Off Topic The EU thread ... first 100 weeks

[ForestHillBilly]

I hear the French are going to cut off the electricity supply to the Channel Islands, so we're sending in the Royal Navy!

Post-Brexit relations reach a new high
Remember Trafalgar

Ridiculous that France ever owned it in the first place, thanks to Maggie's privatisation policy.

 

[Butterfield]

You must log in or register to see media

 

[The Penguin]

I imagine the usual suspects in the tabloid press are trying to whip up anti-French hysteria, with Boris the hero Brit standing against Johnny Foreigner. Privatisation resulted in the electricity industry still being state-owned, except that it was owned by a foreign state instead of the UK.

 

[Ubedizzy]

Maybe I’ve misunderstood this.

I thought this is happening because the French have no longer got the same access that they had when we were a member of the EU. Unfortunately for them we are NOT now a member of the EU, because that’s what the biggest democratic vote in our history decided, so things have changed.

Whether people are happy with that or not is irrelevant. We have left and therefore the rules are different.

But of course the French and EU won’t just accept that, so as usual revert to threats and unlawful action, which is typical of the attitude of the militant people involved. Threatening an unlawful blockade of a free port and threatening to cut electricity supplies with all the inherent danger that would bring and thus breaking a lawful contract which has got nothing to do with fishing licences. Typical.

I hope those patrol boats have got plenty of ammunition on board for their 30mm cannons and 762 machine guns.

How the boys who gave up their lives on the beaches to free that ungrateful nation must be turning in their graves.

Why did we bother ? And is this how to repay the nation that freed you ?

Mother of God.

 

[The Penguin]

You must log in or register to see media

Well worth reading, casts some light on the situation with some facts which aren't being reported.

 

[Ubedizzy]

Response from the Jersey Fishermans Association president.....

He said: ‘The EU have signed up to the [post-Brexit] Trade and Co-operation Agreement which states that Jersey must recognise the extent of previous fishing in our waters. The restrictions on the new licences cover what the French were already doing in our waters and are only preventing them from expanding their fishing efforts, which is needed if we are going to have sustainability in our waters.

‘A point that is being missed is that Jersey boats do not have licences to fish in French waters – we are restricted to our own territorial waters while they can use ours, if any restrictions are placed on their own.’

Mr Thompson also highlighted how the approved 41 French vessels had been given a licence for free and urged Jersey’s government not to give in to the French.

‘Our boats would be charged £250,000 if they were to have something similar. Our advice to ministers is that they should not capitulate to these intimidation and bullying tactics that are being used,’ he said.

‘If we do capitulate now then they are just going to do the same thing every time we try to apply some form of management to make our waters sustainable.’

Regardless of who is right and wrong, or whether both or neither are right or wrong, this is basically a trade dispute brought about by lawful changes as an indirect result of Brexit. This was in turn brought about by the largest democratic vote in our long history. It is valid, it is just and it is fact.

The French need to negotiate fairly and calmly.

Threatening blockades and to cut electricity supplies is not fair and it is not calm. It is typical of the actions of a spoilt 7 year old who can no longer get his own way.

Best thing to do with a spoilt 7 year old who is having a tantrum cos he can't get his own way ? Give him a quick smack and explain why. Over to the Royal Navy.

 

[The Penguin]

Response from the Jersey Fishermans Association president.....

He said: ‘The EU have signed up to the [post-Brexit] Trade and Co-operation Agreement which states that Jersey must recognise the extent of previous fishing in our waters. The restrictions on the new licences cover what the French were already doing in our waters and are only preventing them from expanding their fishing efforts, which is needed if we are going to have sustainability in our waters.

‘A point that is being missed is that Jersey boats do not have licences to fish in French waters – we are restricted to our own territorial waters while they can use ours, if any restrictions are placed on their own.’

Mr Thompson also highlighted how the approved 41 French vessels had been given a licence for free and urged Jersey’s government not to give in to the French.

‘Our boats would be charged £250,000 if they were to have something similar. Our advice to ministers is that they should not capitulate to these intimidation and bullying tactics that are being used,’ he said.

‘If we do capitulate now then they are just going to do the same thing every time we try to apply some form of management to make our waters sustainable.’

Regardless of who is right and wrong, or whether both or neither are right or wrong, this is basically a trade dispute brought about by lawful changes as an indirect result of Brexit. This was in turn brought about by the largest democratic vote in our long history. It is valid, it is just and it is fact.

The French need to negotiate fairly and calmly.

Threatening blockades and to cut electricity supplies is not fair and it is not calm. It is typical of the actions of a spoilt 7 year old who can no longer get his own way.

Best thing to do with a spoilt 7 year old who is having a tantrum cos he can't get his own way ? Give him a quick smack and explain why. Over to the Royal Navy.

