like mine with a skipper who owned the boat. After we joined the cfp in the 70's the quota's we were given went ever downwards with the uk doing strict enforcement on us while spanish, french and belgian fisherman seemed to have a blind eye from their countries. When he sold his quota we had got down to being allowed to fish 6 weeks a year. His boat was no longer financially viable because instead of being able to catch 100% of the fish that was sustainable in british waters we had our share of about 18%.
And that happened to my brother in laws and other family members
Yes people make it sound like fisherman were queuing up to sell, I know our skipper was in tears the day he told us. His family had been running a boat for generations but the amount we were allowed to catch would no longer even pay to maintain the boat let alone pay of the crew on a voyage
It was deeply traumatic and accounts in a large way to the anger towards the EU from the Scottish fishing communities
I'm sure you felt the same empathy for the ex-mining communities in the 80s and 90s.
Let's open all the mines and make Britain great again!
As I have said before I find it ironic that the same people who attacked the closure of the mines are now immersed in the attacks on fossil fuels.
For the avoidance of doubt, I don't actually want the mines to reopen...
The difference is mines were not economic and needed public subsidy compared to imports whereas british fishing was both profitable and flourishing until politicians gave the rights of 80% of our fish away to the eec in the 70's
People who support the mines use the same rubbish argument. "bUt tHEy wERe PrOfITable"
The fact is that Thatcher, despite her many faults, moved us on as a nation to bigger and better things than fishing and mining.
Hang on - some of them WERE profitable. They weren't shut to benefit the environment. We shifted to coal imported half way round the world. Its only in recent years that the coal power stations have stopped burning foreign coal.
What he means by bigger and better thing is services like his don't forget he is training to be a lawyer. A definition of that being someone who produces nothing but tears of fury.
A handy guide to food post Brexit in the Daily Mail
That's a really stupid graphic. The two immediate idiocies that spring to mind are:
We don't import bananas or avocados from the EU so there is no reason for them to be affected by the type of Brexit we have. Indeed the vast majority of avocados are imported from Israel and we already have a trade deal signed with them which will reduce tariffs compared to the current EU tariffs.
Norway and Iceland are not in the EU and particularly are not in the Customs Union so do not have to abide by any EU/UK tariff regime. More to the point the UK, Iceland and Norway have already signed a deal to continue to trade in exactly the same way as they do now until a proper trade deal is concluded next year.
Two immediate idiocies in what you have posted. We almost certainly import bananas and avocados from Belgium rather than from Israel or Ivory Coast. The EU is a vast market, so bulk imports come into a port for warehousing and then onward distribution to the final market like the UK. The Daily Mail puts these on their list because they are EU imports.
Yes we can set up direct import routes for Bananas and Avocados and Oranges and everything else that we import via the EU but it will be low volume high cost additions to the current business model and that will bang the unit price up.
As for fish, the point the Mail is making is that according to our government there is going to be major disruption to our ports. And quite frankly they're trying to educate the wazzocks who think that saving British Fishing liberates Fish and Chips.
'Yes that is a chippy. Yes those are fishing boats. No they haven't caught the cod the chippy across the road is preparing for you because Cod don't swing in these waters you dumb bastards.'
There may be some modest price rises because bananas and avocados now have to go direct to Felixstowe in a different boat rather than to Rotterdam and then Felixstowe in the same boat but there will be no problems with supply as we have free trade deals with all the source countries.
My view is the market will find the most efficient route to keep costs down to a minimum.
Honestly it's a silly thing to hang your hat on. If you're going to take umbrage at No Deal then focus on the EU perishable food products that are really effected.
Is there anything we can't source from elsewhere except tulips ?
What this boils down to is a few months disruption whilst the new supply lines bed in and establish and we adjust to the new systems, general price rises of 2-5% and a mixture of medium-high tarrifs on exclusive EU products, which will mean people will generally buy much less of them and start buying them elsewhere - unless speciality.
Far from ideal but not the end of the world either.
What I'd really like for us to do is finalise trade deals with Australia and New Zealand then stick an absolutely horrific tariff on wine, as in punitively high so as to lock nations without trade deals with the UK out of the mass market for wine in this country. It would hurt EU producers very hard and make them squeal to Macron and Conte for relief.
If we're going into a trade war after no deal we need to be prepared to make life as hard as possible for the EU without mercy and without second thought for their economy.
So now you want a trade war.
Christ on a bike. None of this was on the side of that bus.
I don't want a trade war, no deal becomes a trade war, or didn't you see the veiled threats from the EU over landing rights for UK planes? The nation must be ready to use whatever means we have available to us and that means being absolutely unsentimental about it.
Trade disputes are quite ugly. You have to wield the biggest stick you can to get a good deal if you're up against someone who's keen to do the same.
And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?
A big recovery of the coastal ecosystem.
If the damage trawling did was immediately visible it would have been banned years ago.
You think the message these Tory MPs are looking to sell to the fishing communities is "good news guys, we've got rid of the French, but don't get ahead of yourselves thinking you'll be able to take their place"?
The british fishing fleet will take several years to rebuild, if during that time fish stocks get a recovery period due to the lack of eu factory ships by the time its in place there will have been a significant increase in fish stocks. It is simple to work out apart from for you it seems
Surely British fishermen will do what they've always done: they'll get quotas and then rent them out to foreign firms. That's by far the easiest way to make money.
If I may use an anecdote here, there were two types of people in britain that sold quota's. Large corporations with fishing fleets. The other were boats like mine with a skipper who owned the boat. After we joined the cfp in the 70's the quota's we were given went ever downwards with the uk doing strict enforcement on us while spanish, french and belgian fisherman seemed to have a blind eye from their countries. When he sold his quota we had got down to being allowed to fish 6 weeks a year. His boat was no longer financially viable because instead of being able to catch 100% of the fish that was sustainable in british waters we had our share of about 18%.
And that happened to my brother in laws and other family members
Yes people make it sound like fisherman were queuing up to sell, I know our skipper was in tears the day he told us. His family had been running a boat for generations but the amount we were allowed to catch would no longer even pay to maintain the boat let alone pay of the crew on a voyage
It was deeply traumatic and accounts in a large way to the anger towards the EU from the Scottish fishing communities
I'm sure you felt the same empathy for the ex-mining communities in the 80s and 90s.
Let's open all the mines and make Britain great again!
As I have said before I find it ironic that the same people who attacked the closure of the mines are now immersed in the attacks on fossil fuels.
For the avoidance of doubt, I don't actually want the mines to reopen...
The difference is mines were not economic and needed public subsidy compared to imports whereas british fishing was both profitable and flourishing until politicians gave the rights of 80% of our fish away to the eec in the 70's
People who support the mines use the same rubbish argument. "bUt tHEy wERe PrOfITable"
The fact is that Thatcher, despite her many faults, moved us on as a nation to bigger and better things than fishing and mining.
Hang on - some of them WERE profitable. They weren't shut to benefit the environment. We shifted to coal imported half way round the world. Its only in recent years that the coal power stations have stopped burning foreign coal.
What he means by bigger and better thing is services like his don't forget he is training to be a lawyer. A definition of that being someone who produces nothing but tears of fury.
I worked in North East manufacturing for nearly 7 years so do not lecture me about the merits of "manufacturing" vs a services career.
Oooh did baby get his hands dirty doing that nasty making something thing. No wonder you have such a contempt for people who actually produce something and have gone for a trade that makes its money talking and producing little but hot air and confusion.
No. I gained a lot of skills and experience from my previous career and made many friends for life.
And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?
A big recovery of the coastal ecosystem.
If the damage trawling did was immediately visible it would have been banned years ago.
You think the message these Tory MPs are looking to sell to the fishing communities is "good news guys, we've got rid of the French, but don't get ahead of yourselves thinking you'll be able to take their place"?
The british fishing fleet will take several years to rebuild, if during that time fish stocks get a recovery period due to the lack of eu factory ships by the time its in place there will have been a significant increase in fish stocks. It is simple to work out apart from for you it seems
Surely British fishermen will do what they've always done: they'll get quotas and then rent them out to foreign firms. That's by far the easiest way to make money.
If I may use an anecdote here, there were two types of people in britain that sold quota's. Large corporations with fishing fleets. The other were boats like mine with a skipper who owned the boat. After we joined the cfp in the 70's the quota's we were given went ever downwards with the uk doing strict enforcement on us while spanish, french and belgian fisherman seemed to have a blind eye from their countries. When he sold his quota we had got down to being allowed to fish 6 weeks a year. His boat was no longer financially viable because instead of being able to catch 100% of the fish that was sustainable in british waters we had our share of about 18%.
And that happened to my brother in laws and other family members
Yes people make it sound like fisherman were queuing up to sell, I know our skipper was in tears the day he told us. His family had been running a boat for generations but the amount we were allowed to catch would no longer even pay to maintain the boat let alone pay of the crew on a voyage
It was deeply traumatic and accounts in a large way to the anger towards the EU from the Scottish fishing communities
I'm sure you felt the same empathy for the ex-mining communities in the 80s and 90s.
Let's open all the mines and make Britain great again!
As I have said before I find it ironic that the same people who attacked the closure of the mines are now immersed in the attacks on fossil fuels.
For the avoidance of doubt, I don't actually want the mines to reopen...
The difference is mines were not economic and needed public subsidy compared to imports whereas british fishing was both profitable and flourishing until politicians gave the rights of 80% of our fish away to the eec in the 70's
People who support the mines use the same rubbish argument. "bUt tHEy wERe PrOfITable"
The fact is that Thatcher, despite her many faults, moved us on as a nation to bigger and better things than fishing and mining.
Hang on - some of them WERE profitable. They weren't shut to benefit the environment. We shifted to coal imported half way round the world. Its only in recent years that the coal power stations have stopped burning foreign coal.
What he means by bigger and better thing is services like his don't forget he is training to be a lawyer. A definition of that being someone who produces nothing but tears of fury.
Says the poster who quote literally represents himself as a bottom feeder.
By a bottom feeder you mean someone who doesn't earn a fuck ton just does a job making stuff
And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?
A big recovery of the coastal ecosystem.
If the damage trawling did was immediately visible it would have been banned years ago.
You think the message these Tory MPs are looking to sell to the fishing communities is "good news guys, we've got rid of the French, but don't get ahead of yourselves thinking you'll be able to take their place"?
The british fishing fleet will take several years to rebuild, if during that time fish stocks get a recovery period due to the lack of eu factory ships by the time its in place there will have been a significant increase in fish stocks. It is simple to work out apart from for you it seems
Surely British fishermen will do what they've always done: they'll get quotas and then rent them out to foreign firms. That's by far the easiest way to make money.
If I may use an anecdote here, there were two types of people in britain that sold quota's. Large corporations with fishing fleets. The other were boats like mine with a skipper who owned the boat. After we joined the cfp in the 70's the quota's we were given went ever downwards with the uk doing strict enforcement on us while spanish, french and belgian fisherman seemed to have a blind eye from their countries. When he sold his quota we had got down to being allowed to fish 6 weeks a year. His boat was no longer financially viable because instead of being able to catch 100% of the fish that was sustainable in british waters we had our share of about 18%.
And that happened to my brother in laws and other family members
Yes people make it sound like fisherman were queuing up to sell, I know our skipper was in tears the day he told us. His family had been running a boat for generations but the amount we were allowed to catch would no longer even pay to maintain the boat let alone pay of the crew on a voyage
It was deeply traumatic and accounts in a large way to the anger towards the EU from the Scottish fishing communities
I'm sure you felt the same empathy for the ex-mining communities in the 80s and 90s.
Let's open all the mines and make Britain great again!
As I have said before I find it ironic that the same people who attacked the closure of the mines are now immersed in the attacks on fossil fuels.
For the avoidance of doubt, I don't actually want the mines to reopen...
The difference is mines were not economic and needed public subsidy compared to imports whereas british fishing was both profitable and flourishing until politicians gave the rights of 80% of our fish away to the eec in the 70's
People who support the mines use the same rubbish argument. "bUt tHEy wERe PrOfITable"
The fact is that Thatcher, despite her many faults, moved us on as a nation to bigger and better things than fishing and mining.
Hang on - some of them WERE profitable. They weren't shut to benefit the environment. We shifted to coal imported half way round the world. Its only in recent years that the coal power stations have stopped burning foreign coal.
What he means by bigger and better thing is services like his don't forget he is training to be a lawyer. A definition of that being someone who produces nothing but tears of fury.
Says the poster who quote literally represents himself as a bottom feeder.
By a bottom feeder you mean someone who doesn't earn a fuck ton just does a job making stuff
A handy guide to food post Brexit in the Daily Mail
That's a really stupid graphic. The two immediate idiocies that spring to mind are:
We don't import bananas or avocados from the EU so there is no reason for them to be affected by the type of Brexit we have. Indeed the vast majority of avocados are imported from Israel and we already have a trade deal signed with them which will reduce tariffs compared to the current EU tariffs.
