This isn’t going to go down well in White House – Trump named “Loser of the Year” – politicalbetting

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Gardenwalker said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Gardenwalker said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Gardenwalker said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Gardenwalker said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/MattGarrahan/status/1337508040900284417

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

Casino_Royale said:

Gardenwalker said:

Gallowgate said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Gardenwalker said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Gardenwalker said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/MattGarrahan/status/1337508040900284417

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?

Roger said:

It's odd that people are saying we're being blackmailed by the EU when we hold all the cards. Does that make sense?

Casino_Royale said:

Gardenwalker said:

Gallowgate said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Gardenwalker said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Gardenwalker said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/MattGarrahan/status/1337508040900284417

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?

Scott_xP said:

Casino_Royale said:

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

Dura_Ace said:

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.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Gardenwalker said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Gardenwalker said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Gardenwalker said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Gardenwalker said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Gardenwalker said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/MattGarrahan/status/1337508040900284417

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

justin124 said:

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?

Gallowgate said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Gallowgate said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Gallowgate said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

rcs1000 said:

Pagan2 said:

alex_ said:

Flatlander said:

alex_ said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/donaeldunready/status/1337503342122192896

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.

Casino_Royale said:

Pagan2 said:

Casino_Royale said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

RochdalePioneers said:

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.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Gallowgate said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Gallowgate said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Gallowgate said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

rcs1000 said:

Pagan2 said:

alex_ said:

Flatlander said:

alex_ said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/donaeldunready/status/1337503342122192896

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

Pagan2 said:

Gallowgate said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Gallowgate said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

rcs1000 said:

Pagan2 said:

alex_ said:

Flatlander said:

alex_ said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/donaeldunready/status/1337503342122192896

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

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

Gallowgate said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Gallowgate said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

rcs1000 said:

Pagan2 said:

alex_ said:

Flatlander said:

alex_ said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/donaeldunready/status/1337503342122192896

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.

Scott_xP said:

Gallowgate said:

There's no logic whatsoever to their position.

It's just continued rage and frothing.

The angriest winners in history...

Gallowgate said:

MaxPB said:

Casino_Royale said:

Pagan2 said:

Casino_Royale said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

RochdalePioneers said:

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.

justin124 said:

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?

MaxPB said:

Gallowgate said:

MaxPB said:

Casino_Royale said:

Pagan2 said:

Casino_Royale said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

RochdalePioneers said:

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.

RochdalePioneers said:

I'm not a logistics expert. But the argument being made

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

Gallowgate said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Gallowgate said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

rcs1000 said:

Pagan2 said:

alex_ said:

Flatlander said:

alex_ said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/donaeldunready/status/1337503342122192896

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.

Gallowgate said:

MaxPB said:

Casino_Royale said:

Pagan2 said:

Casino_Royale said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

RochdalePioneers said:

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.

FrancisUrquhart said:

Is Sunday really the deadline?

Pagan2 said:

RochdalePioneers said:

I'm not a logistics expert. But the argument being made

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

Gallowgate said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Gallowgate said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

rcs1000 said:

Pagan2 said:

alex_ said:

Flatlander said:

alex_ said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/donaeldunready/status/1337503342122192896

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.

IanB2 said:

justin124 said:

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.

Gallowgate said:

MaxPB said:

Gallowgate said:

MaxPB said:

Casino_Royale said:

Pagan2 said:

Casino_Royale said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

RochdalePioneers said:

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.

MaxPB said:

Gallowgate said:

MaxPB said:

Casino_Royale said:

Pagan2 said:

Casino_Royale said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

RochdalePioneers said:

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.

Gardenwalker said:

Pagan2 said:

RochdalePioneers said:

I'm not a logistics expert. But the argument being made

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

Gallowgate said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Gallowgate said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

rcs1000 said:

Pagan2 said:

alex_ said:

Flatlander said:

alex_ said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/donaeldunready/status/1337503342122192896

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.

MaxPB said:

Gallowgate said:

MaxPB said:

Gallowgate said:

MaxPB said:

Casino_Royale said:

Pagan2 said:

Casino_Royale said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

RochdalePioneers said:

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.

MaxPB said:

Casino_Royale said:

Pagan2 said:

Casino_Royale said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

RochdalePioneers said:

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.

