The Consequences of Brexit [part 5] Read 1st post before posting

[gomgeg 10]

Brexit related, in the relationship to fishing which has been mentioned quite a bit in the brexit aftermath.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-45337091

 

seems our fishermen have been "pillaging" scollops in french waters all year round while the french have to adhere to certain times of the year? sounds familliar? sounds just like what brextremists have been saying but the opposite way round?

 

Anyway its now come to a head

 

---------- Post added 29-08-2018 at 11:11 ----------

 

and then lots of africans will come over here to work as per our agreements we set up

Seems our fishermen have been fishing quite legally, a trawler man on radio this morning said the French do exactly the same thing depleting the Bass stocks when the Brits aren't allowed to fish, but there's been no violent confrontation there.

But of course the remoaners who hate the British aren't going to mention that.

[melthebell 863]

Seems our fishermen have been fishing quite legally, a trawler man on radio this morning said the French do exactly the same thing depleting the Bass stocks when the Brits aren't allowed to fish, but there's been no violent confrontation there.

But of course the remoaners who hate the British aren't going to mention that.

Personally i dont know enough about the ins and outs on the fishing industry, so can only go what i see or read in the news.

Whether they are fishing legally or not doesnt matter, what does matter is the weird set of rules that have been put into place? two countries both in the EU have come up with some lopsided set of rules, i'd like to know how this set of rules came into being, that one country can fish willy nilly all year long yet the host country can only fish between certain months????? it's baffeling. I'm sure payments by the UK are involved? surely it should be set equally? if scollops need time to breed etc then both countries should be limited?

It certainly flies in the face of what the vast majority of brexiters have made out that the fisheries rules are all set against the UK, which obviously isnt the case since in this case they do get preferential treatment. I wonder if we get any other preferential treatment with other countries like spain etc?

[tinfoilhat 11]

Seems our fishermen have been fishing quite legally, a trawler man on radio this morning said the French do exactly the same thing depleting the Bass stocks when the Brits aren't allowed to fish, but there's been no violent confrontation there.

But of course the remoaners who hate the British aren't going to mention that.

 

I wasn't aware of the latter. But let's put it in perspective - it's road rage but in boats. If two lorry drivers had a bit of aggro it wouldn't be news.

[swarfendor437 14]

Isn't it against forum rules to post unbroken links to crank websites and YouTube videos?

 

So you are medically qualified to state that the former Canadian Minister for Defense is not all there? I think we are the loons for allowing "Bank leverage" to exist in the first place!

[El Cid 216]

Britain’s leading employers’ group said on Friday it accepted that Prime Minister Theresa May would need to impose controls on EU citizens working in the UK after Brexit, but new immigration rules must not stop companies from hiring the staff they need.

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-immigration/control-immigration-but-keep-workers-coming-uk-employers-idUSKBN1KU2QY

 

The above sentence does not make sense to me!

[Annie Bynnol 612]

Britain’s leading employers’ group said on Friday it accepted that Prime Minister Theresa May would need to impose controls on EU citizens working in the UK after Brexit, but new immigration rules must not stop companies from hiring the staff they need.

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-immigration/control-immigration-but-keep-workers-coming-uk-employers-idUSKBN1KU2QY

 

The above sentence does not make sense to me!

 

The first bit is politics.

The second bit is economics.

 

OR

 

"Dear Mrs May,

We understand the mess you are in but we don't want to be seen taking sides. So we will appease the Brexiters by saying that Immigrants are bad and need controlling, but remember key workers are good as they are essential. Actually Mrs May we need unskilled workers as well, but we will keep that bit quiet."

[I1L2T3 10]

Britain’s leading employers’ group said on Friday it accepted that Prime Minister Theresa May would need to impose controls on EU citizens working in the UK after Brexit, but new immigration rules must not stop companies from hiring the staff they need.

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-immigration/control-immigration-but-keep-workers-coming-uk-employers-idUSKBN1KU2QY

 

The above sentence does not make sense to me!

 

Makes perfect sense.

 

We’ve had the power to do this all along, but we chose not to.

 

I’ve got one kid in Germany and one based out Benelux countries. In both cases they were required to register with the local municipality.

 

They need to the registration to work, get a bank account and access health care. In Holland for example you need to register residence, providing official documentation. A housing contract, passport and a certified certificate of birth, and that is to cover every member of the family. If you’re married you need a certified marriage cert. you can’t access health care until you have a citizen number. You can’t work without the number, or go to the hospital, get a bank account etc... Get caught working without it then.....boom. Get caught working without health insurance then.....boom. There’s a carefully constructed system in place to make it extremely difficult to live, work and access services in the country without official docs. Remember Holland is the EU. In the U.K. of course we did none of this. The controls don’t need to be complex, just sensible. And there was nothing stopping us doing the same.

[ricgem2002 11]

Makes perfect sense.

 

We’ve had the power to do this all along, but we chose not to.

 

i think you mean governments of both political sides chose not to then the people of this country had a get out of jail card put to them and took the chance to get rid of the shackles of the eu. we are leaving get used to it as wolfie smith once said power to the people

[Magilla 510]

i think you mean governments of both political sides chose not to then the people of this country had a get out of jail card put to them and took the chance to get rid of the shackles of the eu. we are leaving get used to it as wolfie smith once said power to the people

 

Which is why, under Mays propsal, the laws that we'll be following are made in Brussels

 

Power to the people!

[kidley 48]

Which is why, under Mays propsal, the laws that we'll be following are made in Brussels

 

Power to the people!

 

with alot put forward by the U.K

[Magilla 510]

with alot put forward by the U.K

 

... but ultimately, disputes with regard to trade & standards will be decided by judges in Brussels, not the UK.

[I1L2T3 10]

i think you mean governments of both political sides chose not to then the people of this country had a get out of jail card put to them and took the chance to get rid of the shackles of the eu. we are leaving get used to it as wolfie smith once said power to the people

 

Yes, all to blame.

 

I’m not making any distinctions

 

---------- Post added 02-09-2018 at 11:33 ----------

 

with alot put forward by the U.K

 

It’s going to look like it does in other advanced EU countries, although perhaps not as far.

 

For example the benefits brake that Cameron got agreement to is in practical terms exactly what happens in other EU countries.

 

---------- Post added 02-09-2018 at 11:41 ----------

 

... but ultimately, disputes with regard to trade & standards will be decided by judges in Brussels, not the UK.

 

I thought similar for a long time but now not so sure on all of it.

 

Regulatory alignment - yes for exports for blindingly obvious reasons. But for example the EU-Japan FTA will not use the ECJ as the ultimate arbiter for trade disputes. In our case it makes no short-term sense to dismantle our relationship with the ECJ. Longer term who knows, but we should look at it properly and not just flounce out.