Forum menu
jambalaya - Member
2020 election will be fought on the "vision for the future", I am sure the EU will be blamed for holding us back
The Brexies decided that was how they would do the campaign for back in 1807.
Got to have someone to blame. Couldn't be their own failings.
They have seen what has happened to the jobs of others in areas where there has been higher immigration
They have had their livelihoods negatively impacted by the EU, eg fishing
They feel the EU has favored London/Banking
If people believe this then "thick" would seem a wholly appropriate adjective - fishing is one of the great bogeymen stories that relies on a total ignorance of the previous decimation of fishing stocks. The industry was dying because of itself not the EU. The other two are simply laughable as was the Brexshit case. But there we go..,,,
Agreed all of that list should be part of our post Brexit world and wouod actually nitbhave been possible within the EU as all the investment wouod have been blocked by state aid rules
Which rules, specifically?
Obvious but ignored by those snobs who describe those who disagree with them as "thick"
While not polite to call someone thick we have to accept that there are varying levels of intelligence and knowledge across the country.
A 5 minute discussion with my own sister reveals how little understanding someone can have of politics/EU etc,. Why would I ask my sister to help me decide what to do on the EU anymore than someone should ask me what to do about a chemistry problem (I wouldn't have a clue). Yet that is exactly what we did.
Ah the old fishing myth again: you do realise it is the British Government alone who dish out the quotas for the waters surrounding the UK? If you want to criticise anyone, criticise the UK government. It seems a general pattern that people are blaming the EU for problems caused by our own government.
Some fish facts
[url= https://fullfact.org/europe/eu-pinching-our-fish/ ]fullfact[/url]
If people believe this then "thick" would seem a wholly appropriate adjective - fishing is one of the great bogeymen stories that relies on a total ignorance of the previous decimation of fishing stocks. The industry was dying because of itself not the EU.
This hurts but... 8)
In the 70's, fishermen on the n/e coast of Scotland caught lots of fish and everybody was happy. But the fishermen wanted more money so started to double up crews; boat come in and unloads/new crew standing by the dock/boat out same afternoon. Soon fishermen were making so much money that they bought huge multi-million pound boats capable of fishing over the continental shelf and they went as far as Rockall, double netting all the way. Banks loaned them the money then suddenly yields went down because there were no fish left. Banks called in their loans and forced the fishermen to accept the scrappage scheme (up to a million pounds)that the government rather generously offered.
The sea off the coast of Scotland was/is a desert and it is ENTIRELY down to the greed of the captains. That and that only is why there are quotas of catch and days.
Well put ducks but much easier to blame the EU than to take responsibility
From the fullfact link:
"Some academic research has suggested that the UK’s fishing quotas allow fishermen based here to catch around 30% of fish in UK waters."
Which means oob? It's the middle of a long passage with way more detail so what you saying with the quote?
STWers can read the article and draw their own conclusions. I just pasted a fact that stood out to me personally.
I know with no context or explanation or opinion , on its own it's potentially misleading to say the least. What conclusions did you draw from it?
"I know with no context or explanation or opinion , on its own it's potentially misleading to say the least."
The link is just above it, you can't get much more context than that.
"What conclusions did you draw from it?"
I conclude that the UK's quotas allow fishermen based here to catch around 30pc of fish in UK waters.
OOB,a worthy daily mail headline, I'm sure. 🙄
I conclude from it that
Regarding france's cod quota...
in the North Sea it received only 4%
!!!!
Or perhaps
The research also points out the fact that many species of fish migrate widely and so it is very difficult to determine exactly fish would be British fish in the first place.
Or
If we left the EU it wouldn’t necessarily mean that the situation would improve. The House of Commons Library has said that “many of the underlying issues that affect fisheries management would remain unchanged.”
Or
It’s also impossible to determine what the policy on fishing would be if we left the EU and things wouldn’t necessarily be any better.