Gallowgate said:

The pound will fall off a cliff if we enter into a trade war with the EU. Just look at Turkey.

Literally insane.

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

The pound will fall off a cliff if we enter into a trade war with the EU. Just look at Turkey.

Literally insane.

Helps our exporters.

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

IshmaelZ said:

Pagan2 said:

RochdalePioneers said:

I'm not a logistics expert. But the argument being made

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

Gallowgate said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Gallowgate said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

rcs1000 said:

Pagan2 said:

alex_ said:

Flatlander said:

alex_ said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/donaeldunready/status/1337503342122192896

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.

Philip_Thompson said:

MaxPB said:

Gallowgate said:

MaxPB said:

Gallowgate said:

MaxPB said:

Casino_Royale said:

Pagan2 said:

Casino_Royale said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

RochdalePioneers said:

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.

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

IshmaelZ said:

Pagan2 said:

RochdalePioneers said:

I'm not a logistics expert. But the argument being made

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

Gallowgate said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Gallowgate said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

rcs1000 said:

Pagan2 said:

alex_ said:

Flatlander said:

alex_ said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/donaeldunready/status/1337503342122192896

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.

Gallowgate said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

The pound will fall off a cliff if we enter into a trade war with the EU. Just look at Turkey.

Literally insane.

Helps our exporters.

How's the Turkish economy doing lately?

Pagan2 said:

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

IshmaelZ said:

Pagan2 said:

RochdalePioneers said:

I'm not a logistics expert. But the argument being made

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

Gallowgate said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Gallowgate said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

rcs1000 said:

Pagan2 said:

alex_ said:

Flatlander said:

alex_ said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/donaeldunready/status/1337503342122192896

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?

Beibheirli_C said:

Philip_Thompson said:

MaxPB said:

Gallowgate said:

MaxPB said:

Gallowgate said:

MaxPB said:

Casino_Royale said:

Pagan2 said:

Casino_Royale said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

RochdalePioneers said:

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.....

Pagan2 said:

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

IshmaelZ said:

Pagan2 said:

RochdalePioneers said:

I'm not a logistics expert. But the argument being made

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

Gallowgate said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Gallowgate said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

rcs1000 said:

Pagan2 said:

alex_ said:

Flatlander said:

alex_ said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/donaeldunready/status/1337503342122192896

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

Carnyx said:

Pagan2 said:

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

IshmaelZ said:

Pagan2 said:

RochdalePioneers said:

I'm not a logistics expert. But the argument being made

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

Gallowgate said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Gallowgate said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

rcs1000 said:

Pagan2 said:

alex_ said:

Flatlander said:

alex_ said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/donaeldunready/status/1337503342122192896

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.

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

IshmaelZ said:

Pagan2 said:

RochdalePioneers said:

I'm not a logistics expert. But the argument being made

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

Gallowgate said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Gallowgate said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

rcs1000 said:

Pagan2 said:

alex_ said:

Flatlander said:

alex_ said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/donaeldunready/status/1337503342122192896

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".

Pagan2 said:

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

IshmaelZ said:

Pagan2 said:

RochdalePioneers said:

I'm not a logistics expert. But the argument being made

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

Gallowgate said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Gallowgate said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

rcs1000 said:

Pagan2 said:

alex_ said:

Flatlander said:

alex_ said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/donaeldunready/status/1337503342122192896

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

Pro_Rata said:

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.

Beibheirli_C said:

Philip_Thompson said:

MaxPB said:

Gallowgate said:

MaxPB said:

Gallowgate said:

MaxPB said:

Casino_Royale said:

Pagan2 said:

Casino_Royale said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

RochdalePioneers said:

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.....

Pagan2 said:

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

IshmaelZ said:

Pagan2 said:

RochdalePioneers said:

I'm not a logistics expert. But the argument being made

Gallowgate said:

Pagan2 said:

Gallowgate said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Gallowgate said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

rcs1000 said:

Pagan2 said:

alex_ said:

Flatlander said:

alex_ said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/donaeldunready/status/1337503342122192896

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

Casino_Royale said:

Gardenwalker said:

Casino_Royale said:

Gardenwalker said:

Gallowgate said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Gardenwalker said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Gardenwalker said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/MattGarrahan/status/1337508040900284417

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.