Brexit

ozzyian

Well-known member
Messages
5,510
Reaction score
1,491
Location
East Lothian
Grass isn't always greener when you take a look at European 'leadership' If they keep this up they're going to turn their arse covering into a continent of antivaxers.

How can von de Leyon threaten to prevent vaccine transport to the UK when her cronies have traded lives for political advantage, it's pretty sick really.
 
Last edited:

bassfly

Well-known member
Messages
2,790
Reaction score
663
Location
Cheshire
They have to justify their actions to the plebs so they can carry on making a cock up of it. Any remainers can now see the true colours of this dictatorship.
 

mows

Well-known member
Messages
4,173
Reaction score
2,861
Location
edzell
Its been interesting.
The sky hasnt fallen in, much to somes surprise.
Hospitals havent got their extra money.
( though if they had, they would still be turning all non covid patients away at the door and telling them to just get on with it)
There is teething problems on both sides.
Ireland is a complete duck up and will probably be lost.
Theres probably more negatives than positives.

The original vote was exceedingly close.
I didnt decide what way to vote, till George told me, he couldnt think of any good reasons to stay, but will seriously punish me with a very nasty budget if i vote to leave.

But years down this tortuos path and brexit just beginning.

I cant envisage ever wanting to return to the EU.

I think if there was a vote today, on returning to the EU, we would be surprised at just how little support there would be for returning.

The UK leaving seems to have created a few cracks.
Unless the EU learns to be less dictorial, i think in 10 years time, the cracks may well be huge divides.
 

Grassy_Knollington

Well-known member
Messages
3,620
Reaction score
1,340
Grass isn't always greener when you take a look at European 'leadership' If they keep this up they're going to turn their arse covering into a continent of antivaxers.

How can von de Leyon threaten to prevent vaccine transport to the UK when her cronies have traded lives for political advantage, it's pretty sick really.

Im just glad we voted to stay in the reasonable, progressive EU centre of science and innovation instead of backing the facist populists who wanted to leave.
 

ozzyian

Well-known member
Messages
5,510
Reaction score
1,491
Location
East Lothian
I wonder if we could have the 7m Astra Zeneca doses currently in fridges across Europe back to cover our own supply shortage since they are apparently unsafe. Just until the grasping cling to power at any cost political issues amongst the EU leaders have been resolved anyway, otherwise they could go to waste. Now that would be a proper crime.
 

ibm59

Well-known member
Messages
13,286
Reaction score
1,700
Brexit voting Expats in Spain offered Asylum by Rockall.😂😂😂
9639ADED-6B26-4B32-9E41-BD2DF11660AD.jpeg
 

seeking

Well-known member
Messages
4,559
Reaction score
1,112
Location
Yorkshire (werethereagodit'dbegod'sowncountry)
Certainly making a case based on "cases" or "tests" is flawed and signifies nowt really because of the variable nature of testing, rates and efficacies etc. How many cycles per test and has it changed? (it did in UK) Multivariates.


Available evidence indicates that Germany (together with most of the eastern european countries, as a quick check of the CV19 thread will confirm) has had significantly higher deaths in the "2nd wave" than it had in the first, the opposite of excess deaths in UK. However, without the actual full death data (not freely available for Deutschland unlike for UK, so you'd have to be reliant on Euromomo black boxes!) more difficult to prove.

Hypotheses for why that is include that the virus didn't really take off first time round due to timing and of course the UK was so well infected (thus natural immunity far higher than other European countries for the 2nd wave) because it locked down in the first wave very late, in all likelyhood after cases began to plummet after peaking (according to Whtty and Bozza and available evidence)

But what does this have to do with Brexit? :confused:

(A: Nowt, cept perhaps remoaners ~ Zero CV19 Lockdowners)
 

Handel

Well-known member
Messages
2,234
Reaction score
641
Location
London
A double whammy.
We cant fish their waters, they can import tariff free.
Great deal for the Uk fishing fleet.

