7 ms·

UK and Norway fail to reach fishing deal

51 points by martpie 5y ago

jjgreen 5y ago
The Schadenfreude of seeing this predominantly Brexit crowd getting stuffed is tinged with sadness that the price of cod & chips will soon be through the roof.
- Arnt 5y ago
  It shouldn't affect prices that much. The cost of fishing something in Norwegian waters, landing it and transporting it from the port to Bristol/Leicester/Inverness doesn't really depend on whether it's a Norwegian or British trawler and port. I want to digress, though. For several decades, Britain's approach to negotiations was to let the EU do it, and sometimes get an excetption that the Germans pay for. That's been a lot simpler than "real" negotiations between states, and it sounds as if they're really out of practice. As was also visible last week, when an Australian minister was to be put "on an uncomfortable chair" and made to sign a deal. Of course the Australian arrived with a ready offer and willing to sign at once, and of course the British signed what the Australian wanted. Experienced negotiators do not signal being in a hurry.
  - vesinisa 5y ago
    As an EU citizen, I hate to say this but I think Johnson and his bunch did really well for UK in the Brexit negotiations. They basically got everything that they wanted (free trade, state aid, control over immigration) while EU bascially lost on all fronts and is now weaker than ever. Only place where EU managed to get a concession was extending the deadline until the French fishermen have to quit fishing in British waters. The EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier was of course a Frenchman, so good old eurocronyism at work once again.
    - tonyedgecombe 5y ago
      They only got 20% of what they wanted on free trade, there is nothing on services which make up most of the UK economy. Goods is only 20% and we are a net importer. I don't understand the issues about state aid, we were already at the bottom of the league table interns of doling out aid to business. We had plenty of room to expand that already if we wanted. Right now the most likely outcome of the whole thing is the break up of the United Kingdom. The whole thing was a mess from beginning to end (not that it has ended yet).
      - Chris2048 5y ago
        > the break up of the United Kingdom Wholly? Or just Scotland? I can't see anyone else leaving, and I'm not sure the scots will either.
        lil_cain 5y ago
        Scotland, and NI. Which are 2/3 of the constituent "kingdoms" that were united to form the "United Kingdom". Of course, it might not happen, but odds are rather better, in both cases, than they were pre Brexit. Ninja Edit: This isn't to try and minimise the importance of Wales, just a recognition that at the time of the creation of the UK, the famous Encyclopaedia Britannica entry (For Wales, see England) wouldn't have been controversial in most of the UK. But even in Wales, Plaid have done very well, and become much more radical, as a result of Brexit.
        Chris2048 5y ago
        Nope, never. NI might want to leave, but it can't leave because its too dependant on the UK economically.
        lil_cain 5y ago
        More so than Ireland was in 1921? And will that continue to be the case, with the NIP imposing barriers between it & GB?
    - zibzab 5y ago
      Even if that was true, remember that UK had for years been the main cause of fights within EU. The British approach to making a deal was "this is a disaster, we should have be given at least twice that". After 30 years of that, a divorce was for the best solution for both sides. So whatever the cost, it was worth it.
    - raverbashing 5y ago
      Well they got what Boris/Tory wanted. "Freeish" trade (more like facilitated trade, not free and outside the customs union - which, to be fair, is markedly better than No Deal) - The City of London risks losing clearance/passporting rights - The Ireland/Northern Ireland issues are on fire again - Yes they got control of "immigration" (that they always had) and to the shock of some UK retirees in Spain that is reciprocal - Anyone that exports/imports from the EU (especially more regulated stuff like food, etc) is having to work around the bureaucracy (which shouldn't have surprised anyone that knows a bit about how exports/imports work) https://www.politico.eu/article/a-brexit-lesson-eus-benefits-largely-invisible-hurt-to-lose-single-market-boris-johnson/ https://www.politico.eu/article/a-brexit-lesson-eus-benefits... - I've been seeing more job offers from the UK listed as remote (hah so you mean no more EU developers in place without visas? Good luck then)
      - hlag 5y ago
        That may all be true, but the EU has not been beneficial for the middle and working classes. It exists to drive down wages, import cheap labor, facilitate business transactions and drive up the stock market. So I guess the voters thought it couldn't get any worse. Perhaps people will be able to afford a house again in 20 years.
      - sgt101 5y ago
        The Northern Irish issue is largely due to the failure of the police and the NI executive to police this event. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-53275733 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-53275733
    - lil_cain 5y ago
      I don't think this is true. Firstly they didn't get free trade - there are tariffs, rules of origin, and a lack of equivalence for SPS & product safety rules. The last one is especially egregious currently, because the UK still has exactly the same agricultural rules it did when it was a member. Secondly, there is now a customs border in the UK. That's a fairly gigantic offensive ask for the E.U., which they largely succeeded in. Thirdly, the UK got significantly less freedom on state aid than it wanted (which is of course, not surprising, given that the freedom they wanted was "We do whatever we want"). They got control over immigration. Of course, as a consequence of this, so did we, and if you read the UK press, they're currently finding out that that's a thing that cuts both ways (and they're not massively happy about this).
    - rvba 5y ago
      UK got nothing for services.
    - emptyfile 5y ago
      You're very badly misinformed. How badly the UK did in the negotiations can be seen in the concessions won by the EU with the NI protocol. The actual trade deal covers goods where the UK has a large trade deficit and does not cover services at all. Also the EU is starting to impose tariffs and checks on goods coming out of the UK, while the UK won't do the same for some time as their border control systems aren't ready and they're missing some 40 000 customs agents. So even as exporters are feeling the pain, the actual mangling of supply chains for british importers is still to come. While the best case scenario for the EU would've been the UK staying in the customs union, with that option closed this is as good as it gets. There are no winners in Brexit, only relative losers.