Norway and Iceland are not in the EU and particularly are not in the Customs Union so do not have to abide by any EU/UK tariff regime. More to the point the UK, Iceland and Norway have already signed a deal to continue to trade in exactly the same way as they do now until a proper trade deal is concluded next year.
Two immediate idiocies in what you have posted. We almost certainly import bananas and avocados from Belgium rather than from Israel or Ivory Coast. The EU is a vast market, so bulk imports come into a port for warehousing and then onward distribution to the final market like the UK. The Daily Mail puts these on their list because they are EU imports.
Yes we can set up direct import routes for Bananas and Avocados and Oranges and everything else that we import via the EU but it will be low volume high cost additions to the current business model and that will bang the unit price up.
As for fish, the point the Mail is making is that according to our government there is going to be major disruption to our ports. And quite frankly they're trying to educate the wazzocks who think that saving British Fishing liberates Fish and Chips.
'Yes that is a chippy. Yes those are fishing boats. No they haven't caught the cod the chippy across the road is preparing for you because Cod don't swing in these waters you dumb bastards.'
There may be some modest price rises because bananas and avocados now have to go direct to Felixstowe in a different boat rather than to Rotterdam and then Felixstowe in the same boat but there will be no problems with supply as we have free trade deals with all the source countries.
My view is the market will find the most efficient route to keep costs down to a minimum.
Honestly it's a silly thing to hang your hat on. If you're going to take umbrage at No Deal then focus on the EU perishable food products that are really effected.
Is there anything we can't source from elsewhere except tulips ?
What this boils down to is a few months disruption whilst the new supply lines bed in and establish and we adjust to the new systems, general price rises of 2-5% and a mixture of medium-high tarrifs on exclusive EU products, which will mean people will generally buy much less of them and start buying them elsewhere - unless speciality.
Far from ideal but not the end of the world either.
What I'd really like for us to do is finalise trade deals with Australia and New Zealand then stick an absolutely horrific tariff on wine, as in punitively high so as to lock nations without trade deals with the UK out of the mass market for wine in this country. It would hurt EU producers very hard and make them squeal to Macron and Conte for relief.
If we're going into a trade war after no deal we need to be prepared to make life as hard as possible for the EU without mercy and without second thought for their economy.
So now you want a trade war.
Christ on a bike. None of this was on the side of that bus.
I don't want a trade war, no deal becomes a trade war, or didn't you see the veiled threats from the EU over landing rights for UK planes? The nation must be ready to use whatever means we have available to us and that means being absolutely unsentimental about it.
No thank you. I'm not interested in a trade war.
We can end this right now by simply joining the EEA/EFTA as we should have done all along.
This is is the government's doing.
No one wants a war, but being prepared for one is necessary at this point in time. The EU is clearly preparing for one and ready to strike first with economic blockades like stopping flights.
If they do that it is a trade war and we need to reciprocate with all guns blazing.
And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?
A big recovery of the coastal ecosystem.
If the damage trawling did was immediately visible it would have been banned years ago.
You think the message these Tory MPs are looking to sell to the fishing communities is "good news guys, we've got rid of the French, but don't get ahead of yourselves thinking you'll be able to take their place"?
The british fishing fleet will take several years to rebuild, if during that time fish stocks get a recovery period due to the lack of eu factory ships by the time its in place there will have been a significant increase in fish stocks. It is simple to work out apart from for you it seems
Surely British fishermen will do what they've always done: they'll get quotas and then rent them out to foreign firms. That's by far the easiest way to make money.
If I may use an anecdote here, there were two types of people in britain that sold quota's. Large corporations with fishing fleets. The other were boats like mine with a skipper who owned the boat. After we joined the cfp in the 70's the quota's we were given went ever downwards with the uk doing strict enforcement on us while spanish, french and belgian fisherman seemed to have a blind eye from their countries. When he sold his quota we had got down to being allowed to fish 6 weeks a year. His boat was no longer financially viable because instead of being able to catch 100% of the fish that was sustainable in british waters we had our share of about 18%.
And that happened to my brother in laws and other family members
Yes people make it sound like fisherman were queuing up to sell, I know our skipper was in tears the day he told us. His family had been running a boat for generations but the amount we were allowed to catch would no longer even pay to maintain the boat let alone pay of the crew on a voyage
It was deeply traumatic and accounts in a large way to the anger towards the EU from the Scottish fishing communities
I'm sure you felt the same empathy for the ex-mining communities in the 80s and 90s.
Let's open all the mines and make Britain great again!
As I have said before I find it ironic that the same people who attacked the closure of the mines are now immersed in the attacks on fossil fuels.
For the avoidance of doubt, I don't actually want the mines to reopen...
The difference is mines were not economic and needed public subsidy compared to imports whereas british fishing was both profitable and flourishing until politicians gave the rights of 80% of our fish away to the eec in the 70's
People who support the mines use the same rubbish argument. "bUt tHEy wERe PrOfITable"
The fact is that Thatcher, despite her many faults, moved us on as a nation to bigger and better things than fishing and mining.
Hang on - some of them WERE profitable. They weren't shut to benefit the environment. We shifted to coal imported half way round the world. Its only in recent years that the coal power stations have stopped burning foreign coal.
What he means by bigger and better thing is services like his don't forget he is training to be a lawyer. A definition of that being someone who produces nothing but tears of fury.
Did you get mugged in the divorce? Sympathies.
Shrugs I am happy with my record, I have spent 3 years of my life being an arse when I played cards for a living....4 years as a trawler man, 10 years as an industrial chemist making things people wanted, and 20 years writing stuff people wanted software wise from sat nav stuff to medical software....a lawyer produces what?
A handy guide to food post Brexit in the Daily Mail
That's a really stupid graphic. The two immediate idiocies that spring to mind are:
We don't import bananas or avocados from the EU so there is no reason for them to be affected by the type of Brexit we have. Indeed the vast majority of avocados are imported from Israel and we already have a trade deal signed with them which will reduce tariffs compared to the current EU tariffs.
Norway and Iceland are not in the EU and particularly are not in the Customs Union so do not have to abide by any EU/UK tariff regime. More to the point the UK, Iceland and Norway have already signed a deal to continue to trade in exactly the same way as they do now until a proper trade deal is concluded next year.
Two immediate idiocies in what you have posted. We almost certainly import bananas and avocados from Belgium rather than from Israel or Ivory Coast. The EU is a vast market, so bulk imports come into a port for warehousing and then onward distribution to the final market like the UK. The Daily Mail puts these on their list because they are EU imports.
Yes we can set up direct import routes for Bananas and Avocados and Oranges and everything else that we import via the EU but it will be low volume high cost additions to the current business model and that will bang the unit price up.
As for fish, the point the Mail is making is that according to our government there is going to be major disruption to our ports. And quite frankly they're trying to educate the wazzocks who think that saving British Fishing liberates Fish and Chips.
'Yes that is a chippy. Yes those are fishing boats. No they haven't caught the cod the chippy across the road is preparing for you because Cod don't swing in these waters you dumb bastards.'
There may be some modest price rises because bananas and avocados now have to go direct to Felixstowe in a different boat rather than to Rotterdam and then Felixstowe in the same boat but there will be no problems with supply as we have free trade deals with all the source countries.
My view is the market will find the most efficient route to keep costs down to a minimum.
Honestly it's a silly thing to hang your hat on. If you're going to take umbrage at No Deal then focus on the EU perishable food products that are really effected.
Is there anything we can't source from elsewhere except tulips ?
What this boils down to is a few months disruption whilst the new supply lines bed in and establish and we adjust to the new systems, general price rises of 2-5% and a mixture of medium-high tarrifs on exclusive EU products, which will mean people will generally buy much less of them and start buying them elsewhere - unless speciality.
Far from ideal but not the end of the world either.
What I'd really like for us to do is finalise trade deals with Australia and New Zealand then stick an absolutely horrific tariff on wine, as in punitively high so as to lock nations without trade deals with the UK out of the mass market for wine in this country. It would hurt EU producers very hard and make them squeal to Macron and Conte for relief.
If we're going into a trade war after no deal we need to be prepared to make life as hard as possible for the EU without mercy and without second thought for their economy.
Hmm. Can we not fuck the supply lines from Burgundy and the Medoc please? Some things transcend politics.
And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?
A big recovery of the coastal ecosystem.
If the damage trawling did was immediately visible it would have been banned years ago.
You think the message these Tory MPs are looking to sell to the fishing communities is "good news guys, we've got rid of the French, but don't get ahead of yourselves thinking you'll be able to take their place"?
The british fishing fleet will take several years to rebuild, if during that time fish stocks get a recovery period due to the lack of eu factory ships by the time its in place there will have been a significant increase in fish stocks. It is simple to work out apart from for you it seems
Surely British fishermen will do what they've always done: they'll get quotas and then rent them out to foreign firms. That's by far the easiest way to make money.
If I may use an anecdote here, there were two types of people in britain that sold quota's. Large corporations with fishing fleets. The other were boats like mine with a skipper who owned the boat. After we joined the cfp in the 70's the quota's we were given went ever downwards with the uk doing strict enforcement on us while spanish, french and belgian fisherman seemed to have a blind eye from their countries. When he sold his quota we had got down to being allowed to fish 6 weeks a year. His boat was no longer financially viable because instead of being able to catch 100% of the fish that was sustainable in british waters we had our share of about 18%.
And that happened to my brother in laws and other family members
Yes people make it sound like fisherman were queuing up to sell, I know our skipper was in tears the day he told us. His family had been running a boat for generations but the amount we were allowed to catch would no longer even pay to maintain the boat let alone pay of the crew on a voyage
It was deeply traumatic and accounts in a large way to the anger towards the EU from the Scottish fishing communities
I'm sure you felt the same empathy for the ex-mining communities in the 80s and 90s.
Let's open all the mines and make Britain great again!
As I have said before I find it ironic that the same people who attacked the closure of the mines are now immersed in the attacks on fossil fuels.
For the avoidance of doubt, I don't actually want the mines to reopen...
The difference is mines were not economic and needed public subsidy compared to imports whereas british fishing was both profitable and flourishing until politicians gave the rights of 80% of our fish away to the eec in the 70's
People who support the mines use the same rubbish argument. "bUt tHEy wERe PrOfITable"
The fact is that Thatcher, despite her many faults, moved us on as a nation to bigger and better things than fishing and mining.
Hang on - some of them WERE profitable. They weren't shut to benefit the environment. We shifted to coal imported half way round the world. Its only in recent years that the coal power stations have stopped burning foreign coal.
What he means by bigger and better thing is services like his don't forget he is training to be a lawyer. A definition of that being someone who produces nothing but tears of fury.
Did you get mugged in the divorce? Sympathies.
Shrugs I am happy with my record, I have spent 3 years of my life being an arse when I played cards for a living....4 years as a trawler man, 10 years as an industrial chemist making things people wanted, and 20 years writing stuff people wanted software wise from sat nav stuff to medical software....a lawyer produces what?
A lawyer produces help.
Besides I want to work on the high street with everyday people. I did not do this for the money.
And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?
A big recovery of the coastal ecosystem.
If the damage trawling did was immediately visible it would have been banned years ago.
You think the message these Tory MPs are looking to sell to the fishing communities is "good news guys, we've got rid of the French, but don't get ahead of yourselves thinking you'll be able to take their place"?
The british fishing fleet will take several years to rebuild, if during that time fish stocks get a recovery period due to the lack of eu factory ships by the time its in place there will have been a significant increase in fish stocks. It is simple to work out apart from for you it seems
Surely British fishermen will do what they've always done: they'll get quotas and then rent them out to foreign firms. That's by far the easiest way to make money.
If I may use an anecdote here, there were two types of people in britain that sold quota's. Large corporations with fishing fleets. The other were boats like mine with a skipper who owned the boat. After we joined the cfp in the 70's the quota's we were given went ever downwards with the uk doing strict enforcement on us while spanish, french and belgian fisherman seemed to have a blind eye from their countries. When he sold his quota we had got down to being allowed to fish 6 weeks a year. His boat was no longer financially viable because instead of being able to catch 100% of the fish that was sustainable in british waters we had our share of about 18%.
And that happened to my brother in laws and other family members
Yes people make it sound like fisherman were queuing up to sell, I know our skipper was in tears the day he told us. His family had been running a boat for generations but the amount we were allowed to catch would no longer even pay to maintain the boat let alone pay of the crew on a voyage
It was deeply traumatic and accounts in a large way to the anger towards the EU from the Scottish fishing communities
I'm sure you felt the same empathy for the ex-mining communities in the 80s and 90s.
Let's open all the mines and make Britain great again!