The real eye opener is the article cross referred right at the end of that article, it tells you who owns UK fishing rights.
 

Loxie

Well-known member
Messages
10,936
Reaction score
1,575
A double whammy.
We cant fish their waters, they can import tariff free.
Great deal for the Uk fishing fleet.

I think you mean Export. Isn't this exactly the deal we want from the EU? We export to them tariff free but they can't fish our waters?

this is what it means to be an independent coastal state. We can negotiate deals with other independent coastal states. In this case no deal can be done, we don't get to fish their waters and they don't get to fish ours.

free trade with Norway is a completely separate issue.
 

salarchaser

Well-known member
Messages
3,184
Reaction score
1,939
Location
Cheshire
I think you mean Export. Isn't this exactly the deal we want from the EU? We export to them tariff free but they can't fish our waters?

this is what it means to be an independent coastal state. We can negotiate deals with other independent coastal states. In this case no deal can be done, we don't get to fish their waters and they don't get to fish ours.

free trade with Norway is a completely separate issue.
They can export to us without tariff.
They get the best of both worlds.

"It will all be imported from the Norwegians, who will continue to sell their fish products to the UK tariff-free, while we are excluded from these waters. Quite simply, this is a disgrace and a national embarrassment."
 

Fruin

Well-known member
Messages
3,401
Reaction score
373
Location
East Dunbartonshire
The real eye opener is the article cross referred right at the end of that article, it tells you who owns UK fishing rights.
Yes, because like most other assets that should be in the hands of the people, the UK Government sell them off for short term gain. Even the fishing that s UK owned is largely owned by around five families. Around half of the directors have been prosecuted in the past for the "black fish" scams that saw them abusing quotas. I bet they are all Tory donors!!!
 

Handel

Well-known member
Messages
2,234
Reaction score
641
Location
London
Yes, because like most other assets that should be in the hands of the people, the UK Government sell them off for short term gain. Even the fishing that s UK owned is largely owned by around five families. Around half of the directors have been prosecuted in the past for the "black fish" scams that saw them abusing quotas. I bet they are all Tory donors!!!
Why do the figures vary so much? Most of the Scottish quota appears to be UK owned while all of the Welsh quota seems to be foreign owned.
 

Loxie

Well-known member
Messages
10,936
Reaction score
1,575
They can export to us without tariff.
They get the best of both worlds.

"It will all be imported from the Norwegians, who will continue to sell their fish products to the UK tariff-free, while we are excluded from these waters. Quite simply, this is a disgrace and a national embarrassment."
Yes I read what the fisherman said, but as I said free trade is nothing to do with the fishing access agreement or lack of it.

We offered a reciprocal access deal, they wanted to have more than we offered, we said no. No deal. They can't fish in our waters we can't fish in theirs.

Is this not exactly what everyone was expecting we could do to the EU, and then showed just as much outrage when they weren't having it? I don't understand your point.
 

Loxie

Well-known member
Messages
10,936
Reaction score
1,575
Yes, because like most other assets that should be in the hands of the people, the UK Government sell them off for short term gain. Even the fishing that s UK owned is largely owned by around five families. Around half of the directors have been prosecuted in the past for the "black fish" scams that saw them abusing quotas. I bet they are all Tory donors!!!
That simply isn't true. Quotas were based on existing catches. Skippers then sold quotas and that is why they have ended up as they are, nothing to do with the UK government.