      - Arnt 5y ago
        What NI concessions are those? AFAICT Britain conceded nothing that it wasn't already required to do by the Good Friday agreement. BTW, I don't agree about those checks. Skipping those would not be doable for the EU. Dozens of countries have MFN treaties with the EU. If the EU were to offer Britain anything that those countries aren't offered (such as not checking imports/exports) then all of those trade treaties would need to be renegotiated, because those countries would no longer be most favoured. IIRC some sixty countries' parliaments would have to vote on the resulting treaty changes. That's too much to be doable.
      - vesinisa 5y ago
        The Northern Ireland situation was simply resolved the only way it could be. If there was some better outcome for the UK that would have not spoiled the entire integrity of the EU, I am sure it would have been allowed. But no matter how good Johnson's team was in extracting concessions from the EU, even they can not move mountains nor islands, or otherwise change hard geographical realities.
    - BartekG 5y ago
      As a EU citizen I think UK lost on all fronts - food industry, financial sector, manufacturing, trade, foreign policy, and others. The losses in some of those fields are already visible, in others not yet.
  - estaseuropano 5y ago
    Britain had an outsized influence in the EU, so in fact the strategy was to extract EU-internal horsetrading on the 'negotiating mandate' strong demands for their own position which then became the EU position backed by the EU's entire weight. Also the last time UK had to negotiate on their own it's economy was still bigger than China's. The world has changed and Brexiteers hadn't noticed that their lack of influence was not the EU's fault but rather a general shift of power to Asia.
    - detaro 5y ago
      > Britain had an outsized influence in the EU Something which large parts of the British public and reportedly even of the politicians didn't really realize or appreciate, because Brussels was always a derided side-show, to a higher degree than for most other countries.
      - fmajid 5y ago
        More precisely the British were allowed to take point on a number of laissez-faire positions when it was politically or diplomatically awkward for others like the Dutch or Germans to do so. Playing bad cop, essentially.
    - Chris2048 5y ago
      > Brexiteers hadn't noticed that.. I'm getting sick of people talking on behalf of brexiters, or what they know/think/believe - this colonial reference is just another "little Englander" smear.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
      - croon 5y ago
        Well, the alternative is that they had noticed it, which is worse.
        Chris2048 5y ago
- pydry 5y ago
  I wouldn't laugh too hard. The angrier they get at seeing their livelihoods impacted the more they will lash out politically. We got a taste of what's inside that Pandora's box with Farage.
  - osrec 5y ago
    With Farage, the phrase "empty vessels make the most noise" comes to mind. Apparently he was a loud mouthed joker at school too, who just wanted to say something that would grab people's attention. I'm somewhat thankful for him highlighting the racist, xenophobic streak in certain parts of the UK - it just happened to be the topic that got him the most attention. Honestly, if he thought supporting immigrants would get him the most controversy/support/attention, he'd be doing that in a hurry.
    - pydry 5y ago
      I agree. He was a symptomatic of the underlying problems rather than being the problem himself. Nonetheless, despite him being skewered by the UK Tory party successfully cosplaying as UKIP, he's a sure sign that a competent populist fascist could command a dangerous level of support - especially among military personnel. This doesn't bode well for British democracy.
- callamdelaney 5y ago
  I imagine you're now filled with self satisfaction after using some German word I had to google. Yes; you are certainly smarter than Brexit voters, where shall I send your golden star?
  - Item_Boring 5y ago
    Even though it’s a German word it is also used in English: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/schadenfreude https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/schadenfreude . I don’t see any problem with OP using this word in their comment.
  - smcl 5y ago
    "Schadenfreude" is widely used term in English and isn't used to show off. If you didn't know if before then you are one of today's lucky 10k[0] [0] = https://xkcd.com/1053/ https://xkcd.com/1053/
- Chris2048 5y ago
  Why will it? The price of cod was rising previously, which is why the chippies started switching to haddock as the cheaper fish. Also, why is this Schadenfreude? Should people only vote out of short-term self interest, and to be sneered at if they don't?
  - smcl 5y ago
    Seeing the Tories confidently declare they will negotiate a series of treaties that will be in the UK's favour, only to be shoved around by anyone and everyone and generally being made to look like incompetent oafs is a pretty textbook example of schadenfreude no?
    - Chris2048 5y ago
      The tories? sure. I don't consider them natural brexiters though; their current leader is just a populist.
      - smcl 5y ago
        It's a bit more than the leader though, they seem pretty enthusiastic about it overall.
      - CydeWeys 5y ago
        They were the party most loudly in support of Brexit, voting for it in the largest numbers, and they were also the ones who made it happen. If that doesn't make them "natural Brexiters" then the phrase "natural Brexiters" is meaningless. They are the Brexiters, more than anyone else.
        Chris2048 5y ago
        > They were the party most loudly in support of Brexit Not the brexit party? Arguing which of the established parties was "most supportive" is like arguing who is the tallest hobbit. > they were also the ones who made it happen barely. It was the electorate that made it happen. > They are the Brexiters, more than anyone else That "anyone else" are the people that voted for it.
raverbashing 5y ago
Sounds like they're getting what they voted for.
- SirHound 5y ago
  "You won, get over it"
- azalemeth 5y ago
  Quite. How Brexit became the promised land of milk, honey and fishing rights is really something that I don't understand: it's quite clearly a Mayor Quimby-style scapegoat for lots of other things wrong with British society. My greatest regret is that none of the two major political parties are brave enough to say 'come on – this is a shit show guys'.
  - ChuckNorris89 5y ago
    >none of the two major political parties are brave enough to say 'come on – this is a shit show guys' That's exactly what Lord Buckethead said.[1] [1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6eQ0s4SBefU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6eQ0s4SBefU
  - Cullinet 5y ago