Actually OOB your selective quoting is a brilliant example of how the leave movement, especially Borris and the right wing press have built a campaign on a tissue of lies and missinformation over many years
and highlights nicely the correlation between those who didn't do well at school and leave voting.
I am always impressed that the fish know where the borders are. Must be difficult in all that murky water.
Post Brexit, underwater border controls will solve that issue.
Can we tag "our" fish with Union Jacks so that the foreigners know to leave them alone?
"British Fish, for British Chips" #BF4BC
"Actually OOB your selective quoting is a brilliant example of how the leave movement, especially Borris and the right wing press have built a campaign on a tissue of lies and missinformation over many years
and highlights nicely the correlation between those who didn't do well at school and leave voting."
Yes, fishermen are probably on average less educated but on this issue I don't think they're necessarily wrong. It's a fact that due to UK fishing in the early 70s being largely around Iceland over 2/3rds of fishing around the UK is now denied to UK fishermen.
The sole counter to that in the fullfact article is "If we leave, the situation for fishermen might not improve" which is a pretty weak argument to remain WRT to fishing.
I'm not sure that Fishermen who voted to leave were voting against their own interests at all, on the basis of that fullfact link ( https://fullfact.org/europe/eu-pinching-our-fish/) they may well have a point.
I'm basing this purely on the full fact article, which might be missing some critical evidence.
We should probably stick to fishing but the fishing angle make me wonder if it's possible that poorly educated people are not idiots, they just tend to do things that face the strongest competition from the EU - Trades/Fishing etc. wheras people in the highly educated service sectors face less competition? I don't know if that's true, just throwing it in the air to see where it lands.
Seems to me, there must be winners and losers if we stay in just as there would be winners and losers if we left. Is it really impossible that UK Fishermen might be better off? As always the answer depends on what deals get done, and that we can't predict.
Is it really impossible that UK Fishermen might be better off? As always the answer depends on what deals get done, and that we can't predict.
If the amount of fish available is increased by leaving its possible, but nowhere does it suggest that the amount of fish available will increase. Sensible fishing limits are there for a reason and the UK government sets them.
If the amount of fish available is increased by leaving its possible, but nowhere does it suggest that the amount of fish available will increase. Sensible fishing limits are there for a reason and the UK government sets them.
Perhaps the fishermen think there's a chance that (for instance) the quota could be reduced by 1/3, but because there were no foreign vessels using the quota that amount the amount available for them would double.
Fish get better protection because 1/3 less fish get caught, Uk fishing industry doubles in size. Win-win.
Perhaps Uk fishermen think something like that is best case, and worst case is no change.
I really don't see how they're being dumb about this or mislead in any way at all.
Perhaps Uk fishermen think something like that is best case, and worst case is no change.I really don't see how they're being dumb about this or mislead in any way at all.
Where are they getting this wonderful information from? How are they being told things might get better or is this just another bucket of empty promises from the guy who never showed up to any fish committee meetings
Where are they getting this wonderful information from?
Perhaps fishermen have a pretty good understanding of their own industry, or perhaps, like me, their sole knowledge of UK fishing comes from that full fact article.
Perhaps there should be a campaign against free movement of fish after all or a sort of reverse brexit where EU fish are allowed to enter our waters but can only leave via approved nets
Perhaps everyone who voted for Brexit thinks "leaving the EU" is best case, and worst case is no change.
I really don't see how they're being dumb about this or mislead in any way at all.
Right.
You are neglecting the fact that by preventing the EU fleet to the oither 2/3 of our quota area, we would ourselves be prevented from sending the 2/3rds of our fleet to other EU territorial waters. This hasn't all happened in isolation. There was give and take on both sides and a balance formed. If UK quota owners chose to sell theirs to Spanish companies then that was their perogative at the time. No good crying about it now
You are neglecting the fact that by preventing the EU fleet to the oither 2/3 of our quota area, we would ourselves be prevented from sending the 2/3rds of our fleet to other EU territorial waters.