As I have said before I find it ironic that the same people who attacked the closure of the mines are now immersed in the attacks on fossil fuels.
For the avoidance of doubt, I don't actually want the mines to reopen...
The difference is mines were not economic and needed public subsidy compared to imports whereas british fishing was both profitable and flourishing until politicians gave the rights of 80% of our fish away to the eec in the 70's
People who support the mines use the same rubbish argument. "bUt tHEy wERe PrOfITable"
The fact is that Thatcher, despite her many faults, moved us on as a nation to bigger and better things than fishing and mining.
Hang on - some of them WERE profitable. They weren't shut to benefit the environment. We shifted to coal imported half way round the world. Its only in recent years that the coal power stations have stopped burning foreign coal.
What he means by bigger and better thing is services like his don't forget he is training to be a lawyer. A definition of that being someone who produces nothing but tears of fury.
Did you get mugged in the divorce? Sympathies.
Shrugs I am happy with my record, I have spent 3 years of my life being an arse when I played cards for a living....4 years as a trawler man, 10 years as an industrial chemist making things people wanted, and 20 years writing stuff people wanted software wise from sat nav stuff to medical software....a lawyer produces what?
A lawyer produces help.
Besides I want to work on the high street with everyday people. I did not do this for the money.
A lawyer produces help for people that can afford it, thats not everyday people
I've no idea how the approval is going, but people are getting ready to start vaccinating staff in some emergency departments and intensive care in Germany from next week.
Hopefully we'll start seeing the light at the end of the tunnel, but it's going to be a grim winter.
A handy guide to food post Brexit in the Daily Mail
That's a really stupid graphic. The two immediate idiocies that spring to mind are:
We don't import bananas or avocados from the EU so there is no reason for them to be affected by the type of Brexit we have. Indeed the vast majority of avocados are imported from Israel and we already have a trade deal signed with them which will reduce tariffs compared to the current EU tariffs.
Norway and Iceland are not in the EU and particularly are not in the Customs Union so do not have to abide by any EU/UK tariff regime. More to the point the UK, Iceland and Norway have already signed a deal to continue to trade in exactly the same way as they do now until a proper trade deal is concluded next year.
Two immediate idiocies in what you have posted. We almost certainly import bananas and avocados from Belgium rather than from Israel or Ivory Coast. The EU is a vast market, so bulk imports come into a port for warehousing and then onward distribution to the final market like the UK. The Daily Mail puts these on their list because they are EU imports.
Yes we can set up direct import routes for Bananas and Avocados and Oranges and everything else that we import via the EU but it will be low volume high cost additions to the current business model and that will bang the unit price up.
As for fish, the point the Mail is making is that according to our government there is going to be major disruption to our ports. And quite frankly they're trying to educate the wazzocks who think that saving British Fishing liberates Fish and Chips.
'Yes that is a chippy. Yes those are fishing boats. No they haven't caught the cod the chippy across the road is preparing for you because Cod don't swing in these waters you dumb bastards.'
There may be some modest price rises because bananas and avocados now have to go direct to Felixstowe in a different boat rather than to Rotterdam and then Felixstowe in the same boat but there will be no problems with supply as we have free trade deals with all the source countries.
My view is the market will find the most efficient route to keep costs down to a minimum.
Honestly it's a silly thing to hang your hat on. If you're going to take umbrage at No Deal then focus on the EU perishable food products that are really effected.
Is there anything we can't source from elsewhere except tulips ?
What this boils down to is a few months disruption whilst the new supply lines bed in and establish and we adjust to the new systems, general price rises of 2-5% and a mixture of medium-high tarrifs on exclusive EU products, which will mean people will generally buy much less of them and start buying them elsewhere - unless speciality.
Far from ideal but not the end of the world either.
What I'd really like for us to do is finalise trade deals with Australia and New Zealand then stick an absolutely horrific tariff on wine, as in punitively high so as to lock nations without trade deals with the UK out of the mass market for wine in this country. It would hurt EU producers very hard and make them squeal to Macron and Conte for relief.
If we're going into a trade war after no deal we need to be prepared to make life as hard as possible for the EU without mercy and without second thought for their economy.
So now you want a trade war.
Christ on a bike. None of this was on the side of that bus.
I don't want a trade war, no deal becomes a trade war, or didn't you see the veiled threats from the EU over landing rights for UK planes? The nation must be ready to use whatever means we have available to us and that means being absolutely unsentimental about it.
No thank you. I'm not interested in a trade war.
We can end this right now by simply joining the EEA/EFTA as we should have done all along.
This is is the government's doing.
No one wants a war, but being prepared for one is necessary at this point in time. The EU is clearly preparing for one and ready to strike first with economic blockades like stopping flights.
If they do that it is a trade war and we need to reciprocate with all guns blazing.
Nuke them from orbit... it is the only way to be sure!
@MikeSmithson - we REALLY need a "rolls eyes" smiley.....
And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?
A big recovery of the coastal ecosystem.
If the damage trawling did was immediately visible it would have been banned years ago.
You think the message these Tory MPs are looking to sell to the fishing communities is "good news guys, we've got rid of the French, but don't get ahead of yourselves thinking you'll be able to take their place"?
The british fishing fleet will take several years to rebuild, if during that time fish stocks get a recovery period due to the lack of eu factory ships by the time its in place there will have been a significant increase in fish stocks. It is simple to work out apart from for you it seems
Surely British fishermen will do what they've always done: they'll get quotas and then rent them out to foreign firms. That's by far the easiest way to make money.
If I may use an anecdote here, there were two types of people in britain that sold quota's. Large corporations with fishing fleets. The other were boats like mine with a skipper who owned the boat. After we joined the cfp in the 70's the quota's we were given went ever downwards with the uk doing strict enforcement on us while spanish, french and belgian fisherman seemed to have a blind eye from their countries. When he sold his quota we had got down to being allowed to fish 6 weeks a year. His boat was no longer financially viable because instead of being able to catch 100% of the fish that was sustainable in british waters we had our share of about 18%.
And that happened to my brother in laws and other family members
Yes people make it sound like fisherman were queuing up to sell, I know our skipper was in tears the day he told us. His family had been running a boat for generations but the amount we were allowed to catch would no longer even pay to maintain the boat let alone pay of the crew on a voyage
It was deeply traumatic and accounts in a large way to the anger towards the EU from the Scottish fishing communities
I'm sure you felt the same empathy for the ex-mining communities in the 80s and 90s.
Let's open all the mines and make Britain great again!
As I have said before I find it ironic that the same people who attacked the closure of the mines are now immersed in the attacks on fossil fuels.
For the avoidance of doubt, I don't actually want the mines to reopen...
The difference is mines were not economic and needed public subsidy compared to imports whereas british fishing was both profitable and flourishing until politicians gave the rights of 80% of our fish away to the eec in the 70's
People who support the mines use the same rubbish argument. "bUt tHEy wERe PrOfITable"
The fact is that Thatcher, despite her many faults, moved us on as a nation to bigger and better things than fishing and mining.
Hang on - some of them WERE profitable. They weren't shut to benefit the environment. We shifted to coal imported half way round the world. Its only in recent years that the coal power stations have stopped burning foreign coal.
What he means by bigger and better thing is services like his don't forget he is training to be a lawyer. A definition of that being someone who produces nothing but tears of fury.
Did you get mugged in the divorce? Sympathies.
Shrugs I am happy with my record, I have spent 3 years of my life being an arse when I played cards for a living....4 years as a trawler man, 10 years as an industrial chemist making things people wanted, and 20 years writing stuff people wanted software wise from sat nav stuff to medical software....a lawyer produces what?
A lawyer produces help.
Besides I want to work on the high street with everyday people. I did not do this for the money.
A lawyer produces help for people that can afford it, thats not everyday people
That isn't true. Everyday people need legal help when they are moving house for example.
And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?
A big recovery of the coastal ecosystem.
If the damage trawling did was immediately visible it would have been banned years ago.
You think the message these Tory MPs are looking to sell to the fishing communities is "good news guys, we've got rid of the French, but don't get ahead of yourselves thinking you'll be able to take their place"?
The british fishing fleet will take several years to rebuild, if during that time fish stocks get a recovery period due to the lack of eu factory ships by the time its in place there will have been a significant increase in fish stocks. It is simple to work out apart from for you it seems
Surely British fishermen will do what they've always done: they'll get quotas and then rent them out to foreign firms. That's by far the easiest way to make money.
If I may use an anecdote here, there were two types of people in britain that sold quota's. Large corporations with fishing fleets. The other were boats like mine with a skipper who owned the boat. After we joined the cfp in the 70's the quota's we were given went ever downwards with the uk doing strict enforcement on us while spanish, french and belgian fisherman seemed to have a blind eye from their countries. When he sold his quota we had got down to being allowed to fish 6 weeks a year. His boat was no longer financially viable because instead of being able to catch 100% of the fish that was sustainable in british waters we had our share of about 18%.
And that happened to my brother in laws and other family members
Yes people make it sound like fisherman were queuing up to sell, I know our skipper was in tears the day he told us. His family had been running a boat for generations but the amount we were allowed to catch would no longer even pay to maintain the boat let alone pay of the crew on a voyage
It was deeply traumatic and accounts in a large way to the anger towards the EU from the Scottish fishing communities
I'm sure you felt the same empathy for the ex-mining communities in the 80s and 90s.
Let's open all the mines and make Britain great again!
As I have said before I find it ironic that the same people who attacked the closure of the mines are now immersed in the attacks on fossil fuels.
For the avoidance of doubt, I don't actually want the mines to reopen...
The difference is mines were not economic and needed public subsidy compared to imports whereas british fishing was both profitable and flourishing until politicians gave the rights of 80% of our fish away to the eec in the 70's
People who support the mines use the same rubbish argument. "bUt tHEy wERe PrOfITable"
The fact is that Thatcher, despite her many faults, moved us on as a nation to bigger and better things than fishing and mining.
Hang on - some of them WERE profitable. They weren't shut to benefit the environment. We shifted to coal imported half way round the world. Its only in recent years that the coal power stations have stopped burning foreign coal.
What he means by bigger and better thing is services like his don't forget he is training to be a lawyer. A definition of that being someone who produces nothing but tears of fury.
Did you get mugged in the divorce? Sympathies.
Shrugs I am happy with my record, I have spent 3 years of my life being an arse when I played cards for a living....4 years as a trawler man, 10 years as an industrial chemist making things people wanted, and 20 years writing stuff people wanted software wise from sat nav stuff to medical software....a lawyer produces what?
A lawyer produces help.
Besides I want to work on the high street with everyday people. I did not do this for the money.
A lawyer produces help for people that can afford it, thats not everyday people
That isn't true. Everyday people need legal help when they are moving house for example.
Thats a solicitor not a lawyer, which area of law are you studying for?
So, I've been wondering what a best case political outcome looks like for the Tory party going into No Deal. Really, it's a thought experiment on where the upper bound is here:
- Queues at ports remain in the counties of those ports - Supermarkets are broadly fully stocked with something or another, and there are no 'in these times' tannoy announcements that mention anything other than COVID - if we need Brexit tannoy announcements in Sainsbury's it's probably fatal. - Nobody has noticed Northern Ireland - The economic hit is (1) hidden under COVID and (2) rather like 1979-81 has minimal impact on the Tory shires (note: let's not overestimate the red wall of a few dozen seats, when the shires deliver them hundreds) - Enough deregulation is found that is not immediately impoverishing to the protection for those affected (and therefore opposed) to mount a strong recovery (from a low base and of doubtful sustainability) in 2023 - We are able to wriggle around impacts using whatever softening the EU does for their own convenience - There is no black swan No Deal impact (e.g. water supply) - Winter is mild - Behaviours, e.g. shop queues, extra shopping trips to source basics don't affect COVID infection rates in the month or two. - The clientism of post- Brexit emergency contracts is no more keenly noticed than for COVID. - The Scots going is anything but fatal. - If COVID subsides, people can reasonably source their preferred type of summer holiday.
And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?
A big recovery of the coastal ecosystem.
If the damage trawling did was immediately visible it would have been banned years ago.
You think the message these Tory MPs are looking to sell to the fishing communities is "good news guys, we've got rid of the French, but don't get ahead of yourselves thinking you'll be able to take their place"?
The british fishing fleet will take several years to rebuild, if during that time fish stocks get a recovery period due to the lack of eu factory ships by the time its in place there will have been a significant increase in fish stocks. It is simple to work out apart from for you it seems
Surely British fishermen will do what they've always done: they'll get quotas and then rent them out to foreign firms. That's by far the easiest way to make money.
If I may use an anecdote here, there were two types of people in britain that sold quota's. Large corporations with fishing fleets. The other were boats like mine with a skipper who owned the boat. After we joined the cfp in the 70's the quota's we were given went ever downwards with the uk doing strict enforcement on us while spanish, french and belgian fisherman seemed to have a blind eye from their countries. When he sold his quota we had got down to being allowed to fish 6 weeks a year. His boat was no longer financially viable because instead of being able to catch 100% of the fish that was sustainable in british waters we had our share of about 18%.