    when I stumbled upon a vast fraud involving the highest reaches of political power I was imprisoned for a order the final judge declared "this order does not exist. in fact this order never existed " neither did the very power exist to arrest me. I was mocked in court by a senior judge for merely seeking to point out that very lack of power. I won't go on but I will happily substantiate the facts that are material. the heart of the UK has been usurped and subordinated. the man who threatened me over this was the first port of call for the Japanese Prime Minister who went straight to this man ignoring Tony Blair and anyone else on I think it was the first such state visit since the war and the papers erupted the following day explaining how Japanese protocol always paid respect to the back room power as priority, before falling deathly silent.
    - jjgreen 5y ago
ChrisRR 5y ago
Who would've thought historically bad negotiators have trouble negotiating trade deals?
- toyg 5y ago
  Well, the British used to be great negotiators... when their naval muscle was unmatched, so the other party was basically negotiating under constant threat for their lives. After the rest of the world caught up, their record is indeed more checkered.
- arcturus17 5y ago
  > historically bad negotiators Historically bad negotiatiors? Have we read different histories of Britain? If anything characterizes the country, it's the fact that they've been great seafarers and traders... I'd agree however that exalting this past or viewing it with rose-tinted glasses is wrong, but saying that they are historically bad negotiators? How?
  - avaldes 5y ago
    > If anything characterizes the country, it's the fact that they've been great seafarers and traders... > I'd agree however that exalting this past or viewing it with rose-tinted glasses is wrong, but saying that they are historically bad negotiators? How? Gunboat diplomacy isn't what one would call good negotiation
- taipan100 5y ago
  Britain being "historically bad negotiators" is an objectively silly thing to say
moksly 5y ago
It’s really silly to see how there fishing industry was used in the Brexit ordeal. This is bad of course, and it’s exactly what they were told would happen, but it’s also just 32 million pounds. Compare that to the 300 billion worth of exports and wonder why fishing was ever a part of the debate at all. I mean, I know why it was. It’s a nice mom-and-pop-family is suffering from the evil EU sort of image, but man it’s just wild how manipulative the anti-EU campaigns were and how successful it turned out to be for them. The fishers are of course a magical sort of people. I mean, how could you not realise that leaving the EU would be stupid when you’re catching all your fish in Norwegian waters? Or when your entire export goes to Southern Europe because your own population mostly eats salmon and cod? Also begs to question who the hell benefitted from all this.
- dsomers 5y ago
  Who benefits from this are UK banks and ultra wealthy that don’t want to follow incoming EU regulations on money laundering and tax avoidance that were a reaction the The Panama Papers leak.
  - BartekG 5y ago
    What are the benefits for UK banks? As far as I know they are moving jobs to EU. How is that a benefit for them and not a cost and complication?
    - eptcyka 5y ago
      Moving some jobs to deal with the complication is far better than losing out on dirty money.
    - miohtama 5y ago
      We can get back to the good old business without disruptions, as pro-business MPs can make the UK regulators teethless https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/may/25/how-britain-let-russia-hide-its-dirty-money https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/may/25/how-britain-let...
  - 5y ago
fergie 5y ago
Its worth noting that the UK fishing industry is dominated by a handful of mega-trawlers that are under largely international ownership, and therefore its not clear that the UK _should_ be using its diplomatic power to seek concessions on behalf of these interests. See also "Brexit trade deal: Who really owns UK fishing quotas?" -> https://www.bbc.com/news/52420116 https://www.bbc.com/news/52420116
- fmajid 5y ago
  The best example is this article, where one trawler alone accounts for 10% of the cod sold in fish-and-chip shops, caught in Norwegian waters.
- Y-bar 5y ago
  Tangent on the stock photo in the article: Some of the cod fish on that conveyor in the first photo look very young, maybe young enough to never have spawned once. Look at the one being held, a hand can almost grip around the entire fish at the mid of its body.
  - reason-mr 5y ago
    I grew up on the east coast of the uk. When I was a kid in the 70’s my brother and I would catch huge cod right off the beach with beachcaster rods. Now he tells me there are no big fish left, only small ones, and few of those come in. He doesn’t bother fishing anymore. IMO the time for taking fish is done - we need to leave the ocean alone and let it heal. Also, we clearly have a population boom based on over exploitation of natural resources. Fish - depleted, topsoil - in bad shape, bees - in bad shape. Typical natural world bubble of a species that ate all of the available prey.
- FriedrichN 5y ago
  >£160m worth of England's fishing quota is in the hands of vessels owned by companies based in Iceland, Spain and the Netherlands, according to BBC research. >That amounts to 130,000 tonnes of fish a year and 55% of the quota's annual value in 2019. This shows how trivial the fishing industry is in the UK if you compare it to the $2.638 trillion 2020 GDP. It's truly amazing how one of the least important issues of Brexit came to be one of the most spoken of. My guess is that economics and international politics are just too complex and abstract for just about anyone to understand. So if you take something more tangible like someone literally fishing in your waters it speaks to the imagination more than things like free flow of goods and persons.
Chris2048 5y ago