The fullfact article doesn't say that 2/3s of our fleet get access to European waters, it would be a glaring omission if that weren't the case.
However, let's assume they do:
1) Fishermen might consider that leaving will be totally neutral to Uk fishermen they lose 2/3 and gain a different 2/3 nearer to home.
2) Maybe the vessels that travel further are larger, more automated and employ less people, so when it comes to vote time there's a bias of people on the nearer trade and the larger ships fishing off continental Europe are under represented in the vote. Or as you say, quotas might have been sold abroad in which case the Fishermen using our quota won't even be voting.
from your link OOB
The data does not provide a robust explanation for reasons for this confidence,
a brilliant summary of brexit right there 😛
[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38885167 ]more good news for the hms brexshit.[/url]
from your link OOB "The data does not provide a robust explanation for reasons for this confidence" a brilliant summary of brexit right there
In your quote they're talking specifically about the sale of their produce. So all other things being equal Fishermen will be able to harvest 3 times more fish, and the quid pro-quo is they will have to pay tariffs on the export into the EU, at the same time supply from EU fishermen will have reduced in the Europe.
They might well consider the potential reward outweighs the risk. (The only risk is that the EU impose some kind of fishing related condition in whatever deal is agreed and if so it's hard to imagine they'd do something harsher than the existing deal.)
Yes, Fishermen may be be poorly educated. They might have got it wrong, but it just doesn't seem to me they're mislead or stupid in this case, it looks reasonable and logical to me.
In your quote
you mean its out of context ! 😉
So all other things being equal
which your article states several times they may not be, because no one knows what deal will be negotiated
Yes, Fishermen may be be poorly educated. They might have got it wrong, but it just doesn't seem to me they're mislead or stupid in this case, it looks reasonable and logical to me.
That would be the same reasonable and logical rationale that led to the collapse of the North Sea Cod populations in the first place?
[img] 
[/img]
how were the stocks doing before the EU imposed the big cuts to quotas?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/2586349.stm
This is good news:
I don't care really whether TM had to do it to face off her own rebels, its still good news.
you mean its out of context !
Nope, the link was right above it so the context was there.
which your article states several times they may not be, because no one knows what deal will be negotiated
Indeed, so presumably they think that (probably) gaining 2/3 more product will at least offset whatever is lost in negotiation. AFAIC that's a far more likely explanation than "they're all stupid and mislead.".
Folk are odd. I suggest a way of making £400-450m a week available for NHS and people won't pay ? Taxes are what fund services, there is no money tree.
On Channel Islands I don't really care, not a central / priority Brexit issue.
The figure I recall is 20% of fish caught in British waters are caught by British fishermen. I very much doubt we go out and catch much fish in other EU waters. No one here was blaming the decline in fish stocks on the EU. However we got here imho Britjsh Fishermen will be better off if EU boats have substantially lower or zero quotas. Have a fleet of neely British built boats too, why not ?
@cody as one headline put it, it's a vote on "the deal or no deal" - works for me 🙂
The figure I recall is 20% of fish caught in British waters are caught by British fishermen.
which came from Nigel farage so was obviously a lie for the easily led...
http://theconversation.com/fact-check-is-80-of-uk-fish-given-away-to-the-rest-of-europe-39966
This is a thorough and well-illustrated response which uses the most reliable and up-to-date information available. By demonstrating that the majority of fish in our waters are in fact European rather than British it highlights a key point – even if Britain left the EU we would still need to negotiate quotas which took this into account. There is no guarantee this would ensure any more of the catch.
.
.
.
.
@cody as one headline put it, it's a vote on "the deal or no deal" - works for me
indeed as MPs dont have any power to change the deal its a great example of #fakecontrol that appeals to the brexies
The lies of Borris and Farage exposed over fisheries in the last couple of pages are the exact reason that they dont want our MPs to scrutinise any deal, because it would expose their duplicity
Would these be the same WTO tariffs that our resident Brexiter was telling us how wonderful they would be?
