Nigel Farage was on the European Parliament Fishing Committee and [...] attended one out of 43 meetings

[ipsogenix]

Fantastic quote from Bob Geldof about Nigel Farage:

"You were on the European Parliament Fishing Committee and you attended one out of 43 meetings."

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36537180

Did you actually bother to listen to the actual points he made?

Why are you always so rude about other posters that disagree with you?

Completely unnecessary.

To answer your question yes I did listen to it all so you are wrong..

He does not at any point call leave voters creationists. Not once. He compares the official campaign's claims about points of EU / UK law, which they present as fact, to other untrue statements, such as creationism being a scientific theory.

You are trying to spin the message because the message does not suit your agenda. But this video has no spin. Not like the rest of this nasty campaign. It's a clear, dispassionate analysis of some of the key campaign issues. If you are undecided, it's well worth a watch.

Of course Farage claimed expenses for all the meetings he didn't go to as well.
He'll miss that source of income, no doubt, but I doubt he's thought that far ahead.

You are trying to spin the message because the message does not suit your agenda. But this video has no spin.

Of course it does. If the leave campaign's claims are disputed and compared to creationism not being scientific, they should obviously give the remain side's spurious claims equal treatment.

itinerary None of the spurious claims are included in this video - did you watch it? It's basically an overview of the legal situation.

I suspect that the Professor is referring to things like the Leave Defence Minister lying again about the Turkey veto, the totally made up 350 million as well as claims we'd easily set up trade. He explains for example how the 2 years 'divorce' works, and how legally we'd need to start from scratch at the WTO.

Plus I have had that sensation when people say to me things like, oh but we don't elect MEPs... !?

Ah right...

Of course the EU always follows its own rules doesn't it....

Crikey youd think a professor would know of the numerous times we have been over ruled by European courts despite having legal protections in place.

They've basically voted for UKIP to have a jolly time and lots of liquid lumches making controversial statements rather than working for the voter. And getting a rather nice salary with it! Not a bad gig I guess!

In fact maybe thats why UKIP is making a hash of things right now with that evil poster etc. Perhaps they're worried about their salaries! (Wink)

One thing that is often overlooked when discussing primary industries is the multiplier effect upon the wider economy.

Hence should an extra £1m of cod be caught in UK waters this does not increase GDP by £1m, it is a lot closer to £10m and may be far higher. This is due to the value added.

For instance that £1m worth of cod becomes roughly £7m once processed and packaged. Indeed the processing and packaging employs far more people than the actual fishing. This is increased further once it is retailed.

If that £1m initial worth of cod ends up in a fish and chip shop then it's value is considerably higher still, and helps to employ people both in the retail and processing side well inland and away from the actual ports.

As of 2013 we were having to import about £400 million worth of cod per year. As of next year our overall quota for cod would be only 17% of the EU total....

Hence merely being self sufficient would result in billions per year of savings.

It goes further though. Over the last 40 years those processing plants had little reason to set up in the UK due to our quotas being low. Made sense for them to be based close to wherever the fish were actually landed.

Returning control of our waters would not just see an increase in exports, an almost complete reduction in EU imports ( several £billion here currently where we have to buy our own fish back!) and more jobs at sea. It would also mean that the processing, transport, finance and associated activities would return to the UK.

Where did you get those figures from Spin? They are very detailed- could you include the source please?

The quota was from EU documentation for year 2017, import statistics from the ONS.

The multiplier effect from an analysis of input-output forces in the market published by a non-departmental governing body.

So you're saying the British fishing companies which rent their British quota to foreign companies are harming the processing industries as well?

Could you post the link or the name of the organisation so I can read it? Thanks

I don't personally know that British companies rent their quota out, that strikes me as a recent defamation concocted by the remain campaign.

Indeed I can't see that it would be necessary. we are unable to discriminate on who gets to use our quota by geographic location or nationality. Why bother to rent when a foreign firm can just apply for it in the first instance? Every attempt to prevent this results in the European courts awarding damages against us.

But yes, the net effect of having our fish stolen and landed on the continent for the last 33 years is that it will be processed there rather than in the UK.

Hence processing factories, markets, logistics chains in Spain etc that wouldn't otherwise exist there.

Greenpeace statement: Foreign businesses use nearly half of England’s fishing quota.

"The scale of foreign dominance in fishing quota is revealed today by a Greenpeace investigation which shows that 43% of England’s fishing quota is held by foreign controlled fishing businesses.

It exposes the high concentration of quota in the hands of a few industrial fishing companies, many of them foreign controlled:

- Five largest foreign controlled vessels hold 32 per cent of the English quota
- One Dutch-controlled vessel holds 23 per cent of the English quota
- Five vessels hold 20 per cent of the UK quota
- The small scale fleet make up four fifths of the entire UK fishing fleet and has just 4 per cent of the UK’s quota^

The analysis shows the government gives just five industrial fishing vessels five times more quota than the small scale fishing fleet, which make up nearly 80 per cent of the UK's fleet.