Hmm, this article doesn't really spell out the balance. So, why is it a disgrace? because brits like Arctic fish? Also, "UK fleets landed fish worth £32m in Norwegian waters" - how much (£m) in fish where landed in UK waters by foreign boats as part of the quota trade? The quote about how terrible this is comes from "UK Fisheries chief executive Jane Sandell", but later is reveals Sandell owns a business that "catches around 10% of all the fish sold in the UK's chip shops" which I assume to be those arctic fish - another [1]article reveals: One trawler, which catches 10% of fish sold in chip shops, will be tied up for a year following the collapse in talks. That trawler appears to be owned by Sandells company: her firm having only 40% of the fishing opportunities of previous years Unless the entire British fishing industry fishes exclusively outside British waters, it seems a pretty big bias to proclaim the opinion of someone with such a massive stake in access to Norwegian fish. And here's another [2]article revealing a little of the British water side: £160m worth of England's fishing quota is in the hands of vessels owned by companies based in Iceland, Spain and the Netherlands Well, maybe we should freely trade our respective fishes, rather than have UK based trawlers travel all the way to the Arctic? There might even be a reduced emissions benefit somewhere in there. Edit: Here's a site some more answers: https://ukfisheries.net/about-distant-fishing/qsas https://ukfisheries.net/about-distant-fishing/qsas I was unsatisfied to the answer about why cod fishing isn't done locally, so here's an interesting [3]article: In 2019, 70% of the UK’s seafood was exported to Europe and Asia with an end value of over $2bn. .. over 90% of the cod consumed by the UK’s domestic market is imported cod from Iceland, the largest importer into the UK, is 38% more expensive than cod exported from the UK. the UK is exporting an unsustainable cod catch because British waters have been overfished for decades So, why not fix this by matching tariff on imported cod with tariffs on exported seafood (if necessary), and then learn to either fish sustainably, or learn how to trade with Norway and live with the price of (good) fish. What I do find strange, is how Britain apparently lacks the fishing industry capable of fishing their own waters, but cod is overfished in them, very selective. But again, why isn't this fixed in trade rather than quotas? [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-56940914 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-56940914 [2] https://www.bbc.com/news/52420116 https://www.bbc.com/news/52420116 [3] https://www.foodnavigator.com/Article/2020/11/16/Fishy-business-The-UK-cod-industry-is-in-a-truly-unsustainable-position https://www.foodnavigator.com/Article/2020/11/16/Fishy-busin...
altacc 5y ago
The UK thinks its fishing industry is important but Norway knows its fishing industry is important. This is not a surprise. The influence of the industry is not to be underestimated in either country but in the UK it's a small industry with a lot of emotional baggage, especially for those supporting Brexit as it's linked to the idea of territory, even though much fishing is outside of UK waters. In Norway it's a major industry, they're one of the biggest exporters in the world and it forms a large part of the country's income. There was no way that Norwegian politicians were ever going to do anything that upset the industry. Brexit was a big win for Norwegian fisheries in a zero sum game.
- piva00 5y ago
  As much emotional baggage fishing has for the UK, I believe there are much deeper cultural roots in Norway tied to fishing. I always remember a Norwegian ad, the 200 kr banknote displays a picture of a cod and Norges Bank made a really funny music video for its introduction [0]. The cultural roots in a much smaller population than the UK makes fishing not only a major industry but a big part of Norway's history and culture, I'm very sure the UK being an island has the same long history on fishing, I just don't feel it's so deeply rooted into the British national identity as it is in Norway. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2CKHH_KKGE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2CKHH_KKGE
  - altacc 5y ago
    Yes, indeed. Having lived in both countries, the fishing & farming industries are much more protected & respected in Norway than the UK. To me it seems that part of Norwegians' story about themselves is that not so long ago they were a country of farmers & fishermen, then they found oil. They're reveling in the oil wealth but still protect the farmers & fishermen.
- alfiedotwtf 5y ago
  From what I've read, the UK fishing industry was outside UK waters, to export fish to the EU. Talk about own-goal.
quijoteuniv 5y ago
This does not even seem to have reached the Norwegian media. Although an article fromladt year mention Norwegian vessel fishing 20% of their catch in Uk water
eivindga 5y ago
The Norwegian fishing industry has commented a bit on the failed talks. It seems the UK negotiators wanted to modify the long running agreement on joint zone access. Some quotes: "Unfriendly action from the British" "Norway's entry into the negotiations has been the maintenance of the traditional and historical fishing patterns Norwegian fishermen have had in British waters. - The British have responded with a number of demands and conditions that are not in line with this, and which it was impossible for Norway to accept. " "- The lack of concessions on zone access came as a bit of a surprise to us" https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https://fisk.no/fiskeri/7413-norge-og-storbritannia-avslutter-fiskeriforhandlingene-for-2021 https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https... https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https://www.fiskeribladet.no/politikk/forhandlingene-kollapset-uk-vil-sitte-igjen-som-en-av-taperne/2-1-1003713 https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https...
- dagw 5y ago
  The cynic in me might almost believe that the current UK government would prefer to fail to get a deal in loud public spectacle with a foreign government that gets them lots of newspaper coverage over quietly coming to a deal that is good for its citizens. But surely no politician would ever be that cynical.
  - meepmorp 5y ago
    I think Boris wins either way. If the Norwegians make concessions, great it’s something to brag about. If they don’t, well it’s just another EU-ish country stabbing the UK in the back.
foolmeonce 5y ago
At least the cod get a break from the UK. We've been hearing about this lovely idea by the british to go it alone since 2016? Countries should be thinking less about any potential with the UK and more about how to block any dependencies on new trade with them to be able to step out of this time sink of a drama.
PedroBatista 5y ago
Wait until the level below the ultra-elites find out EU countries aren't "quite lovely" anymore for their usual shenanigans. Some even will very shaken when they learn this isn't India and the 19th century was more than a century ago. :) On a more serious note, except for some specific ones, UK's problems are problems shared by most western societies, but handled in a comically tragic way. Also the government approved money laundering at cosmic proportions that has been going on for decades now is another big factor for the "inexplicably" low standard of life many people have compared to what they think they would have. Not only those deals with the many devils have a cost but also an opportunity cost in time wasted not doing any meaningful reforms deluding the population into keep doing the rat race and when they get nothing, blame the EU.
jacknews 5y ago
Hunting wild animals for food, especially at the incredible industrial scale that we currently do, is not sustainable, and should be banned in any case.