[I]A string of MPs branded the offer of a final vote a “con” and a “Hobson’s choice”, aware that a refusal to back the final deal struck by May would leave Britain reliant on damaging tariffs set by the World Trade Organisation.[/I]
jambalaya - Member
Folk are odd. I suggest a way of making £400-450m a week available for NHS and people won't pay ? Taxes are what fund services, there is no money tree.
I imagine you hurt your economic credentials when you kept pedalling the other x millions a week argument, strange that...
What gets me about this whole thing is that the government is not ****ing listening to anyone.
What kind of a way to run a country is that?
Ice cream for breakfast, that's what this is.
What gets me about this whole thing is that the government is not **** listening to anyone.
Well they are taking us out of the EU so they listened to the result of the referendum.
I imagine you hurt your economic credentials when you kept pedalling the other x millions a week argument, strange that...
I am using "your" figures Mike. My credibility couldn't be higher as I have been proven right time after time on these issues. Remember you are the one who said Remain would win and that Trump could not possibly be elected.
The pushback here wasn't about the numbers for the NHS but the very concept of paying extra taxes via WTO tarifs to pay the NHS bills.
Sky News paper review shows that we are now seeing the news coverage of the eurozone debt crises that I have been speaking of. Not surprisingly with Trump in the White House the IMF knows the writing is on the wall. No more fake bailouts, only a real solution writing off the majority of the [s]loans[/s] gifts made to Greece. As both left and right wing reciewrs said - the euro cannot survive in its current form. Greece has to go and possibly Italy too. With French and German elections coming up this is going to get very messy.
Diane Abbot should be truely ashamed for skiving the A50 vote. Nick Bowles tweeted this picture of him leaving hospital where he is undergoing Chemotherapy to cast his vote
[img] 
[/img]
I am using "your" figures Mike. My credibility couldn't be higher as I have been proven right time after time on these issues. Remember you are the one who said Remain would win and that Trump could not possibly be elected.
No you were not. You know you were not, when challenged you refused point blank to accept what was presented as fact.Leave by 1% Trump by 200,000 votes. I'll put that in the margain of error.
Guessing correectly is not the same as being correct or truthful. You continue to pedal lies and spin about the EU and ignore any challenge of facts on the issues. It's a bit sad really.
Mol, in addition to listening to the people - something that you seem to be unhappy with - the givernment has backed down:changed its mind/wobbled/compromksed (you chose) on
The need for a Bill
The White Paper - weak as it was
The final votes in both houses etc
Have you been watching the news? And they will ultimately compromise on the current red lines.
Jambas - mon Amis, what you have been proven is incorrect on many of the core arguments with fisheries merely being the latest one. The whole Brexshit argument was based on five core lies and a false premise of taking control. I am not sure that this is something to be proud of.
Jamba
The pushback here wasn't about the numbers for the NHS but the very concept of paying extra taxes via WTO tarifs to pay the NHS bills.
Explain for a poor engineer whose best friends are electrons and he doesn't even really understand them, what the difference in effect on the man in the street and government coffers (over say a 5 year period) is between WTO tariffs and raising VAT?
I suppose WTO tariffs might suppress exports (exchange rates being equal) but given our level of imports any the unavailability of certain manufacturing technologies, crops, raw materials etc they won't make much of a short to medium term impact in imports.
So you're just proposing to tax the poor I think.
Mol, in addition to listening to the people - something that you seem to be unhappy with
I'm unhappy with people being stitched up in a poorly conceived referendum form, yes. There are many ways to listen to people without doing this.
The government might've wobbled on a few things, but not the important questions such as single market/customs union and so on. We weren't asked about any of that, were we? We weren't asked what we wanted the new Britain to look like at all. That's my huge problem with May&co.