Who granted the 41 vessels free licences? And who agreed to it? Clearly the situation is imbalanced and the Jersey fishermen have a genuine grievance, how did it come about?

 

[Ubedizzy]

Who granted the 41 vessels free licences? And who agreed to it? Clearly the situation is imbalanced and the Jersey fishermen have a genuine grievance, how did it come about?

Not sure who you mean by "the Jersey fishermen" ? Do you mean the majority of them as represented by the president of the Jersey Fishermans Association or the individual, who is clearly anti-Tory, anti-Brexit, anti-democratic, but has an active Twatter account ?

The licences were lawfully issued to those who could comply with the lawful conditions attached to them. Others were not issued as the boats can't comply with the conditions. That will reduce the number of French fisherman who can fish there, which is the whole point, in order to preserve stocks and make the industry sustainable. The point is we are no longer part of the CFP so its up to us or Jersey to issue them however we/they see fit. Some will benefit, some will lose but as long as its lawful then that's how democracy works.

In my opinion the rights and wrongs of these decisions are irrelevant, as long as they comply with the rules and laws which govern them.

What is indisputably wrong is the idea that because a decision or a law doesn't suit you, its ok for you to make threats, illegally block ports, and threaten to breach a lawfully binding contract to supply electricity in order to force through your view.

That's not democracy. That's bordering on anarchy, or dictatorship if it's backed by a government.

 

[The Penguin]

Boris has already shafted our own fishermen by promising them the earth then delivering scraps. A shame they are taking it so quietly.

 

[The Penguin]

Not sure who you mean by "the Jersey fishermen" ? Do you mean the majority of them as represented by the president of the Jersey Fishermans Association or the individual, who is clearly anti-Tory, anti-Brexit, anti-democratic, but has an active Twatter account ?

The licences were lawfully issued to those who could comply with the lawful conditions attached to them. Others were not issued as the boats can't comply with the conditions. That will reduce the number of French fisherman who can fish there, which is the whole point, in order to preserve stocks and make the industry sustainable. The point is we are no longer part of the CFP so its up to us or Jersey to issue them however we/they see fit. Some will benefit, some will lose but as long as its lawful then that's how democracy works.

In my opinion the rights and wrongs of these decisions are irrelevant, as long as they comply with the rules and laws which govern them.

What is indisputably wrong is the idea that because a decision or a law doesn't suit you, its ok for you to make threats, illegally block ports, and threaten to breach a lawfully binding contract to supply electricity in order to force through your view.

That's not democracy. That's bordering on anarchy, or dictatorship if it's backed by a government.

The whole point here as you say is who is breaking the law. If French boats want to fish there unlicensed it's clear they are simply wrong. But considering Boris's record of breaking promises I need to see the legal facts before I trust him.

 

[lardiman]

Threatening to cut the electricity supply is totally unacceptable.
It cannot be allowed to be used as a bargaining chip threat every time there is a dispute.

Long term alternatives need to be implemented, so the Channel Islands do not have to get electricity from France.
Then the French Government should be sent the bill for that work.

Perhaps the Royal Navy should have a permanent presence around the Channel Islands.
It does around Gibraltar I assume.
Protecting our people comes before the niceties of diplomacy.

 

[Ken Shabby]

I originally assumed this was a case of the French fishermen tripping over the same disastrous fishing treaty that Boris has inflicted on the UK fishermen. If that is the case, they sadly have to comply with the same ridiculous red tape that is strangling our own fleet. (and I thught Brexit was - according to Farage - going to reduce red tape). However, if the agreement alows the french fishermen to fish in those waters, we are supposed under international law to comply with a treaty we signed voluntarily. If Jersey are now altering the terms by demanding a whole load of illegal documentaion as a means of keeping the French out, when our government signed an agreement saying it shouldn't happen. I don't want to go much further, as none of us know what the actual documentation states, but the impression I got from the Jersey fishermans statement was they were unhappy that these fishing boats were allowed to fish in their waters, and the conclusion might be that the extra documentation was a way of stopping that.

I would imagine that if you no longer want France to supply the Channel Islands with electricity, there is an agreement with the French in place (apparently signed off by Mrs Thatcher - never knew that!) and it would need to be negotiated away, rather like buying off a footballers contract. I don't see a bill for work regarding that as very realistic.

To be honest, the whole navy boats/electricity cuts seem a very jingoistic way of dealing with this, and coincidentally comes on a day with elections in the UK.

 

[The Penguin]

To be honest, the whole navy boats/electricity cuts seem a very jingoistic way of dealing with this, and coincidentally comes on a day with elections in the UK.

Ooooh, you cynic you. You'll be suggesting next that the "Boris sends in the Gunboats" headlines were politically motivated?

 

[Ken Shabby]

Wot me guv? Naaaaah.