51 points by martpie 5y ago

The Schadenfreude of seeing this predominantly Brexit crowd getting stuffed is tinged with sadness that the price of cod & chips will soon be through the roof.

Arnt 5y ago
It shouldn't affect prices that much. The cost of fishing something in Norwegian waters, landing it and transporting it from the port to Bristol/Leicester/Inverness doesn't really depend on whether it's a Norwegian or British trawler and port. I want to digress, though. For several decades, Britain's approach to negotiations was to let the EU do it, and sometimes get an excetption that the Germans pay for. That's been a lot simpler than "real" negotiations between states, and it sounds as if they're really out of practice. As was also visible last week, when an Australian minister was to be put "on an uncomfortable chair" and made to sign a deal. Of course the Australian arrived with a ready offer and willing to sign at once, and of course the British signed what the Australian wanted. Experienced negotiators do not signal being in a hurry.
- vesinisa 5y ago
  As an EU citizen, I hate to say this but I think Johnson and his bunch did really well for UK in the Brexit negotiations. They basically got everything that they wanted (free trade, state aid, control over immigration) while EU bascially lost on all fronts and is now weaker than ever. Only place where EU managed to get a concession was extending the deadline until the French fishermen have to quit fishing in British waters. The EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier was of course a Frenchman, so good old eurocronyism at work once again.
  - tonyedgecombe 5y ago
    They only got 20% of what they wanted on free trade, there is nothing on services which make up most of the UK economy. Goods is only 20% and we are a net importer. I don't understand the issues about state aid, we were already at the bottom of the league table interns of doling out aid to business. We had plenty of room to expand that already if we wanted. Right now the most likely outcome of the whole thing is the break up of the United Kingdom. The whole thing was a mess from beginning to end (not that it has ended yet).
    - Chris2048 5y ago
      > the break up of the United Kingdom Wholly? Or just Scotland? I can't see anyone else leaving, and I'm not sure the scots will either.
      - lil_cain 5y ago
        Scotland, and NI. Which are 2/3 of the constituent "kingdoms" that were united to form the "United Kingdom". Of course, it might not happen, but odds are rather better, in both cases, than they were pre Brexit. Ninja Edit: This isn't to try and minimise the importance of Wales, just a recognition that at the time of the creation of the UK, the famous Encyclopaedia Britannica entry (For Wales, see England) wouldn't have been controversial in most of the UK. But even in Wales, Plaid have done very well, and become much more radical, as a result of Brexit.
        Chris2048 5y ago
        Nope, never. NI might want to leave, but it can't leave because its too dependant on the UK economically.
        lil_cain 5y ago
        More so than Ireland was in 1921? And will that continue to be the case, with the NIP imposing barriers between it & GB?
  - zibzab 5y ago
    Even if that was true, remember that UK had for years been the main cause of fights within EU. The British approach to making a deal was "this is a disaster, we should have be given at least twice that". After 30 years of that, a divorce was for the best solution for both sides. So whatever the cost, it was worth it.
  - raverbashing 5y ago
    Well they got what Boris/Tory wanted. "Freeish" trade (more like facilitated trade, not free and outside the customs union - which, to be fair, is markedly better than No Deal) - The City of London risks losing clearance/passporting rights - The Ireland/Northern Ireland issues are on fire again - Yes they got control of "immigration" (that they always had) and to the shock of some UK retirees in Spain that is reciprocal - Anyone that exports/imports from the EU (especially more regulated stuff like food, etc) is having to work around the bureaucracy (which shouldn't have surprised anyone that knows a bit about how exports/imports work) https://www.politico.eu/article/a-brexit-lesson-eus-benefits-largely-invisible-hurt-to-lose-single-market-boris-johnson/ https://www.politico.eu/article/a-brexit-lesson-eus-benefits... - I've been seeing more job offers from the UK listed as remote (hah so you mean no more EU developers in place without visas? Good luck then)
    - hlag 5y ago
      That may all be true, but the EU has not been beneficial for the middle and working classes. It exists to drive down wages, import cheap labor, facilitate business transactions and drive up the stock market. So I guess the voters thought it couldn't get any worse. Perhaps people will be able to afford a house again in 20 years.
    - sgt101 5y ago
      The Northern Irish issue is largely due to the failure of the police and the NI executive to police this event. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-53275733 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-53275733
  - lil_cain 5y ago
    I don't think this is true. Firstly they didn't get free trade - there are tariffs, rules of origin, and a lack of equivalence for SPS & product safety rules. The last one is especially egregious currently, because the UK still has exactly the same agricultural rules it did when it was a member. Secondly, there is now a customs border in the UK. That's a fairly gigantic offensive ask for the E.U., which they largely succeeded in. Thirdly, the UK got significantly less freedom on state aid than it wanted (which is of course, not surprising, given that the freedom they wanted was "We do whatever we want"). They got control over immigration. Of course, as a consequence of this, so did we, and if you read the UK press, they're currently finding out that that's a thing that cuts both ways (and they're not massively happy about this).
  - rvba 5y ago
    UK got nothing for services.
  - emptyfile 5y ago