Well they won't be SNP donors as they don't have any. Anyone with any money or a viable business is staying well clear!
 

acercon3

Active member
Messages
382
Reaction score
146
Location
Aberdeen
Yes, because like most other assets that should be in the hands of the people, the UK Government sell them off for short term gain. Even the fishing that s UK owned is largely owned by around five families. Around half of the directors have been prosecuted in the past for the "black fish" scams that saw them abusing quotas. I bet they are all Tory donors!!!
You are wide of the mark on two counts. It was not the UK government who sold off the entltlement. The entitlement to quota passed into the hands of individuals and businesses at a point in time when little value was attached . Some of these entities sold out in years following by which time substantial value were attached to these rights.
The mistake being that the entitlement should never have been allowed to fall into private hands.
Those that sold off quota either sold abroad or to other UK businesses where further speculation took place.
Your reference to ‘five families’ is often trotted out and refers mostly to the UK Pelagic sector. True a substantial amount is held in some hands but a quick mental calculation would suggest that the entitlement within this sector is concentrated in 20/25 businesses.
White fish and shellfish quotas are held across a range of businesses and individual hands.

Your quip about Tory voters is also probably incorrect. One particular , substantial quota holder is or was pro SNP/Independence and is or was a very substantial donor to this cause .
 

Handel

Well-known member
Messages
2,234
Reaction score
641
Location
London
You are wide of the mark on two counts. It was not the UK government who sold off the entltlement. The entitlement to quota passed into the hands of individuals and businesses at a point in time when little value was attached . Some of these entities sold out in years following by which time substantial value were attached to these rights.
The mistake being that the entitlement should never have been allowed to fall into private hands.
Those that sold off quota either sold abroad or to other UK businesses where further speculation took place.
Your reference to ‘five families’ is often trotted out and refers mostly to the UK Pelagic sector. True a substantial amount is held in some hands but a quick mental calculation would suggest that the entitlement within this sector is concentrated in 20/25 businesses.
White fish and shellfish quotas are held across a range of businesses and individual hands.

Your quip about Tory voters is also probably incorrect. One particular , substantial quota holder is or was pro SNP/Independence and is or was a very substantial donor to this cause .
So going back to my question in post 8891, is the marked difference in foreign ownership between Scottish and Welsh quotas simply down to who decided to sell? And is that in turn down to what sort of fish can be caught with those quotas? Sorry to ask but you obviously know what you are talking about and this is all stuff that most journalists seem too lazy to find out about.
 

Roag Fisher

Well-known member
Messages
2,318
Reaction score
939
Location
Isle of Lewis
You are wide of the mark on two counts. It was not the UK government who sold off the entltlement. The entitlement to quota passed into the hands of individuals and businesses at a point in time when little value was attached . Some of these entities sold out in years following by which time substantial value were attached to these rights.
The mistake being that the entitlement should never have been allowed to fall into private hands.
Those that sold off quota either sold abroad or to other UK businesses where further speculation took place.
Your reference to ‘five families’ is often trotted out and refers mostly to the UK Pelagic sector. True a substantial amount is held in some hands but a quick mental calculation would suggest that the entitlement within this sector is concentrated in 20/25 businesses.
White fish and shellfish quotas are held across a range of businesses and individual hands.

Your quip about Tory voters is also probably incorrect. One particular , substantial quota holder is or was pro SNP/Independence and is or was a very substantial donor to this cause .
The same happened with milk quota, but I believe there was no compensation when milk quotas ended?
No reason why there cannot be a reset of fishing rights.
 

firefly

Well-known member
Messages
1,045
Reaction score
398
Location
Belgium
Yes I read what the fisherman said, but as I said free trade is nothing to do with the fishing access agreement or lack of it.

We offered a reciprocal access deal, they wanted to have more than we offered, we said no. No deal. They can't fish in our waters we can't fish in theirs.

Is this not exactly what everyone was expecting we could do to the EU, and then showed just as much outrage when they weren't having it? I don't understand your point.
Is this deal off then? Or are the Norwegians still allowed to fish UK waters, according to the agreement?

Norway, UK, and EU agree deal on fishing quotas - The Local
 

Handel

Well-known member
Messages
2,234
Reaction score
641
Location
London
Dunno your link is behind a paywall. The deal done last year with Norway was to negotiate access annually, is that it?
Strange, I could see it. Mind you it is another one of those articles where the author didn't really know what he was talking about and so left his readers none the wiser.
 
Top