 

[Ubedizzy]

The whole point here as you say is who is breaking the law. If French boats want to fish there unlicensed it's clear they are simply wrong. But considering Boris's record of breaking promises I need to see the legal facts before I trust him.

Don’t think there’s much doubt about who’s breaking the law. It’s the French fishermen, egged on and supported by members of the French government.

The Jersey authorities have done nothing wrong and we are right to support them. It’s for them and them alone to decide who to issue licences to and they MUST NOT back down in the face of unlawful French action or threats.

As to trusting Boris - just like any other politician (or indeed any person who I don’t know really well) I don’t trust him. But that’s not a criticism, it’s just a fact and quite frankly it means nothing.

 

[Ken Shabby]

Don’t think there’s much doubt about who’s breaking the law. It’s the French fishermen, egged on and supported by members of the French government.

The Jersey authorities have done nothing wrong and we are right to support them. It’s for them and them alone to decide who to issue licences to and they MUST NOT back down in the face of unlawful French action or threats.

As to trusting Boris - just like any other politician (or indeed any person who I don’t know really well) I don’t trust him. But that’s not a criticism, it’s just a fact and quite frankly it means nothing.

I'm not going to argue as I don't know exactly who has done what, but their are two sides to every story and the French Fishermen claim they have the right to fish in those waters as written into the UK/EU Brexit trade deal signed in december. If thats true (and it is an IF)while the French protests and threats are likely to be unlaful, so is the issuing of permits with a lot of fees that the treaty doesn't include. as I have never read the treaty, and to be honest don't intend to, I have no idea who is right and wrong, but I doubt very much that the tabloids are publish much accurate news about it.

 

[The Penguin]

No government should break the law, whether it's the UK government or the French government. When Boris tried to illegally prorogue Parliament he was cheered on, and the judges vilified. They also said they were prepared to break international law over the Good Friday Agreement.
One reason why I came close to voting for Brexit was over the fishing industry. Our fishermen were among the staunchest supporters, and quite right too, considering the promises made. The Brexit argument is over, it's done, but the government's failure to protect the fishing industry is a gross betrayal, and what's happening in Jersey should not obscure that.

 

[lardiman]

Not sure what the UK Government could have done differently about this latest business, aside from doing nothing.

We're slow to issue some fishing licences. So the French threaten to cut the electricity supply, and blockade Jersey's port.
And we do nothing.

So they cut the power, making life on the Island very difficult for people who may need electricity for medical reasons, closing all businesses and most shops, and allowing tons of food to spoil.
And we do nothing.

Then they blockade the port, preventing vital supplies from getting to the Island except by air. They celebrate this all over the world news channels and the internet.
And we do nothing.

Then an Islander tries to get past the blockade, they get nasty and people get hurt. Maybe killed.
And we do nothing?


OK, this scenario is taking things to something of an extreme.
But how much provocation do the Islanders and the UK have to put up with before we stand up for ourselves? I believe we have acted appropriately so far.
And if the blockaders want to get feisty, I'd rather they took on the Royal Navy than a few helpless Islanders.

If we're not going to protect the people of the Channel Islands from bullying, intimidation and actual harm, we might as well just give the Islands to France.

 

[The Penguin]

Brexit has changed the political map for good. I think it's a pity, because I never had a problem seeing both sides of the debate, and found the decision quite difficult. With the prospect of a Johnson government for at least another 9 years it's odds-on that Scotland will want independence because he doesn't enjoy the same popularity north of the border. I'm quite horrified at the thought. Apart from that it will take quite a long time for politics to reshape, and I don't think anyone knows how it will pan ahrt.

 

[lardiman]

The people of Scotland should understand what Independence means before they embrace it.
Not scrap the Union simply because they're fed up with Boris.

At a guess, the UK generates about 50% of the wealth that the EU does put together.
That's why we can get by without them.

Scotland can generate what... maybe 5% of what England can generate?
5% is not going to pay for a Scottish NHS and all the other infrastructure they will need.
Because they must be totally clear on one thing;
English tax payers will not pay ONE PENNY towards subsidising a fully Independent Scotland.

Is Nicola Sturgeon really going to sell the Scottish people the notion that the day after declaring Independence, Scotland is just going to seamlessly plug itself into the European Union and begin sucking £billions out of Brussels?
That's a desperate pipe dream.
Countries wait years to join the EU. Decades even.
Especially when they are going to be net consumers of funds, by a million miles.

Never mind the hard border, massive disruption to Anglo-Scottish trade, the loss of 90% (at least) of English tourism money, and a hundred other complications.
One thing's for sure - I'll never go there again.
It's a beautiful country. But I know when I'm not wanted somewhere.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I'm not saying Scotland should not have its Independence.
If that's what the Scottish People vote for in a free & fair referendum, then fair play to them.
They just need to be aware of what they are voting for.