    You're very badly misinformed. How badly the UK did in the negotiations can be seen in the concessions won by the EU with the NI protocol. The actual trade deal covers goods where the UK has a large trade deficit and does not cover services at all. Also the EU is starting to impose tariffs and checks on goods coming out of the UK, while the UK won't do the same for some time as their border control systems aren't ready and they're missing some 40 000 customs agents. So even as exporters are feeling the pain, the actual mangling of supply chains for british importers is still to come. While the best case scenario for the EU would've been the UK staying in the customs union, with that option closed this is as good as it gets. There are no winners in Brexit, only relative losers.
    - Arnt 5y ago
      What NI concessions are those? AFAICT Britain conceded nothing that it wasn't already required to do by the Good Friday agreement. BTW, I don't agree about those checks. Skipping those would not be doable for the EU. Dozens of countries have MFN treaties with the EU. If the EU were to offer Britain anything that those countries aren't offered (such as not checking imports/exports) then all of those trade treaties would need to be renegotiated, because those countries would no longer be most favoured. IIRC some sixty countries' parliaments would have to vote on the resulting treaty changes. That's too much to be doable.
    - vesinisa 5y ago
      The Northern Ireland situation was simply resolved the only way it could be. If there was some better outcome for the UK that would have not spoiled the entire integrity of the EU, I am sure it would have been allowed. But no matter how good Johnson's team was in extracting concessions from the EU, even they can not move mountains nor islands, or otherwise change hard geographical realities.
  - BartekG 5y ago
    As a EU citizen I think UK lost on all fronts - food industry, financial sector, manufacturing, trade, foreign policy, and others. The losses in some of those fields are already visible, in others not yet.
- estaseuropano 5y ago
  Britain had an outsized influence in the EU, so in fact the strategy was to extract EU-internal horsetrading on the 'negotiating mandate' strong demands for their own position which then became the EU position backed by the EU's entire weight. Also the last time UK had to negotiate on their own it's economy was still bigger than China's. The world has changed and Brexiteers hadn't noticed that their lack of influence was not the EU's fault but rather a general shift of power to Asia.
  - detaro 5y ago
    > Britain had an outsized influence in the EU Something which large parts of the British public and reportedly even of the politicians didn't really realize or appreciate, because Brussels was always a derided side-show, to a higher degree than for most other countries.
    - fmajid 5y ago
      More precisely the British were allowed to take point on a number of laissez-faire positions when it was politically or diplomatically awkward for others like the Dutch or Germans to do so. Playing bad cop, essentially.
  - Chris2048 5y ago
    > Brexiteers hadn't noticed that.. I'm getting sick of people talking on behalf of brexiters, or what they know/think/believe - this colonial reference is just another "little Englander" smear.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - croon 5y ago
      Well, the alternative is that they had noticed it, which is worse.
      - Chris2048 5y ago
pydry 5y ago
I wouldn't laugh too hard. The angrier they get at seeing their livelihoods impacted the more they will lash out politically. We got a taste of what's inside that Pandora's box with Farage.
- osrec 5y ago
  With Farage, the phrase "empty vessels make the most noise" comes to mind. Apparently he was a loud mouthed joker at school too, who just wanted to say something that would grab people's attention. I'm somewhat thankful for him highlighting the racist, xenophobic streak in certain parts of the UK - it just happened to be the topic that got him the most attention. Honestly, if he thought supporting immigrants would get him the most controversy/support/attention, he'd be doing that in a hurry.
  - pydry 5y ago
    I agree. He was a symptomatic of the underlying problems rather than being the problem himself. Nonetheless, despite him being skewered by the UK Tory party successfully cosplaying as UKIP, he's a sure sign that a competent populist fascist could command a dangerous level of support - especially among military personnel. This doesn't bode well for British democracy.
callamdelaney 5y ago
I imagine you're now filled with self satisfaction after using some German word I had to google. Yes; you are certainly smarter than Brexit voters, where shall I send your golden star?
- Item_Boring 5y ago
  Even though it’s a German word it is also used in English: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/schadenfreude https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/schadenfreude . I don’t see any problem with OP using this word in their comment.
- smcl 5y ago
  "Schadenfreude" is widely used term in English and isn't used to show off. If you didn't know if before then you are one of today's lucky 10k[0] [0] = https://xkcd.com/1053/ https://xkcd.com/1053/
Chris2048 5y ago
Why will it? The price of cod was rising previously, which is why the chippies started switching to haddock as the cheaper fish. Also, why is this Schadenfreude? Should people only vote out of short-term self interest, and to be sneered at if they don't?
- smcl 5y ago
  Seeing the Tories confidently declare they will negotiate a series of treaties that will be in the UK's favour, only to be shoved around by anyone and everyone and generally being made to look like incompetent oafs is a pretty textbook example of schadenfreude no?
  - Chris2048 5y ago
    The tories? sure. I don't consider them natural brexiters though; their current leader is just a populist.
    - smcl 5y ago
      It's a bit more than the leader though, they seem pretty enthusiastic about it overall.
    - CydeWeys 5y ago
      They were the party most loudly in support of Brexit, voting for it in the largest numbers, and they were also the ones who made it happen. If that doesn't make them "natural Brexiters" then the phrase "natural Brexiters" is meaningless. They are the Brexiters, more than anyone else.
      - Chris2048 5y ago
        > They were the party most loudly in support of Brexit Not the brexit party? Arguing which of the established parties was "most supportive" is like arguing who is the tallest hobbit. > they were also the ones who made it happen barely. It was the electorate that made it happen. > They are the Brexiters, more than anyone else That "anyone else" are the people that voted for it.