And that happened to my brother in laws and other family members
Yes people make it sound like fisherman were queuing up to sell, I know our skipper was in tears the day he told us. His family had been running a boat for generations but the amount we were allowed to catch would no longer even pay to maintain the boat let alone pay of the crew on a voyage
It was deeply traumatic and accounts in a large way to the anger towards the EU from the Scottish fishing communities
I'm sure you felt the same empathy for the ex-mining communities in the 80s and 90s.
Let's open all the mines and make Britain great again!
As I have said before I find it ironic that the same people who attacked the closure of the mines are now immersed in the attacks on fossil fuels.
For the avoidance of doubt, I don't actually want the mines to reopen...
The difference is mines were not economic and needed public subsidy compared to imports whereas british fishing was both profitable and flourishing until politicians gave the rights of 80% of our fish away to the eec in the 70's
People who support the mines use the same rubbish argument. "bUt tHEy wERe PrOfITable"
The fact is that Thatcher, despite her many faults, moved us on as a nation to bigger and better things than fishing and mining.
Hang on - some of them WERE profitable. They weren't shut to benefit the environment. We shifted to coal imported half way round the world. Its only in recent years that the coal power stations have stopped burning foreign coal.
What he means by bigger and better thing is services like his don't forget he is training to be a lawyer. A definition of that being someone who produces nothing but tears of fury.
Did you get mugged in the divorce? Sympathies.
Shrugs I am happy with my record, I have spent 3 years of my life being an arse when I played cards for a living....4 years as a trawler man, 10 years as an industrial chemist making things people wanted, and 20 years writing stuff people wanted software wise from sat nav stuff to medical software....a lawyer produces what?
A lawyer produces help.
Besides I want to work on the high street with everyday people. I did not do this for the money.
A lawyer produces help for people that can afford it, thats not everyday people
That isn't true. Everyday people need legal help when they are moving house for example.
Thats a solicitor not a lawyer, which area of law are you studying for?
Besides most everyday people can't afford to buy a house so point still stands
And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?
A big recovery of the coastal ecosystem.
If the damage trawling did was immediately visible it would have been banned years ago.
You think the message these Tory MPs are looking to sell to the fishing communities is "good news guys, we've got rid of the French, but don't get ahead of yourselves thinking you'll be able to take their place"?
The british fishing fleet will take several years to rebuild, if during that time fish stocks get a recovery period due to the lack of eu factory ships by the time its in place there will have been a significant increase in fish stocks. It is simple to work out apart from for you it seems
Surely British fishermen will do what they've always done: they'll get quotas and then rent them out to foreign firms. That's by far the easiest way to make money.
If I may use an anecdote here, there were two types of people in britain that sold quota's. Large corporations with fishing fleets. The other were boats like mine with a skipper who owned the boat. After we joined the cfp in the 70's the quota's we were given went ever downwards with the uk doing strict enforcement on us while spanish, french and belgian fisherman seemed to have a blind eye from their countries. When he sold his quota we had got down to being allowed to fish 6 weeks a year. His boat was no longer financially viable because instead of being able to catch 100% of the fish that was sustainable in british waters we had our share of about 18%.
And that happened to my brother in laws and other family members
Yes people make it sound like fisherman were queuing up to sell, I know our skipper was in tears the day he told us. His family had been running a boat for generations but the amount we were allowed to catch would no longer even pay to maintain the boat let alone pay of the crew on a voyage
It was deeply traumatic and accounts in a large way to the anger towards the EU from the Scottish fishing communities
I'm sure you felt the same empathy for the ex-mining communities in the 80s and 90s.
Let's open all the mines and make Britain great again!
As I have said before I find it ironic that the same people who attacked the closure of the mines are now immersed in the attacks on fossil fuels.
For the avoidance of doubt, I don't actually want the mines to reopen...
The difference is mines were not economic and needed public subsidy compared to imports whereas british fishing was both profitable and flourishing until politicians gave the rights of 80% of our fish away to the eec in the 70's
People who support the mines use the same rubbish argument. "bUt tHEy wERe PrOfITable"
The fact is that Thatcher, despite her many faults, moved us on as a nation to bigger and better things than fishing and mining.
Hang on - some of them WERE profitable. They weren't shut to benefit the environment. We shifted to coal imported half way round the world. Its only in recent years that the coal power stations have stopped burning foreign coal.
What he means by bigger and better thing is services like his don't forget he is training to be a lawyer. A definition of that being someone who produces nothing but tears of fury.
Did you get mugged in the divorce? Sympathies.
Shrugs I am happy with my record, I have spent 3 years of my life being an arse when I played cards for a living....4 years as a trawler man, 10 years as an industrial chemist making things people wanted, and 20 years writing stuff people wanted software wise from sat nav stuff to medical software....a lawyer produces what?
A lawyer produces help.
Besides I want to work on the high street with everyday people. I did not do this for the money.
A lawyer produces help for people that can afford it, thats not everyday people
That isn't true. Everyday people need legal help when they are moving house for example.
Thats a solicitor not a lawyer, which area of law are you studying for?
A solicitor is a type of lawyer and I'm training to be a solicitor, as opposed to a barrister.
The exact type of law I end up practicing in will depend on who (if anyone) is willing to employ me. However, there is apparently a shortage of conveyancers in the North East so that bodes well because I enjoy property law.
A handy guide to food post Brexit in the Daily Mail
That's a really stupid graphic. The two immediate idiocies that spring to mind are:
We don't import bananas or avocados from the EU so there is no reason for them to be affected by the type of Brexit we have. Indeed the vast majority of avocados are imported from Israel and we already have a trade deal signed with them which will reduce tariffs compared to the current EU tariffs.
Norway and Iceland are not in the EU and particularly are not in the Customs Union so do not have to abide by any EU/UK tariff regime. More to the point the UK, Iceland and Norway have already signed a deal to continue to trade in exactly the same way as they do now until a proper trade deal is concluded next year.
Two immediate idiocies in what you have posted. We almost certainly import bananas and avocados from Belgium rather than from Israel or Ivory Coast. The EU is a vast market, so bulk imports come into a port for warehousing and then onward distribution to the final market like the UK. The Daily Mail puts these on their list because they are EU imports.
Yes we can set up direct import routes for Bananas and Avocados and Oranges and everything else that we import via the EU but it will be low volume high cost additions to the current business model and that will bang the unit price up.
As for fish, the point the Mail is making is that according to our government there is going to be major disruption to our ports. And quite frankly they're trying to educate the wazzocks who think that saving British Fishing liberates Fish and Chips.
'Yes that is a chippy. Yes those are fishing boats. No they haven't caught the cod the chippy across the road is preparing for you because Cod don't swing in these waters you dumb bastards.'
There may be some modest price rises because bananas and avocados now have to go direct to Felixstowe in a different boat rather than to Rotterdam and then Felixstowe in the same boat but there will be no problems with supply as we have free trade deals with all the source countries.
My view is the market will find the most efficient route to keep costs down to a minimum.
Honestly it's a silly thing to hang your hat on. If you're going to take umbrage at No Deal then focus on the EU perishable food products that are really effected.
Is there anything we can't source from elsewhere except tulips ?
What this boils down to is a few months disruption whilst the new supply lines bed in and establish and we adjust to the new systems, general price rises of 2-5% and a mixture of medium-high tarrifs on exclusive EU products, which will mean people will generally buy much less of them and start buying them elsewhere - unless speciality.
Far from ideal but not the end of the world either.
What I'd really like for us to do is finalise trade deals with Australia and New Zealand then stick an absolutely horrific tariff on wine, as in punitively high so as to lock nations without trade deals with the UK out of the mass market for wine in this country. It would hurt EU producers very hard and make them squeal to Macron and Conte for relief.
If we're going into a trade war after no deal we need to be prepared to make life as hard as possible for the EU without mercy and without second thought for their economy.
So now you want a trade war.
Christ on a bike. None of this was on the side of that bus.
I don't want a trade war, no deal becomes a trade war, or didn't you see the veiled threats from the EU over landing rights for UK planes? The nation must be ready to use whatever means we have available to us and that means being absolutely unsentimental about it.
Trade disputes are quite ugly. You have to wield the biggest stick you can to get a good deal if you're up against someone who's keen to do the same.
A better solution is a fair deal, of course.
Yes, agreed with both points. As I said this morning I think the concessions on state aid and the two way ratchet are enough to get talking again and if they move on arbitration it's enough for a deal. Even if it was lightning tariffs only until arbitration set tariffs I'd probably be ok with that. If we get to a better stage in our relationship with the EU we can begin to unpick all of it together and agree on baseline standards and non-regression, areas where we're actually happy to align. All of the things we can't even talk about at the moment without both sides accusing the other of either wanting to run sweatshops with £1/workers and no welfare state or thinking that they'll introduce rules that directly target British companies and prevent them from selling into the EU.
A handy guide to food post Brexit in the Daily Mail
That's a really stupid graphic. The two immediate idiocies that spring to mind are:
We don't import bananas or avocados from the EU so there isde deal signed with them which will reduce tariffs compared to the current EU tariffs.
Norway and Iceland are not in the EU and particularly are not in the Customs Union so do not have to abide by any EU/UK tariff regime. More to the point the UK, Iceland and Norway have already signed a deal to continue to trade in exactly the same way as they do now until a proper trade deal is concluded next year.
Two immediate idiocies in what you have posted. We almost certainly import bananas and avocados from Belgium rather than from Israel or Ivory Coast. The EU is a vast market, so bulk imports come into a port for warehousing and then onward distribution to the final market like the UK. The Daily Mail puts these on their list because they are EU imports.
Yes we can set up direct import routes for Bananas and Avocados and Oranges and everything else that we import via the EU but it will be low volume high cost additions to the current business model and that will bang the unit price up.
As for fish, the point the Mail is making is that according to our government there is going to be major disruption to our ports. And quite frankly they're trying to educate the wazzocks who think that saving British Fishing liberates Fish and Chips.
'Yes that is a chippy. Yes those are fishing boats. No they haven't caught the cod the chippy across the road is preparing for you because Cod don't swing in these waters you dumb bastards.'
There may be some modest price rises because bananas and avocados now have to go direct to Felixstowe in a different boat rather than to Rotterdam and then Felixstowe in the same boat but there will be no problems with supply as we have free trade deals with all the source countries.
My view is the market will find the most efficient route to keep costs down to a minimum.
Honestly it's a silly thing to hang your hat on. If you're going to take umbrage at No Deal then focus on the EU perishable food products that are really effected.
Is there anything we can't source from elsewhere except tulips ?
What this boils down to is a few months disruption whilst the new supply lines bed in and establish and we adjust to the new systems, general price rises of 2-5% and a mixture of medium-high tarrifs on exclusive EU products, which will mean people will generally buy much less of them and start buying them elsewhere - unless speciality.
Far from ideal but not the end of the world either.
Snip
If we're going into a trade war after no deal we need to be prepared to make life as hard as possible for the EU without mercy and without second thought for their economy.
So now you want a trade war.
Christ on a bike. None of this was on the side of that bus.
Snip
lol
No thank you. I'm not interested in a trade war.
We can end this right now by simply joining the EEA/EFTA as we should have done all along.
This is is the government's doing.
No one wants a war, but being prepared for one is necessary at this point in time. The EU is clearly preparing for one and ready to strike first with economic blockades like stopping flights.
If they do that it is a trade war and we need to reciprocate with all guns blazing.
Nuke them from orbit... it is the only way to be sure!
@MikeSmithson - we REALLY need a "rolls eyes" smiley.....
And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?
A big recovery of the coastal ecosystem.
If the damage trawling did was immediately visible it would have been banned years ago.
You think the message these Tory MPs are looking to sell to the fishing communities is "good news guys, we've got rid of the French, but don't get ahead of yourselves thinking you'll be able to take their place"?
The british fishing fleet will take several years to rebuild, if during that time fish stocks get a recovery period due to the lack of eu factory ships by the time its in place there will have been a significant increase in fish stocks. It is simple to work out apart from for you it seems
Surely British fishermen will do what they've always done: they'll get quotas and then rent them out to foreign firms. That's by far the easiest way to make money.
If I may use an anecdote here, there were two types of people in britain that sold quota's. Large corporations with fishing fleets. The other were boats like mine with a skipper who owned the boat. After we joined the cfp in the 70's the quota's we were given went ever downwards with the uk doing strict enforcement on us while spanish, french and belgian fisherman seemed to have a blind eye from their countries. When he sold his quota we had got down to being allowed to fish 6 weeks a year. His boat was no longer financially viable because instead of being able to catch 100% of the fish that was sustainable in british waters we had our share of about 18%.