That'll be the same Greenpeace that Brexiters were citing to support some other part of their campaign.

Oh fgs this is nonsense. We're going to screw everyone else's jobs and the economy order to get back a few low paying, zero hours contracts fish-gutting jobs? Screw retail, media, technology, financial services, advertising, manufacturing, the public sector, professional services etc etc. It's all about fish.

From the same statement in 2014, ie long before any referendum was announced:

Many blamed their lack of quota and struggle for survival on the European legislation, the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). However, the CFP was reformed last year, and now requires national governments to prioritise giving quota to fishing businesses which contribute most to coastal economies and fish using low impact methods, which better protect marine life.

Greenpeace and low impact fishermen are today calling on the UK government to urgently implement the reformed legislation. This would lead to a re-prioritisation of quota in favour of the smaller scale fishermen who fish off the coastline of the UK.

Kirk Stribling, a small scale fisherman and business owner from Aldeburgh in Suffolk,
"The government is not giving a fair share of quota to local fishermen who look after the sea and our communities. We fish sustainably and seasonally and we benefit our communities by selling our catch to local fish mongers and restaurants; we bring business to local net makers, boat builders and engineering companies and we keep tourism going. But instead of giving us the quota we, and our communities, need to survive, the government is choosing to give huge quantities of quota to industrial fishing businesses. That costs us jobs here but the government can put it right by implementing the Common Fisheries Policy."

That's hilarious - yet again showing that our own government at home is to blame, not the EU.

Not hilarious for the fishermen though. They can't get the situation fixed, because the Tory press lies to them about what the situation actually is while our useless elected British politicians get off scot free.

Can't see anything about our fishermen renting their quota out.

Maybe the government could do more, though I rather suspect they merely know they would be over ruled by the European Court as they have been on every occasion in the past.

Still why bother getting 32% of 17% back when we can have 100%?

"Oh fgs this is nonsense. We're going to screw everyone else's jobs and the economy order to get back a few low paying, zero hours contracts fish-gutting jobs?

Taking back control of our national resources in an ecologically friendly way wouldn't screw anyone over and would revive the fortunes of many impoverished rural communities.

Is it JP Morgan or Goldman Sachs you work for? :)

It's not even that long a thread. The Greenpeace statement about the owners of one of the Farage Flotilla boats renting out quota for a half a million quid is at Thu 16-Jun-16 07:41:20.

I'll link it again though: www.greenpeace.org.uk/media/press-releases/brexit-flotilla’s-star-trawler-was-involved-£63m-fishing-fraud-20160615
The beneficial owner of the other large trawler, the 40-metre-long Atlantic Challenge, is Caley Fisheries, which posted a healthy turnover of £18m in 2014, including over a half a million pound from renting out fishing quota.

"British fishing companies which rent their British quota to foreign companies"

To whom?

The article you linked to merely says rented out, nothing about foreign fishermen in there.

You and your friends seem to be spectacularly missing the point here. Brexit would mean that we didn't have a quota, never mind one to rent out.

It is our fish. :)

It's also nice that you have a fluffy picture of ecologically friendly fisherfolk sailing off hand-in-hand into the sunset.

In reality, the fishers' organisations fought tooth and nail against restrictions for sustainability.

Here we are in 2001: Fishermen condemn quota cuts
Fisheries minister, Elliot Morley, said: "We have no choice but to make cuts because if we didn't some fish stocks would collapse. We know that very well. We don't have a great deal of choice about this." The government says that historically heavy fishing has helped to exhaust stocks. Modern boats are increasingly efficient and are catching more fish. Fishermen say they want to reduce the pressure on stocks but insist their industry cannot cope with deep cuts in quotas.
...
"British fishermen catch barely a third of the cod they were landing 30 years ago. The fish are smaller as well as being more costly. They are the warning signs of a population of fish closer than ever to exhaustion."

And here we are in 2013: Europe fish stocks 'heading for recovery', study claims.
In 2011, for the first time, they say, the majority of fish stocks were being fished sustainably - the result of reforms put in place in 2002.
...
"In the last few decades there has been some success at reducing fleet size and the number of days that vessels fish for. But that has to stay that way - if you don't do that things will just deteriorate to where they were in the past. Having got to where we are, we don't want to just take the brakes off and expand again."

It's been absolutely brutal for many working in the industry. But the choices were to cut capacity or have the whole industry die. Ghastly for those involved, like any industry restructuring, especially those affecting a whole community. But unlike much of the industrial restructuring, not merely the whim of accountants.

It's breath-taking naivety (at best) to claim that quotas are caused by the EU, and will disappear with Brexit. The EU is the forum we currently use to negotiate quotas for sustainable fishing. If we leave the EU, we will still have to negotiate international fishing quotas. Indeed the EU will be one of the parties we will be negotiating with.

I work for a small business you've never heard of. I'm not a banker or any other vilified profession. I'm not in politics. I don't depend on EU funding even indirectly.

On economic grounds, It's not worth the risk just for some fish.