raverbashing 5y ago

Sounds like they're getting what they voted for.

SirHound 5y ago
"You won, get over it"
azalemeth 5y ago
Quite. How Brexit became the promised land of milk, honey and fishing rights is really something that I don't understand: it's quite clearly a Mayor Quimby-style scapegoat for lots of other things wrong with British society. My greatest regret is that none of the two major political parties are brave enough to say 'come on – this is a shit show guys'.
- ChuckNorris89 5y ago
  >none of the two major political parties are brave enough to say 'come on – this is a shit show guys' That's exactly what Lord Buckethead said.[1] [1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6eQ0s4SBefU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6eQ0s4SBefU
- Cullinet 5y ago
  when I stumbled upon a vast fraud involving the highest reaches of political power I was imprisoned for a order the final judge declared "this order does not exist. in fact this order never existed " neither did the very power exist to arrest me. I was mocked in court by a senior judge for merely seeking to point out that very lack of power. I won't go on but I will happily substantiate the facts that are material. the heart of the UK has been usurped and subordinated. the man who threatened me over this was the first port of call for the Japanese Prime Minister who went straight to this man ignoring Tony Blair and anyone else on I think it was the first such state visit since the war and the papers erupted the following day explaining how Japanese protocol always paid respect to the back room power as priority, before falling deathly silent.
  - jjgreen 5y ago

ChrisRR 5y ago

Who would've thought historically bad negotiators have trouble negotiating trade deals?

toyg 5y ago
Well, the British used to be great negotiators... when their naval muscle was unmatched, so the other party was basically negotiating under constant threat for their lives. After the rest of the world caught up, their record is indeed more checkered.
arcturus17 5y ago
> historically bad negotiators Historically bad negotiatiors? Have we read different histories of Britain? If anything characterizes the country, it's the fact that they've been great seafarers and traders... I'd agree however that exalting this past or viewing it with rose-tinted glasses is wrong, but saying that they are historically bad negotiators? How?
- avaldes 5y ago
  > If anything characterizes the country, it's the fact that they've been great seafarers and traders... > I'd agree however that exalting this past or viewing it with rose-tinted glasses is wrong, but saying that they are historically bad negotiators? How? Gunboat diplomacy isn't what one would call good negotiation
taipan100 5y ago
Britain being "historically bad negotiators" is an objectively silly thing to say

moksly 5y ago

It’s really silly to see how there fishing industry was used in the Brexit ordeal. This is bad of course, and it’s exactly what they were told would happen, but it’s also just 32 million pounds. Compare that to the 300 billion worth of exports and wonder why fishing was ever a part of the debate at all. I mean, I know why it was. It’s a nice mom-and-pop-family is suffering from the evil EU sort of image, but man it’s just wild how manipulative the anti-EU campaigns were and how successful it turned out to be for them. The fishers are of course a magical sort of people. I mean, how could you not realise that leaving the EU would be stupid when you’re catching all your fish in Norwegian waters? Or when your entire export goes to Southern Europe because your own population mostly eats salmon and cod? Also begs to question who the hell benefitted from all this.

dsomers 5y ago
Who benefits from this are UK banks and ultra wealthy that don’t want to follow incoming EU regulations on money laundering and tax avoidance that were a reaction the The Panama Papers leak.
- BartekG 5y ago
  What are the benefits for UK banks? As far as I know they are moving jobs to EU. How is that a benefit for them and not a cost and complication?
  - eptcyka 5y ago
    Moving some jobs to deal with the complication is far better than losing out on dirty money.
  - miohtama 5y ago
    We can get back to the good old business without disruptions, as pro-business MPs can make the UK regulators teethless https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/may/25/how-britain-let-russia-hide-its-dirty-money https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/may/25/how-britain-let...
- 5y ago

fergie 5y ago

Its worth noting that the UK fishing industry is dominated by a handful of mega-trawlers that are under largely international ownership, and therefore its not clear that the UK _should_ be using its diplomatic power to seek concessions on behalf of these interests. See also "Brexit trade deal: Who really owns UK fishing quotas?" -> https://www.bbc.com/news/52420116 https://www.bbc.com/news/52420116

fmajid 5y ago
The best example is this article, where one trawler alone accounts for 10% of the cod sold in fish-and-chip shops, caught in Norwegian waters.
Y-bar 5y ago
Tangent on the stock photo in the article: Some of the cod fish on that conveyor in the first photo look very young, maybe young enough to never have spawned once. Look at the one being held, a hand can almost grip around the entire fish at the mid of its body.
- reason-mr 5y ago
  I grew up on the east coast of the uk. When I was a kid in the 70’s my brother and I would catch huge cod right off the beach with beachcaster rods. Now he tells me there are no big fish left, only small ones, and few of those come in. He doesn’t bother fishing anymore. IMO the time for taking fish is done - we need to leave the ocean alone and let it heal. Also, we clearly have a population boom based on over exploitation of natural resources. Fish - depleted, topsoil - in bad shape, bees - in bad shape. Typical natural world bubble of a species that ate all of the available prey.
FriedrichN 5y ago
>£160m worth of England's fishing quota is in the hands of vessels owned by companies based in Iceland, Spain and the Netherlands, according to BBC research. >That amounts to 130,000 tonnes of fish a year and 55% of the quota's annual value in 2019. This shows how trivial the fishing industry is in the UK if you compare it to the $2.638 trillion 2020 GDP. It's truly amazing how one of the least important issues of Brexit came to be one of the most spoken of. My guess is that economics and international politics are just too complex and abstract for just about anyone to understand. So if you take something more tangible like someone literally fishing in your waters it speaks to the imagination more than things like free flow of goods and persons.