And that happened to my brother in laws and other family members
Yes people make it sound like fisherman were queuing up to sell, I know our skipper was in tears the day he told us. His family had been running a boat for generations but the amount we were allowed to catch would no longer even pay to maintain the boat let alone pay of the crew on a voyage
It was deeply traumatic and accounts in a large way to the anger towards the EU from the Scottish fishing communities
I'm sure you felt the same empathy for the ex-mining communities in the 80s and 90s.
Let's open all the mines and make Britain great again!
As I have said before I find it ironic that the same people who attacked the closure of the mines are now immersed in the attacks on fossil fuels.
For the avoidance of doubt, I don't actually want the mines to reopen...
The difference is mines were not economic and needed public subsidy compared to imports whereas british fishing was both profitable and flourishing until politicians gave the rights of 80% of our fish away to the eec in the 70's
People who support the mines use the same rubbish argument. "bUt tHEy wERe PrOfITable"
The fact is that Thatcher, despite her many faults, moved us on as a nation to bigger and better things than fishing and mining.
Hang on - some of them WERE profitable. They weren't shut to benefit the environment. We shifted to coal imported half way round the world. Its only in recent years that the coal power stations have stopped burning foreign coal.
What he means by bigger and better thing is services like his don't forget he is training to be a lawyer. A definition of that being someone who produces nothing but tears of fury.
Did you get mugged in the divorce? Sympathies.
Shrugs I am happy with my record, I have spent 3 years of my life being an arse when I played cards for a living....4 years as a trawler man, 10 years as an industrial chemist making things people wanted, and 20 years writing stuff people wanted software wise from sat nav stuff to medical software....a lawyer produces what?
A lawyer produces help.
Besides I want to work on the high street with everyday people. I did not do this for the money.
A lawyer produces help for people that can afford it, thats not everyday people
That isn't true. Everyday people need legal help when they are moving house for example.
Thats a solicitor not a lawyer, which area of law are you studying for?
A solicitor is a type of lawyer and I'm training to be a solicitor, as opposed to a barrister.
The exact type of law I end up practicing in will depend on who (if anyone) is willing to employ me. However, there is apparently a shortage of conveyancers in the North East so that bodes well because I enjoy property law.
Doesnt change the arguement as you have pontificated on here in the past that ordinary people cant afford to buy a house anymore so just admit you work for those with money
And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?
A big recovery of the coastal ecosystem.
If the damage trawling did was immediately visible it would have been banned years ago.
You think the message these Tory MPs are looking to sell to the fishing communities is "good news guys, we've got rid of the French, but don't get ahead of yourselves thinking you'll be able to take their place"?
The british fishing fleet will take several years to rebuild, if during that time fish stocks get a recovery period due to the lack of eu factory ships by the time its in place there will have been a significant increase in fish stocks. It is simple to work out apart from for you it seems
Surely British fishermen will do what they've always done: they'll get quotas and then rent them out to foreign firms. That's by far the easiest way to make money.
If I may use an anecdote here, there were two types of people in britain that sold quota's. Large corporations with fishing fleets. The other were boats like mine with a skipper who owned the boat. After we joined the cfp in the 70's the quota's we were given went ever downwards with the uk doing strict enforcement on us while spanish, french and belgian fisherman seemed to have a blind eye from their countries. When he sold his quota we had got down to being allowed to fish 6 weeks a year. His boat was no longer financially viable because instead of being able to catch 100% of the fish that was sustainable in british waters we had our share of about 18%.
And that happened to my brother in laws and other family members
Yes people make it sound like fisherman were queuing up to sell, I know our skipper was in tears the day he told us. His family had been running a boat for generations but the amount we were allowed to catch would no longer even pay to maintain the boat let alone pay of the crew on a voyage
It was deeply traumatic and accounts in a large way to the anger towards the EU from the Scottish fishing communities
I'm sure you felt the same empathy for the ex-mining communities in the 80s and 90s.
Let's open all the mines and make Britain great again!
As I have said before I find it ironic that the same people who attacked the closure of the mines are now immersed in the attacks on fossil fuels.
For the avoidance of doubt, I don't actually want the mines to reopen...
The difference is mines were not economic and needed public subsidy compared to imports whereas british fishing was both profitable and flourishing until politicians gave the rights of 80% of our fish away to the eec in the 70's
People who support the mines use the same rubbish argument. "bUt tHEy wERe PrOfITable"
The fact is that Thatcher, despite her many faults, moved us on as a nation to bigger and better things than fishing and mining.
Hang on - some of them WERE profitable. They weren't shut to benefit the environment. We shifted to coal imported half way round the world. Its only in recent years that the coal power stations have stopped burning foreign coal.
What he means by bigger and better thing is services like his don't forget he is training to be a lawyer. A definition of that being someone who produces nothing but tears of fury.
Did you get mugged in the divorce? Sympathies.
Shrugs I am happy with my record, I have spent 3 years of my life being an arse when I played cards for a living....4 years as a trawler man, 10 years as an industrial chemist making things people wanted, and 20 years writing stuff people wanted software wise from sat nav stuff to medical software....a lawyer produces what?
A lawyer produces help.
Besides I want to work on the high street with everyday people. I did not do this for the money.
A lawyer produces help for people that can afford it, thats not everyday people
That isn't true. Everyday people need legal help when they are moving house for example.
Thats a solicitor not a lawyer, which area of law are you studying for?
A solicitor is a type of lawyer and I'm training to be a solicitor, as opposed to a barrister.
The exact type of law I end up practicing in will depend on who (if anyone) is willing to employ me. However, there is apparently a shortage of conveyancers in the North East so that bodes well because I enjoy property law.
Doesnt change the arguement as you have pontificated on here in the past that ordinary people cant afford to buy a house anymore so just admit you work for those with money
You did too when you were a trawler chappie. The blokes who didn't buy your fish didn't get any.
A handy guide to food post Brexit in the Daily Mail
That's a really stupid graphic. The two immediate idiocies that spring to mind are:
We don't import bananas or avocados from the EU so there isde deal signed with them which will reduce tariffs compared to the current EU tariffs.
Norway and Iceland are not in the EU and particularly are not in the Customs Union so do not have to abide by any EU/UK tariff regime. More to the point the UK, Iceland and Norway have already signed a deal to continue to trade in exactly the same way as they do now until a proper trade deal is concluded next year.
Two immediate idiocies in what you have posted. We almost certainly import bananas and avocados from Belgium rather than from Israel or Ivory Coast. The EU is a vast market, so bulk imports come into a port for warehousing and then onward distribution to the final market like the UK. The Daily Mail puts these on their list because they are EU imports.
Yes we can set up direct import routes for Bananas and Avocados and Oranges and everything else that we import via the EU but it will be low volume high cost additions to the current business model and that will bang the unit price up.
As for fish, the point the Mail is making is that according to our government there is going to be major disruption to our ports. And quite frankly they're trying to educate the wazzocks who think that saving British Fishing liberates Fish and Chips.
'Yes that is a chippy. Yes those are fishing boats. No they haven't caught the cod the chippy across the road is preparing for you because Cod don't swing in these waters you dumb bastards.'
There may be some modest price rises because bananas and avocados now have to go direct to Felixstowe in a different boat rather than to Rotterdam and then Felixstowe in the same boat but there will be no problems with supply as we have free trade deals with all the source countries.
My view is the market will find the most efficient route to keep costs down to a minimum.
Honestly it's a silly thing to hang your hat on. If you're going to take umbrage at No Deal then focus on the EU perishable food products that are really effected.
Is there anything we can't source from elsewhere except tulips ?
What this boils down to is a few months disruption whilst the new supply lines bed in and establish and we adjust to the new systems, general price rises of 2-5% and a mixture of medium-high tarrifs on exclusive EU products, which will mean people will generally buy much less of them and start buying them elsewhere - unless speciality.
Far from ideal but not the end of the world either.
Snip
If we're going into a trade war after no deal we need to be prepared to make life as hard as possible for the EU without mercy and without second thought for their economy.
So now you want a trade war.
Christ on a bike. None of this was on the side of that bus.
Snip
lol
No thank you. I'm not interested in a trade war.
We can end this right now by simply joining the EEA/EFTA as we should have done all along.
This is is the government's doing.
No one wants a war, but being prepared for one is necessary at this point in time. The EU is clearly preparing for one and ready to strike first with economic blockades like stopping flights.
If they do that it is a trade war and we need to reciprocate with all guns blazing.
Nuke them from orbit... it is the only way to be sure!
@MikeSmithson - we REALLY need a "rolls eyes" smiley.....
And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?
A big recovery of the coastal ecosystem.
If the damage trawling did was immediately visible it would have been banned years ago.
You think the message these Tory MPs are looking to sell to the fishing communities is "good news guys, we've got rid of the French, but don't get ahead of yourselves thinking you'll be able to take their place"?
The british fishing fleet will take several years to rebuild, if during that time fish stocks get a recovery period due to the lack of eu factory ships by the time its in place there will have been a significant increase in fish stocks. It is simple to work out apart from for you it seems
Surely British fishermen will do what they've always done: they'll get quotas and then rent them out to foreign firms. That's by far the easiest way to make money.
If I may use an anecdote here, there were two types of people in britain that sold quota's. Large corporations with fishing fleets. The other were boats like mine with a skipper who owned the boat. After we joined the cfp in the 70's the quota's we were given went ever downwards with the uk doing strict enforcement on us while spanish, french and belgian fisherman seemed to have a blind eye from their countries. When he sold his quota we had got down to being allowed to fish 6 weeks a year. His boat was no longer financially viable because instead of being able to catch 100% of the fish that was sustainable in british waters we had our share of about 18%.
And that happened to my brother in laws and other family members
Yes people make it sound like fisherman were queuing up to sell, I know our skipper was in tears the day he told us. His family had been running a boat for generations but the amount we were allowed to catch would no longer even pay to maintain the boat let alone pay of the crew on a voyage
It was deeply traumatic and accounts in a large way to the anger towards the EU from the Scottish fishing communities
I'm sure you felt the same empathy for the ex-mining communities in the 80s and 90s.
Let's open all the mines and make Britain great again!
As I have said before I find it ironic that the same people who attacked the closure of the mines are now immersed in the attacks on fossil fuels.
For the avoidance of doubt, I don't actually want the mines to reopen...
The difference is mines were not economic and needed public subsidy compared to imports whereas british fishing was both profitable and flourishing until politicians gave the rights of 80% of our fish away to the eec in the 70's
People who support the mines use the same rubbish argument. "bUt tHEy wERe PrOfITable"
The fact is that Thatcher, despite her many faults, moved us on as a nation to bigger and better things than fishing and mining.
Hang on - some of them WERE profitable. They weren't shut to benefit the environment. We shifted to coal imported half way round the world. Its only in recent years that the coal power stations have stopped burning foreign coal.
What he means by bigger and better thing is services like his don't forget he is training to be a lawyer. A definition of that being someone who produces nothing but tears of fury.
Did you get mugged in the divorce? Sympathies.
Shrugs I am happy with my record, I have spent 3 years of my life being an arse when I played cards for a living....4 years as a trawler man, 10 years as an industrial chemist making things people wanted, and 20 years writing stuff people wanted software wise from sat nav stuff to medical software....a lawyer produces what?
A lawyer produces help.
Besides I want to work on the high street with everyday people. I did not do this for the money.
A lawyer produces help for people that can afford it, thats not everyday people
That isn't true. Everyday people need legal help when they are moving house for example.
Thats a solicitor not a lawyer, which area of law are you studying for?
A solicitor is a type of lawyer and I'm training to be a solicitor, as opposed to a barrister.
The exact type of law I end up practicing in will depend on who (if anyone) is willing to employ me. However, there is apparently a shortage of conveyancers in the North East so that bodes well because I enjoy property law.
Doesnt change the arguement as you have pontificated on here in the past that ordinary people cant afford to buy a house anymore so just admit you work for those with money
You did too when you were a trawler chappie. The blokes who didn't buy your fish didn't get any.
Well while that is true I think the price of a cod fillet was somewhat more affordable than a maisonette in london. I doubt there are many in our country never had a fish supper, I suspect its a lot higher percentage that could buy a maisonette anywhere
And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?
A big recovery of the coastal ecosystem.
If the damage trawling did was immediately visible it would have been banned years ago.
You think the message these Tory MPs are looking to sell to the fishing communities is "good news guys, we've got rid of the French, but don't get ahead of yourselves thinking you'll be able to take their place"?
The british fishing fleet will take several years to rebuild, if during that time fish stocks get a recovery period due to the lack of eu factory ships by the time its in place there will have been a significant increase in fish stocks. It is simple to work out apart from for you it seems
Surely British fishermen will do what they've always done: they'll get quotas and then rent them out to foreign firms. That's by far the easiest way to make money.
