Thread: UK & EU Agree Post-Brexit Trade Deal
View Single Post
Old 26-04-2020, 13:21   #2873
OLD BOY
Rise above the players
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Wokingham
Services: 2 V6 with 360 software, ITVX, 4+, Prime, Netflix, Apple+, Disney+, Paramount+, Discovery+
Posts: 15,081
OLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronze
OLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronze
Re: [Updated] The UK’s future relationship with the EU
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman View Post
Yes and at risk of repeating myself the Government saying something vs the Government delivering it is two wildly different things.

At no time, in any referendum or general election, has a Government been given a mandate to end the transition agreement on 31st December at all costs.

A mandate was for leaving on 31st January. Johnson's Government delivered.



Can UK fishermen not fish in our waters? I'm unsure the relevance of 50 year old practice in the fishing industry, but it's obvious to me (as a non-fisherman) that in the limited space that is the North Sea an agreement on sustainable fishing is desirable.

Otherwise unregulated and uncontrolled capitalism does what it does best - seeks short terms gains against long term sustainability. It's undesirable to have no fish at all - I'm sure even you would agree that's obvious.

---------- Post added at 19:49 ---------- Previous post was at 19:44 ----------



You are missing the point of an agreement. We both agree mutually beneficial terms and the other party is committed to do their bit to enforce their side.

Whether the EU or the UK are a net beneficiary on the single issue of fisheries is frankly an irrelevance. It is nationalist flag waving nonsense against the backdrop of a much larger trade agreement.

I'm sure the City of London would consider access to the EU financial sector much more important than whether we have a net loss of a few hundred million pounds per year in fish to the EU. Also I'm sure the Treasury would find their revenues would benefit overall.
Where do I start? OK, I'll keep it brief as I know you are playing a game here.

My point on your argument for an extension of the withdrawal agreement is that the government is still insisting there will not be one. As usual, you are simply saying there will be an extension with absolutely nothing to back up your claim. For that reason, you would be well advised to state your reservations rather than explicitly state that an extension will be requested. I say this to spare you embarrassment if it doesn't happen at the end of the year, as I believe to be the case.

What's all this about limited space in the North Sea? What a load of codswallop

Look, whether some fish like to swim on the left hand side or the right hand side is irrelevant. Our fishermen want their territory back to fish in, end of. If the Europeans have some fish that we want and vice versa, there is this thing called trade.

I am sure that neither side wants to over-fish, jfman, because to do so will lead to smaller catches in the future.

My reference to what was happening prior to our EU days was simply making the case that we did not need a European agreement then to fish in our own waters and we don't need one now.
OLD BOY is offline