Chris2048 5y ago

Hmm, this article doesn't really spell out the balance. So, why is it a disgrace? because brits like Arctic fish? Also, "UK fleets landed fish worth £32m in Norwegian waters" - how much (£m) in fish where landed in UK waters by foreign boats as part of the quota trade? The quote about how terrible this is comes from "UK Fisheries chief executive Jane Sandell", but later is reveals Sandell owns a business that "catches around 10% of all the fish sold in the UK's chip shops" which I assume to be those arctic fish - another [1]article reveals: One trawler, which catches 10% of fish sold in chip shops, will be tied up for a year following the collapse in talks. That trawler appears to be owned by Sandells company: her firm having only 40% of the fishing opportunities of previous years Unless the entire British fishing industry fishes exclusively outside British waters, it seems a pretty big bias to proclaim the opinion of someone with such a massive stake in access to Norwegian fish. And here's another [2]article revealing a little of the British water side: £160m worth of England's fishing quota is in the hands of vessels owned by companies based in Iceland, Spain and the Netherlands Well, maybe we should freely trade our respective fishes, rather than have UK based trawlers travel all the way to the Arctic? There might even be a reduced emissions benefit somewhere in there. Edit: Here's a site some more answers: https://ukfisheries.net/about-distant-fishing/qsas https://ukfisheries.net/about-distant-fishing/qsas I was unsatisfied to the answer about why cod fishing isn't done locally, so here's an interesting [3]article: In 2019, 70% of the UK’s seafood was exported to Europe and Asia with an end value of over $2bn. .. over 90% of the cod consumed by the UK’s domestic market is imported cod from Iceland, the largest importer into the UK, is 38% more expensive than cod exported from the UK. the UK is exporting an unsustainable cod catch because British waters have been overfished for decades So, why not fix this by matching tariff on imported cod with tariffs on exported seafood (if necessary), and then learn to either fish sustainably, or learn how to trade with Norway and live with the price of (good) fish. What I do find strange, is how Britain apparently lacks the fishing industry capable of fishing their own waters, but cod is overfished in them, very selective. But again, why isn't this fixed in trade rather than quotas? [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-56940914 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-56940914 [2] https://www.bbc.com/news/52420116 https://www.bbc.com/news/52420116 [3] https://www.foodnavigator.com/Article/2020/11/16/Fishy-business-The-UK-cod-industry-is-in-a-truly-unsustainable-position https://www.foodnavigator.com/Article/2020/11/16/Fishy-busin...

altacc 5y ago

The UK thinks its fishing industry is important but Norway knows its fishing industry is important. This is not a surprise. The influence of the industry is not to be underestimated in either country but in the UK it's a small industry with a lot of emotional baggage, especially for those supporting Brexit as it's linked to the idea of territory, even though much fishing is outside of UK waters. In Norway it's a major industry, they're one of the biggest exporters in the world and it forms a large part of the country's income. There was no way that Norwegian politicians were ever going to do anything that upset the industry. Brexit was a big win for Norwegian fisheries in a zero sum game.

piva00 5y ago
As much emotional baggage fishing has for the UK, I believe there are much deeper cultural roots in Norway tied to fishing. I always remember a Norwegian ad, the 200 kr banknote displays a picture of a cod and Norges Bank made a really funny music video for its introduction [0]. The cultural roots in a much smaller population than the UK makes fishing not only a major industry but a big part of Norway's history and culture, I'm very sure the UK being an island has the same long history on fishing, I just don't feel it's so deeply rooted into the British national identity as it is in Norway. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2CKHH_KKGE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2CKHH_KKGE
- altacc 5y ago
  Yes, indeed. Having lived in both countries, the fishing & farming industries are much more protected & respected in Norway than the UK. To me it seems that part of Norwegians' story about themselves is that not so long ago they were a country of farmers & fishermen, then they found oil. They're reveling in the oil wealth but still protect the farmers & fishermen.
alfiedotwtf 5y ago
From what I've read, the UK fishing industry was outside UK waters, to export fish to the EU. Talk about own-goal.

quijoteuniv 5y ago

This does not even seem to have reached the Norwegian media. Although an article fromladt year mention Norwegian vessel fishing 20% of their catch in Uk water

eivindga 5y ago

The Norwegian fishing industry has commented a bit on the failed talks. It seems the UK negotiators wanted to modify the long running agreement on joint zone access. Some quotes: "Unfriendly action from the British" "Norway's entry into the negotiations has been the maintenance of the traditional and historical fishing patterns Norwegian fishermen have had in British waters. - The British have responded with a number of demands and conditions that are not in line with this, and which it was impossible for Norway to accept. " "- The lack of concessions on zone access came as a bit of a surprise to us" https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https://fisk.no/fiskeri/7413-norge-og-storbritannia-avslutter-fiskeriforhandlingene-for-2021 https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https... https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https://www.fiskeribladet.no/politikk/forhandlingene-kollapset-uk-vil-sitte-igjen-som-en-av-taperne/2-1-1003713 https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https...

dagw 5y ago
The cynic in me might almost believe that the current UK government would prefer to fail to get a deal in loud public spectacle with a foreign government that gets them lots of newspaper coverage over quietly coming to a deal that is good for its citizens. But surely no politician would ever be that cynical.
- meepmorp 5y ago
  I think Boris wins either way. If the Norwegians make concessions, great it’s something to brag about. If they don’t, well it’s just another EU-ish country stabbing the UK in the back.

foolmeonce 5y ago

At least the cod get a break from the UK. We've been hearing about this lovely idea by the british to go it alone since 2016? Countries should be thinking less about any potential with the UK and more about how to block any dependencies on new trade with them to be able to step out of this time sink of a drama.

PedroBatista 5y ago

Wait until the level below the ultra-elites find out EU countries aren't "quite lovely" anymore for their usual shenanigans. Some even will very shaken when they learn this isn't India and the 19th century was more than a century ago. :) On a more serious note, except for some specific ones, UK's problems are problems shared by most western societies, but handled in a comically tragic way. Also the government approved money laundering at cosmic proportions that has been going on for decades now is another big factor for the "inexplicably" low standard of life many people have compared to what they think they would have. Not only those deals with the many devils have a cost but also an opportunity cost in time wasted not doing any meaningful reforms deluding the population into keep doing the rat race and when they get nothing, blame the EU.

jacknews 5y ago

Hunting wild animals for food, especially at the incredible industrial scale that we currently do, is not sustainable, and should be banned in any case.