If I may use an anecdote here, there were two types of people in britain that sold quota's. Large corporations with fishing fleets. The other were boats like mine with a skipper who owned the boat. After we joined the cfp in the 70's the quota's we were given went ever downwards with the uk doing strict enforcement on us while spanish, french and belgian fisherman seemed to have a blind eye from their countries. When he sold his quota we had got down to being allowed to fish 6 weeks a year. His boat was no longer financially viable because instead of being able to catch 100% of the fish that was sustainable in british waters we had our share of about 18%.
And that happened to my brother in laws and other family members
Yes people make it sound like fisherman were queuing up to sell, I know our skipper was in tears the day he told us. His family had been running a boat for generations but the amount we were allowed to catch would no longer even pay to maintain the boat let alone pay of the crew on a voyage
It was deeply traumatic and accounts in a large way to the anger towards the EU from the Scottish fishing communities
I'm sure you felt the same empathy for the ex-mining communities in the 80s and 90s.
Let's open all the mines and make Britain great again!
As I have said before I find it ironic that the same people who attacked the closure of the mines are now immersed in the attacks on fossil fuels.
For the avoidance of doubt, I don't actually want the mines to reopen...
The difference is mines were not economic and needed public subsidy compared to imports whereas british fishing was both profitable and flourishing until politicians gave the rights of 80% of our fish away to the eec in the 70's
People who support the mines use the same rubbish argument. "bUt tHEy wERe PrOfITable"
The fact is that Thatcher, despite her many faults, moved us on as a nation to bigger and better things than fishing and mining.
Hang on - some of them WERE profitable. They weren't shut to benefit the environment. We shifted to coal imported half way round the world. Its only in recent years that the coal power stations have stopped burning foreign coal.
What he means by bigger and better thing is services like his don't forget he is training to be a lawyer. A definition of that being someone who produces nothing but tears of fury.
Did you get mugged in the divorce? Sympathies.
Shrugs I am happy with my record, I have spent 3 years of my life being an arse when I played cards for a living....4 years as a trawler man, 10 years as an industrial chemist making things people wanted, and 20 years writing stuff people wanted software wise from sat nav stuff to medical software....a lawyer produces what?
A lawyer produces help.
Besides I want to work on the high street with everyday people. I did not do this for the money.
A lawyer produces help for people that can afford it, thats not everyday people
That isn't true. Everyday people need legal help when they are moving house for example.
Thats a solicitor not a lawyer, which area of law are you studying for?
A solicitor is a type of lawyer and I'm training to be a solicitor, as opposed to a barrister.
The exact type of law I end up practicing in will depend on who (if anyone) is willing to employ me. However, there is apparently a shortage of conveyancers in the North East so that bodes well because I enjoy property law.
Doesnt change the arguement as you have pontificated on here in the past that ordinary people cant afford to buy a house anymore so just admit you work for those with money
House prices here in the North East are much more affordable.
The only data I can find is that 62% of people in the "North" are owner occupiers so I don't think it's entire true that "most ordinary people can't afford to buy a house".
I understand that most of the fish caught in British waters is consumed abroad in the EU and elsewhere. Conversely most of the fish we eat, comes from the EU catch. Surely that was also true pre-1973! How did we manage then?
You need to read up on some history. Some of which is actually in this thread. Trying unrealistically to propel 2020 back to 1970 is part of the explanation as to why we are in such a mess.
I understand that most of the fish caught in British waters is consumed abroad in the EU and elsewhere. Conversely most of the fish we eat, comes from the EU catch. Surely that was also true pre-1973! How did we manage then?
You need to read up on some history. Some of which is actually in this thread. Trying unrealistically to propel 2020 back to 1970 is part of the explanation as to why we are in such a mess.
I am pretty well read on modern history , but my point was that consumer habits re-fish in both the UK and EU were not so very different pre-1973. Pagan has pointed out that most of the fish eaten here comes from non-EU countries.
And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?
A big recovery of the coastal ecosystem.
If the damage trawling did was immediately visible it would have been banned years ago.
You think the message these Tory MPs are looking to sell to the fishing communities is "good news guys, we've got rid of the French, but don't get ahead of yourselves thinking you'll be able to take their place"?
The british fishing fleet will take several years to rebuild, if during that time fish stocks get a recovery period due to the lack of eu factory ships by the time its in place there will have been a significant increase in fish stocks. It is simple to work out apart from for you it seems
Surely British fishermen will do what they've always done: they'll get quotas and then rent them out to foreign firms. That's by far the easiest way to make money.
If I may use an anecdote here, there were two types of people in britain that sold quota's. Large corporations with fishing fleets. The other were boats like mine with a skipper who owned the boat. After we joined the cfp in the 70's the quota's we were given went ever downwards with the uk doing strict enforcement on us while spanish, french and belgian fisherman seemed to have a blind eye from their countries. When he sold his quota we had got down to being allowed to fish 6 weeks a year. His boat was no longer financially viable because instead of being able to catch 100% of the fish that was sustainable in british waters we had our share of about 18%.
And that happened to my brother in laws and other family members
Yes people make it sound like fisherman were queuing up to sell, I know our skipper was in tears the day he told us. His family had been running a boat for generations but the amount we were allowed to catch would no longer even pay to maintain the boat let alone pay of the crew on a voyage
It was deeply traumatic and accounts in a large way to the anger towards the EU from the Scottish fishing communities
I'm sure you felt the same empathy for the ex-mining communities in the 80s and 90s.
Let's open all the mines and make Britain great again!
As I have said before I find it ironic that the same people who attacked the closure of the mines are now immersed in the attacks on fossil fuels.
For the avoidance of doubt, I don't actually want the mines to reopen...
The difference is mines were not economic and needed public subsidy compared to imports whereas british fishing was both profitable and flourishing until politicians gave the rights of 80% of our fish away to the eec in the 70's
People who support the mines use the same rubbish argument. "bUt tHEy wERe PrOfITable"
The fact is that Thatcher, despite her many faults, moved us on as a nation to bigger and better things than fishing and mining.
Hang on - some of them WERE profitable. They weren't shut to benefit the environment. We shifted to coal imported half way round the world. Its only in recent years that the coal power stations have stopped burning foreign coal.
What he means by bigger and better thing is services like his don't forget he is training to be a lawyer. A definition of that being someone who produces nothing but tears of fury.
Did you get mugged in the divorce? Sympathies.
Shrugs I am happy with my record, I have spent 3 years of my life being an arse when I played cards for a living....4 years as a trawler man, 10 years as an industrial chemist making things people wanted, and 20 years writing stuff people wanted software wise from sat nav stuff to medical software....a lawyer produces what?
A lawyer produces help.
Besides I want to work on the high street with everyday people. I did not do this for the money.
A lawyer produces help for people that can afford it, thats not everyday people
That isn't true. Everyday people need legal help when they are moving house for example.
Thats a solicitor not a lawyer, which area of law are you studying for?
A solicitor is a type of lawyer and I'm training to be a solicitor, as opposed to a barrister.
The exact type of law I end up practicing in will depend on who (if anyone) is willing to employ me. However, there is apparently a shortage of conveyancers in the North East so that bodes well because I enjoy property law.
Doesnt change the arguement as you have pontificated on here in the past that ordinary people cant afford to buy a house anymore so just admit you work for those with money
House prices here in the North East are much more affordable.
The only data I can find is that 62% of people in the "North" are owner occupiers so I don't think it's entire true that "most ordinary people can't afford to buy a house".
Ah so you are saying 38% of people are priced out of your services nods
And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?
A big recovery of the coastal ecosystem.
If the damage trawling did was immediately visible it would have been banned years ago.
You think the message these Tory MPs are looking to sell to the fishing communities is "good news guys, we've got rid of the French, but don't get ahead of yourselves thinking you'll be able to take their place"?
The british fishing fleet will take several years to rebuild, if during that time fish stocks get a recovery period due to the lack of eu factory ships by the time its in place there will have been a significant increase in fish stocks. It is simple to work out apart from for you it seems
Surely British fishermen will do what they've always done: they'll get quotas and then rent them out to foreign firms. That's by far the easiest way to make money.
If I may use an anecdote here, there were two types of people in britain that sold quota's. Large corporations with fishing fleets. The other were boats like mine with a skipper who owned the boat. After we joined the cfp in the 70's the quota's we were given went ever downwards with the uk doing strict enforcement on us while spanish, french and belgian fisherman seemed to have a blind eye from their countries. When he sold his quota we had got down to being allowed to fish 6 weeks a year. His boat was no longer financially viable because instead of being able to catch 100% of the fish that was sustainable in british waters we had our share of about 18%.
And that happened to my brother in laws and other family members
Yes people make it sound like fisherman were queuing up to sell, I know our skipper was in tears the day he told us. His family had been running a boat for generations but the amount we were allowed to catch would no longer even pay to maintain the boat let alone pay of the crew on a voyage
It was deeply traumatic and accounts in a large way to the anger towards the EU from the Scottish fishing communities
I'm sure you felt the same empathy for the ex-mining communities in the 80s and 90s.
Let's open all the mines and make Britain great again!
As I have said before I find it ironic that the same people who attacked the closure of the mines are now immersed in the attacks on fossil fuels.
For the avoidance of doubt, I don't actually want the mines to reopen...
The difference is mines were not economic and needed public subsidy compared to imports whereas british fishing was both profitable and flourishing until politicians gave the rights of 80% of our fish away to the eec in the 70's
People who support the mines use the same rubbish argument. "bUt tHEy wERe PrOfITable"
The fact is that Thatcher, despite her many faults, moved us on as a nation to bigger and better things than fishing and mining.
Hang on - some of them WERE profitable. They weren't shut to benefit the environment. We shifted to coal imported half way round the world. Its only in recent years that the coal power stations have stopped burning foreign coal.
What he means by bigger and better thing is services like his don't forget he is training to be a lawyer. A definition of that being someone who produces nothing but tears of fury.
Did you get mugged in the divorce? Sympathies.
Shrugs I am happy with my record, I have spent 3 years of my life being an arse when I played cards for a living....4 years as a trawler man, 10 years as an industrial chemist making things people wanted, and 20 years writing stuff people wanted software wise from sat nav stuff to medical software....a lawyer produces what?
A lawyer produces help.
Besides I want to work on the high street with everyday people. I did not do this for the money.
A lawyer produces help for people that can afford it, thats not everyday people
That isn't true. Everyday people need legal help when they are moving house for example.
Thats a solicitor not a lawyer, which area of law are you studying for?
A solicitor is a type of lawyer and I'm training to be a solicitor, as opposed to a barrister.
The exact type of law I end up practicing in will depend on who (if anyone) is willing to employ me. However, there is apparently a shortage of conveyancers in the North East so that bodes well because I enjoy property law.
Doesnt change the arguement as you have pontificated on here in the past that ordinary people cant afford to buy a house anymore so just admit you work for those with money
House prices here in the North East are much more affordable.
The only data I can find is that 62% of people in the "North" are owner occupiers so I don't think it's entire true that "most ordinary people can't afford to buy a house".
Ah so you are saying 38% of people are priced out of your services nods
Well even fewer people could afford to buy the products I was involved in manufacturing so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.
A handy guide to food post Brexit in the Daily Mail
That's a really stupid graphic. The two immediate idiocies that spring to mind are:
We don't import bananas or avocados from the EU so there isde deal signed with them which will reduce tariffs compared to the current EU tariffs.
Norway and Iceland are not in the EU and particularly are not in the Customs Union so do not have to abide by any EU/UK tariff regime. More to the point the UK, Iceland and Norway have already signed a deal to continue to trade in exactly the same way as they do now until a proper trade deal is concluded next year.
Two immediate idiocies in what you have posted. We almost certainly import bananas and avocados from Belgium rather than from Israel or Ivory Coast. The EU is a vast market, so bulk imports come into a port for warehousing and then onward distribution to the final market like the UK. The Daily Mail puts these on their list because they are EU imports.
Yes we can set up direct import routes for Bananas and Avocados and Oranges and everything else that we import via the EU but it will be low volume high cost additions to the current business model and that will bang the unit price up.
As for fish, the point the Mail is making is that according to our government there is going to be major disruption to our ports. And quite frankly they're trying to educate the wazzocks who think that saving British Fishing liberates Fish and Chips.
'Yes that is a chippy. Yes those are fishing boats. No they haven't caught the cod the chippy across the road is preparing for you because Cod don't swing in these waters you dumb bastards.'
There may be some modest price rises because bananas and avocados now have to go direct to Felixstowe in a different boat rather than to Rotterdam and then Felixstowe in the same boat but there will be no problems with supply as we have free trade deals with all the source countries.
My view is the market will find the most efficient route to keep costs down to a minimum.
Honestly it's a silly thing to hang your hat on. If you're going to take umbrage at No Deal then focus on the EU perishable food products that are really effected.
Is there anything we can't source from elsewhere except tulips ?
What this boils down to is a few months disruption whilst the new supply lines bed in and establish and we adjust to the new systems, general price rises of 2-5% and a mixture of medium-high tarrifs on exclusive EU products, which will mean people will generally buy much less of them and start buying them elsewhere - unless speciality.
Far from ideal but not the end of the world either.
Snip
If we're going into a trade war after no deal we need to be prepared to make life as hard as possible for the EU without mercy and without second thought for their economy.
So now you want a trade war.
Christ on a bike. None of this was on the side of that bus.
Snip
lol
No thank you. I'm not interested in a trade war.
We can end this right now by simply joining the EEA/EFTA as we should have done all along.
This is is the government's doing.
No one wants a war, but being prepared for one is necessary at this point in time. The EU is clearly preparing for one and ready to strike first with economic blockades like stopping flights.
If they do that it is a trade war and we need to reciprocate with all guns blazing.
Nuke them from orbit... it is the only way to be sure!
@MikeSmithson - we REALLY need a "rolls eyes" smiley.....
So, I've been wondering what a best case political outcome looks like for the Tory party going into No Deal. Really, it's a thought experiment on where the upper bound is here:
- Queues at ports remain in the counties of those ports - Supermarkets are broadly fully stocked with something or another, and there are no 'in these times' tannoy announcements that mention anything other than COVID - if we need Brexit tannoy announcements in Sainsbury's it's probably fatal. - Nobody has noticed Northern Ireland - The economic hit is (1) hidden under COVID and (2) rather like 1979-81 has minimal impact on the Tory shires (note: let's not overestimate the red wall of a few dozen seats, when the shires deliver them hundreds) - Enough deregulation is found that is not immediately impoverishing to the protection for those affected (and therefore opposed) to mount a strong recovery (from a low base and of doubtful sustainability) in 2023 - We are able to wriggle around impacts using whatever softening the EU does for their own convenience - There is no black swan No Deal impact (e.g. water supply) - Winter is mild - Behaviours, e.g. shop queues, extra shopping trips to source basics don't affect COVID infection rates in the month or two. - The clientism of post- Brexit emergency contracts is no more keenly noticed than for COVID. - The Scots going is anything but fatal. - If COVID subsides, people can reasonably source their preferred type of summer holiday.
Interesting thought experiment. You've covered most of the points that accured to me, plus a few that hadn't.
To escape relatively unscathed I think HMG would need to also avoid all of the following:
- Shortages of medicines. - Fuel shortages. - Road blockages caused by unhappy lorry drivers (remember the fuel protests of 2000?). - Road blockages caused by unhappy farmers. - Power cuts. - Daily job loss announcements hitting the news.
A handy guide to food post Brexit in the Daily Mail
That's a really stupid graphic. The two immediate idiocies that spring to mind are:
We don't import bananas or avocados from the EU so there isde deal signed with them which will reduce tariffs compared to the current EU tariffs.
Norway and Iceland are not in the EU and particularly are not in the Customs Union so do not have to abide by any EU/UK tariff regime. More to the point the UK, Iceland and Norway have already signed a deal to continue to trade in exactly the same way as they do now until a proper trade deal is concluded next year.
Two immediate idiocies in what you have posted. We almost certainly import bananas and avocados from Belgium rather than from Israel or Ivory Coast. The EU is a vast market, so bulk imports come into a port for warehousing and then onward distribution to the final market like the UK. The Daily Mail puts these on their list because they are EU imports.
Yes we can set up direct import routes for Bananas and Avocados and Oranges and everything else that we import via the EU but it will be low volume high cost additions to the current business model and that will bang the unit price up.
As for fish, the point the Mail is making is that according to our government there is going to be major disruption to our ports. And quite frankly they're trying to educate the wazzocks who think that saving British Fishing liberates Fish and Chips.
'Yes that is a chippy. Yes those are fishing boats. No they haven't caught the cod the chippy across the road is preparing for you because Cod don't swing in these waters you dumb bastards.'
There may be some modest price rises because bananas and avocados now have to go direct to Felixstowe in a different boat rather than to Rotterdam and then Felixstowe in the same boat but there will be no problems with supply as we have free trade deals with all the source countries.
My view is the market will find the most efficient route to keep costs down to a minimum.
Honestly it's a silly thing to hang your hat on. If you're going to take umbrage at No Deal then focus on the EU perishable food products that are really effected.
Is there anything we can't source from elsewhere except tulips ?
What this boils down to is a few months disruption whilst the new supply lines bed in and establish and we adjust to the new systems, general price rises of 2-5% and a mixture of medium-high tarrifs on exclusive EU products, which will mean people will generally buy much less of them and start buying them elsewhere - unless speciality.
Far from ideal but not the end of the world either.
Snip
If we're going into a trade war after no deal we need to be prepared to make life as hard as possible for the EU without mercy and without second thought for their economy.
So now you want a trade war.
Christ on a bike. None of this was on the side of that bus.
Snip
lol
No thank you. I'm not interested in a trade war.
We can end this right now by simply joining the EEA/EFTA as we should have done all along.
This is is the government's doing.
No one wants a war, but being prepared for one is necessary at this point in time. The EU is clearly preparing for one and ready to strike first with economic blockades like stopping flights.
If they do that it is a trade war and we need to reciprocate with all guns blazing.
Nuke them from orbit... it is the only way to be sure!
@MikeSmithson - we REALLY need a "rolls eyes" smiley.....
And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?
A big recovery of the coastal ecosystem.
If the damage trawling did was immediately visible it would have been banned years ago.
You think the message these Tory MPs are looking to sell to the fishing communities is "good news guys, we've got rid of the French, but don't get ahead of yourselves thinking you'll be able to take their place"?
The british fishing fleet will take several years to rebuild, if during that time fish stocks get a recovery period due to the lack of eu factory ships by the time its in place there will have been a significant increase in fish stocks. It is simple to work out apart from for you it seems
Surely British fishermen will do what they've always done: they'll get quotas and then rent them out to foreign firms. That's by far the easiest way to make money.
If I may use an anecdote here, there were two types of people in britain that sold quota's. Large corporations with fishing fleets. The other were boats like mine with a skipper who owned the boat. After we joined the cfp in the 70's the quota's we were given went ever downwards with the uk doing strict enforcement on us while spanish, french and belgian fisherman seemed to have a blind eye from their countries. When he sold his quota we had got down to being allowed to fish 6 weeks a year. His boat was no longer financially viable because instead of being able to catch 100% of the fish that was sustainable in british waters we had our share of about 18%.
And that happened to my brother in laws and other family members
Yes people make it sound like fisherman were queuing up to sell, I know our skipper was in tears the day he told us. His family had been running a boat for generations but the amount we were allowed to catch would no longer even pay to maintain the boat let alone pay of the crew on a voyage
It was deeply traumatic and accounts in a large way to the anger towards the EU from the Scottish fishing communities
I'm sure you felt the same empathy for the ex-mining communities in the 80s and 90s.
Let's open all the mines and make Britain great again!
As I have said before I find it ironic that the same people who attacked the closure of the mines are now immersed in the attacks on fossil fuels.
For the avoidance of doubt, I don't actually want the mines to reopen...
The difference is mines were not economic and needed public subsidy compared to imports whereas british fishing was both profitable and flourishing until politicians gave the rights of 80% of our fish away to the eec in the 70's
People who support the mines use the same rubbish argument. "bUt tHEy wERe PrOfITable"
The fact is that Thatcher, despite her many faults, moved us on as a nation to bigger and better things than fishing and mining.
Hang on - some of them WERE profitable. They weren't shut to benefit the environment. We shifted to coal imported half way round the world. Its only in recent years that the coal power stations have stopped burning foreign coal.
What he means by bigger and better thing is services like his don't forget he is training to be a lawyer. A definition of that being someone who produces nothing but tears of fury.
Did you get mugged in the divorce? Sympathies.
Shrugs I am happy with my record, I have spent 3 years of my life being an arse when I played cards for a living....4 years as a trawler man, 10 years as an industrial chemist making things people wanted, and 20 years writing stuff people wanted software wise from sat nav stuff to medical software....a lawyer produces what?
A lawyer produces help.
Besides I want to work on the high street with everyday people. I did not do this for the money.
A lawyer produces help for people that can afford it, thats not everyday people
That isn't true. Everyday people need legal help when they are moving house for example.
Thats a solicitor not a lawyer, which area of law are you studying for?
A solicitor is a type of lawyer and I'm training to be a solicitor, as opposed to a barrister.
The exact type of law I end up practicing in will depend on who (if anyone) is willing to employ me. However, there is apparently a shortage of conveyancers in the North East so that bodes well because I enjoy property law.
Doesnt change the arguement as you have pontificated on here in the past that ordinary people cant afford to buy a house anymore so just admit you work for those with money
House prices here in the North East are much more affordable.
The only data I can find is that 62% of people in the "North" are owner occupiers so I don't think it's entire true that "most ordinary people can't afford to buy a house".
Ah so you are saying 38% of people are priced out of your services nods
Well even fewer people could afford to buy the products I was involved in manufacturing so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.
My point was really you decided to go for a profession that can only be afforded by some. I am still in a profession that helps people regardless of money so stop throwing sermons around
A handy guide to food post Brexit in the Daily Mail
That's a really stupid graphic. The two immediate idiocies that spring to mind are:
We don't import bananas or avocados from the EU so there is no reason for them to be affected by the type of Brexit we have. Indeed the vast majority of avocados are imported from Israel and we already have a trade deal signed with them which will reduce tariffs compared to the current EU tariffs.
Norway and Iceland are not in the EU and particularly are not in the Customs Union so do not have to abide by any EU/UK tariff regime. More to the point the UK, Iceland and Norway have already signed a deal to continue to trade in exactly the same way as they do now until a proper trade deal is concluded next year.
Two immediate idiocies in what you have posted. We almost certainly import bananas and avocados from Belgium rather than from Israel or Ivory Coast. The EU is a vast market, so bulk imports come into a port for warehousing and then onward distribution to the final market like the UK. The Daily Mail puts these on their list because they are EU imports.
Yes we can set up direct import routes for Bananas and Avocados and Oranges and everything else that we import via the EU but it will be low volume high cost additions to the current business model and that will bang the unit price up.
As for fish, the point the Mail is making is that according to our government there is going to be major disruption to our ports. And quite frankly they're trying to educate the wazzocks who think that saving British Fishing liberates Fish and Chips.
'Yes that is a chippy. Yes those are fishing boats. No they haven't caught the cod the chippy across the road is preparing for you because Cod don't swing in these waters you dumb bastards.'
There may be some modest price rises because bananas and avocados now have to go direct to Felixstowe in a different boat rather than to Rotterdam and then Felixstowe in the same boat but there will be no problems with supply as we have free trade deals with all the source countries.
My view is the market will find the most efficient route to keep costs down to a minimum.
Honestly it's a silly thing to hang your hat on. If you're going to take umbrage at No Deal then focus on the EU perishable food products that are really effected.
Is there anything we can't source from elsewhere except tulips ?
What this boils down to is a few months disruption whilst the new supply lines bed in and establish and we adjust to the new systems, general price rises of 2-5% and a mixture of medium-high tarrifs on exclusive EU products, which will mean people will generally buy much less of them and start buying them elsewhere - unless speciality.
Far from ideal but not the end of the world either.
What I'd really like for us to do is finalise trade deals with Australia and New Zealand then stick an absolutely horrific tariff on wine, as in punitively high so as to lock nations without trade deals with the UK out of the mass market for wine in this country. It would hurt EU producers very hard and make them squeal to Macron and Conte for relief.
If we're going into a trade war after no deal we need to be prepared to make life as hard as possible for the EU without mercy and without second thought for their economy.
So now you want a trade war.
Christ on a bike. None of this was on the side of that bus.
I don't want a trade war, no deal becomes a trade war, or didn't you see the veiled threats from the EU over landing rights for UK planes? The nation must be ready to use whatever means we have available to us and that means being absolutely unsentimental about it.
No thank you. I'm not interested in a trade war.
We can end this right now by simply joining the EEA/EFTA as we should have done all along.
This is is the government's doing.
No one wants a war, but being prepared for one is necessary at this point in time. The EU is clearly preparing for one and ready to strike first with economic blockades like stopping flights.
If they do that it is a trade war and we need to reciprocate with all guns blazing.
Nuke them from orbit... it is the only way to be sure!
@MikeSmithson - we REALLY need a "rolls eyes" smiley.....
And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?
A big recovery of the coastal ecosystem.
If the damage trawling did was immediately visible it would have been banned years ago.
You think the message these Tory MPs are looking to sell to the fishing communities is "good news guys, we've got rid of the French, but don't get ahead of yourselves thinking you'll be able to take their place"?
The british fishing fleet will take several years to rebuild, if during that time fish stocks get a recovery period due to the lack of eu factory ships by the time its in place there will have been a significant increase in fish stocks. It is simple to work out apart from for you it seems
Surely British fishermen will do what they've always done: they'll get quotas and then rent them out to foreign firms. That's by far the easiest way to make money.
If I may use an anecdote here, there were two types of people in britain that sold quota's. Large corporations with fishing fleets. The other were boats like mine with a skipper who owned the boat. After we joined the cfp in the 70's the quota's we were given went ever downwards with the uk doing strict enforcement on us while spanish, french and belgian fisherman seemed to have a blind eye from their countries. When he sold his quota we had got down to being allowed to fish 6 weeks a year. His boat was no longer financially viable because instead of being able to catch 100% of the fish that was sustainable in british waters we had our share of about 18%.
And that happened to my brother in laws and other family members
Yes people make it sound like fisherman were queuing up to sell, I know our skipper was in tears the day he told us. His family had been running a boat for generations but the amount we were allowed to catch would no longer even pay to maintain the boat let alone pay of the crew on a voyage
It was deeply traumatic and accounts in a large way to the anger towards the EU from the Scottish fishing communities
I'm sure you felt the same empathy for the ex-mining communities in the 80s and 90s.
Let's open all the mines and make Britain great again!
As I have said before I find it ironic that the same people who attacked the closure of the mines are now immersed in the attacks on fossil fuels.
For the avoidance of doubt, I don't actually want the mines to reopen...
The difference is mines were not economic and needed public subsidy compared to imports whereas british fishing was both profitable and flourishing until politicians gave the rights of 80% of our fish away to the eec in the 70's
People who support the mines use the same rubbish argument. "bUt tHEy wERe PrOfITable"
The fact is that Thatcher, despite her many faults, moved us on as a nation to bigger and better things than fishing and mining.
Hang on - some of them WERE profitable. They weren't shut to benefit the environment. We shifted to coal imported half way round the world. Its only in recent years that the coal power stations have stopped burning foreign coal.
What he means by bigger and better thing is services like his don't forget he is training to be a lawyer. A definition of that being someone who produces nothing but tears of fury.
Did you get mugged in the divorce? Sympathies.
Shrugs I am happy with my record, I have spent 3 years of my life being an arse when I played cards for a living....4 years as a trawler man, 10 years as an industrial chemist making things people wanted, and 20 years writing stuff people wanted software wise from sat nav stuff to medical software....a lawyer produces what?
A lawyer produces help.
Besides I want to work on the high street with everyday people. I did not do this for the money.
A lawyer produces help for people that can afford it, thats not everyday people
That isn't true. Everyday people need legal help when they are moving house for example.
Thats a solicitor not a lawyer, which area of law are you studying for?
A solicitor is a type of lawyer and I'm training to be a solicitor, as opposed to a barrister.
The exact type of law I end up practicing in will depend on who (if anyone) is willing to employ me. However, there is apparently a shortage of conveyancers in the North East so that bodes well because I enjoy property law.
Doesnt change the arguement as you have pontificated on here in the past that ordinary people cant afford to buy a house anymore so just admit you work for those with money
House prices here in the North East are much more affordable.
The only data I can find is that 62% of people in the "North" are owner occupiers so I don't think it's entire true that "most ordinary people can't afford to buy a house".
Ah so you are saying 38% of people are priced out of your services nods
Well even fewer people could afford to buy the products I was involved in manufacturing so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.
My point was really you decided to go for a profession that can only be afforded by some. I am still in a profession that helps people regardless of money so stop throwing sermons around
You are literally the person who started the sermon. I am not claiming to "help more people than you". I am going into this profession because I enjoy it more and that's it.
And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?
A big recovery of the coastal ecosystem.
If the damage trawling did was immediately visible it would have been banned years ago.
You think the message these Tory MPs are looking to sell to the fishing communities is "good news guys, we've got rid of the French, but don't get ahead of yourselves thinking you'll be able to take their place"?
The british fishing fleet will take several years to rebuild, if during that time fish stocks get a recovery period due to the lack of eu factory ships by the time its in place there will have been a significant increase in fish stocks. It is simple to work out apart from for you it seems
Surely British fishermen will do what they've always done: they'll get quotas and then rent them out to foreign firms. That's by far the easiest way to make money.
If I may use an anecdote here, there were two types of people in britain that sold quota's. Large corporations with fishing fleets. The other were boats like mine with a skipper who owned the boat. After we joined the cfp in the 70's the quota's we were given went ever downwards with the uk doing strict enforcement on us while spanish, french and belgian fisherman seemed to have a blind eye from their countries. When he sold his quota we had got down to being allowed to fish 6 weeks a year. His boat was no longer financially viable because instead of being able to catch 100% of the fish that was sustainable in british waters we had our share of about 18%.
And that happened to my brother in laws and other family members
Yes people make it sound like fisherman were queuing up to sell, I know our skipper was in tears the day he told us. His family had been running a boat for generations but the amount we were allowed to catch would no longer even pay to maintain the boat let alone pay of the crew on a voyage
It was deeply traumatic and accounts in a large way to the anger towards the EU from the Scottish fishing communities
I'm sure you felt the same empathy for the ex-mining communities in the 80s and 90s.
Let's open all the mines and make Britain great again!
As I have said before I find it ironic that the same people who attacked the closure of the mines are now immersed in the attacks on fossil fuels.
For the avoidance of doubt, I don't actually want the mines to reopen...
The difference is mines were not economic and needed public subsidy compared to imports whereas british fishing was both profitable and flourishing until politicians gave the rights of 80% of our fish away to the eec in the 70's
People who support the mines use the same rubbish argument. "bUt tHEy wERe PrOfITable"
The fact is that Thatcher, despite her many faults, moved us on as a nation to bigger and better things than fishing and mining.
Hang on - some of them WERE profitable. They weren't shut to benefit the environment. We shifted to coal imported half way round the world. Its only in recent years that the coal power stations have stopped burning foreign coal.
What he means by bigger and better thing is services like his don't forget he is training to be a lawyer. A definition of that being someone who produces nothing but tears of fury.
Did you get mugged in the divorce? Sympathies.
Shrugs I am happy with my record, I have spent 3 years of my life being an arse when I played cards for a living....4 years as a trawler man, 10 years as an industrial chemist making things people wanted, and 20 years writing stuff people wanted software wise from sat nav stuff to medical software....a lawyer produces what?
A lawyer produces help.
Besides I want to work on the high street with everyday people. I did not do this for the money.
A lawyer produces help for people that can afford it, thats not everyday people
That isn't true. Everyday people need legal help when they are moving house for example.
If all the EU can offer is blackmail then no deal it will be
Again, read the article (admittedly behind a paywall). I’m not clear how you are construing this blackmail.
Many will
Not many read the FT. I thought also you had your own mind.
I have and to be honest the rhetoric from both sides needs dialing down
However, if it is no deal I cannot understand why so many think it is OK for the illegal operation of fishing boats in UK waters or indeed Norwegian and Iceland
Because it's laughable we're even in this position. It's especially laughable that the reaction of those who said it was "all going to be fine" in 2016 is not "let's rationally sort this out" but instead "fire up the Royal Navy".
It's the continued WW2 war fantasy on steroids and it's frankly pathetic.
It’s pathetic and sickening that the Mail should publish a headline about gunboats on the eve of a critical deal with the EU.
Were you saying the same thing yesterday when the EU threatened to ground all our planes unless we gave them unilateral access to our fishing waters in the event of No Deal?
I thought it an inept and unwelcome contribution, if not quite at the gunboats level.
How else do we enforce control of our waters to show we won't accept this?
Look, I want a Deal. It's possible Boris is being totally reckless and disingenuous here (and it wouldn't be the first time) but it's more likely the wider reports that the EU still hasn't compromised on fish are accurate and that needs to happen in the political sweet spot, which is the 30-40% share zone.
I would have thought the correct answer was for the EU to buy a share of our quotas for a limited period of time.
Comments
If not I apologise. Sadly, those who did voted to perpetuate disaster.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cod_Wars
I can't believe you lot are still peddling nonsense like this.
It's just continued rage and frothing.
Look, I want a Deal. It's possible Boris is being totally reckless and disingenuous here (and it wouldn't be the first time) but it's more likely the wider reports that the EU still hasn't compromised on fish are accurate and that needs to happen in the political sweet spot, which is the 30-40% share zone.
I assume there are serious penalties for illegal fishing including confiscation of boats and equipment but I stand to be corrected
Put your hands in the air and own up to the truth. We have got into this mess by pursuing a fantasy between people ears that doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. Scrutiny is shouted down on basis 2016 and all that you lost respect democracy. Salient arguments about costs to business, destruction of the UK, threat to security cooperation etc was shouted down in 2016 on basis it was project fear.
And the current negotiators for us, with fantasy between their ears and hemmed in by their lies and silly promises are the last people who should be negotiating a deal for us.
Those supporting Brexit are giving support to those lies.
If Brexit is not "Fake News" then I do not know what is.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/511023/cod-import-value-united-kingdom-uk-country-of-origin/#:~:text=Fisheries & Aquaculture-,Cod import value to the United Kingdom (UK,2016, by country of origin&text=This statistic shows the total,to the UK from Iceland.
Fishing has a great future, why are the French and Spanish so angry that they are prepared to fish illegally
If we're going into a trade war after no deal we need to be prepared to make life as hard as possible for the EU without mercy and without second thought for their economy.
17.4 million? Or a few less than that?
I bet it was fewer people than the number of times you've told this story.
Christ on a bike. None of this was on the side of that bus.
Threat to security cooperation is hollow there is a reason we always supplied more intel than we got and there is a reason no one talks to some of the european intel agencies as they leak like a sieve
It is v hard to see what is happening in inside the negotiation, but I agree generally with your take.
However, I am fed up with the cavalier rhetoric from the Brexit mob, as well as the flat lying (wondrous deal, Australian deal etc) from our supposed PM.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/999-kfc-is-out-of-chicken-met-reveals-2018-s-worst-hoax-calls-a4022211.html
We can end this right now by simply joining the EEA/EFTA as we should have done all along.
This is is the government's doing.
No balls-out behaviour.
Just get it sorted.
You're one of the more reasonable and objective Remain posters, despite our sparring.
Our waters and rights now are what they are entitled to be and automatically will be under international law on 1st January.
A better solution is a fair deal, of course.
Burgundy and the Medoc please? Some things transcend politics.
Literally insane.
Besides I want to work on the high street with everyday people. I did not do this for the money.
Hopefully we'll start seeing the light at the end of the tunnel, but it's going to be a grim winter.
@MikeSmithson - we REALLY need a "rolls eyes" smiley.....
- Queues at ports remain in the counties of those ports
- Supermarkets are broadly fully stocked with something or another, and there are no 'in these times' tannoy announcements that mention anything other than COVID - if we need Brexit tannoy announcements in Sainsbury's it's probably fatal.
- Nobody has noticed Northern Ireland
- The economic hit is (1) hidden under COVID and (2) rather like 1979-81 has minimal impact on the Tory shires (note: let's not overestimate the red wall of a few dozen seats, when the shires deliver them hundreds)
- Enough deregulation is found that is not immediately impoverishing to the protection for those affected (and therefore opposed) to mount a strong recovery (from a low base and of doubtful sustainability) in 2023
- We are able to wriggle around impacts using whatever softening the EU does for their own convenience
- There is no black swan No Deal impact (e.g. water supply)
- Winter is mild
- Behaviours, e.g. shop queues, extra shopping trips to source basics don't affect COVID infection rates in the month or two.
- The clientism of post- Brexit emergency contracts is no more keenly noticed than for COVID.
- The Scots going is anything but fatal.
- If COVID subsides, people can reasonably source their preferred type of summer holiday.
We aren't led by an Islamist quasi dictator reversing secularism to start with.
The exact type of law I end up practicing in will depend on who (if anyone) is willing to employ me. However, there is apparently a shortage of conveyancers in the North East so that bodes well because I enjoy property law.
The only data I can find is that 62% of people in the "North" are owner occupiers so I don't think it's entire true that "most ordinary people can't afford to buy a house".
311220235959 is the deadline.
And even then it might get extended until everyone is sober.
@FrancisUrquhart will be agitating.
To escape relatively unscathed I think HMG would need to also avoid all of the following:
- Shortages of medicines.
- Fuel shortages.
- Road blockages caused by unhappy lorry drivers (remember the fuel protests of 2000?).
- Road blockages caused by unhappy farmers.
- Power cuts.
- Daily job loss announcements hitting the news.
🙄
I am not claiming to "help more people than you". I am going into this profession because I enjoy it more and that's it.