Good

Theresa May is expected to announce within weeks that the UK will reclaim its waters for British fishermen by pulling out of a deal that pre-dates the EU.

The Prime Minister will take Britain out of the 1964 London convention which allows European fishing vessels to access waters six to twelve nautical miles from British shores.

No so much because of this specific thing, but because it means we’re going to kill the Common Fisheries Policy.

That CFP which is among the most idiot things the EU has come up with, right up there with the euro.

32 comments on “Good

  1. Ah, makes me nostalgic for the good old days of the Icelandic cod wars. My memory may be fading but as I recall, the dastardly Icelanders arbitrarily extended their fishing boundaries to three thousand miles, making them think they could sail up the Thames and steal all our cod. Luckily Lord Nelson was there to stop them.

    “Hoorah!” we all cried. “The Icelandic fleet is as likely to defeat England’s navy as their football team is to defeat England’s” (a thing we knew to be impossible).

  2. And the Left will hate it on the general principle that it is an assertion of national sovereignty, while making up some lies about ‘sustainability’ to cover it.

  3. Claiming a few miles is irrelevant. We need to claim the full EEZ – and exclude the Europeans from it. Fish stocks have been ripe for abuse. Countries that honestly enforce catch limits have lost out to those that do not.

    This is an excellent start to Brexit. But the CAP is the bigger target.

  4. After the devastation of the Royal Navy by Brown and Cameron’s cuts it is going to be very difficult to enforce exclusion zones.

  5. What would the navy do, even if it were at strength? Because they will certainly never be authorised to fire on another vessel.

  6. Its a good start but needs to be followed up with an ownership scheme.

    Have we got enough trawlers left to meet our own needs?

  7. It is a good start but we need some conservation/no fishing zones. Evidence suggests that these really help maintain fish populations whereas catch limits just encourage trawlers to throw back dead fish and size limits just select for smaller fish..

  8. Paying farmers NOT to grow stuff, and turning traders into tax collectors were idiotic. The CFP was not just idiotic but wicked.

  9. As I asked when Tim wrote about this on Forbes, and received no answer, the question here isn’t about the CFP, but about our host’s seeming blind insistence that the UK will pick the right way of doing things, rather than come up with our own terrible idea.

    Ignoring expert advice is not a sole competency of the EU. Our domestic swine are quite as capable as our European swine in that regard.

  10. Dave you shock me. You asked a question and received no answer?! Does Worstall not realise who you are?!

    The great thing about our own people doing stupid stuff is we get to chuck them out now and then. We could refine this process so as, for example, to make it harder for incompetents to be sacked and just walk into another sinecure, but even as it is it’s way better than being openly talked down to by the likes of Jean Claude Juncker.

  11. our host’s seeming blind insistence that the UK will pick the right way of doing things, rather than come up with our own terrible idea.

    Tim can speak for himself, but my decision was on in small part based on if the EU comes up with a terrible idea we’re shafted. If our own Government comes up with a terrible idea we’re shafted for up to 5 years, then we sack the bastards.

  12. I did answer in fact. Along the lines of Owen Paterson being the man out there with a fisheries plan. Involving ownership, ITQs and all that sort of cool stuff. Another reason for optimism along these lines is that the Adam Smith Institute is the sort of place that politicians in search of a policy tend to talk to….as I’m told Paterson did in fact…..

  13. When I was working on the Government mobile infrastructure project I had dealings with DEFRA civil servants during the time Patterson was Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. They referred to him as “the swivel eyed loons’ swivel eyed loon”.

    More evidence that we need to beat the incumbent opposition first before sensible policies can be enacted.

  14. There’s no need for the UK to pick the right way of doing things. Just need to devolve it to the regions with coastline ( existing Marine Conservation areas excluded ).

  15. “Ignoring expert advice is not a sole competency of the EU. Our domestic swine are quite as capable as our European swine in that regard.”

    Hardly an original sentiment. Numerous on here have already pointed this out and called for the removal of well-off, middle class, London Bubble, incompetent BluLabour parasite May. Despite her attempts at playing dress up as Fatcher 2.

  16. Timmy,
    Normally you approve of selling a commodity at the highest price in the most convenient market. Why do you make an exception here?
    There are loads of “British” trawlers owned by British subsidiaries of Spanish firms. (A bit like Norwegian airlines, then.)
    The real scandal is not the fish landed (fairly easy to police) but the dead fish thrown over the side (very difficult to police). I do not see how having “our” quotas instead of “their” quotas would change this much.

  17. Tim>

    You never answered the question about our domestic ability to ignore competent advice.

    Is anything in this country done competently?

  18. You miss what I actually want to happen. ITQs. Individual fishermen own the fish stocks as farmers do fields.

  19. There’s no need for the UK to pick the right way of doing things. Just need to devolve it to the regions with coastline ( existing Marine Conservation areas excluded ).

    Yeah, because they will all see the big picture and won’t overfish. It will always be the bastards in the next region who are at fault.

    It would probably work for oyster fisheries and the like, who don’t move.

    But we’ve seen that countries will overfish — the chance regions won’t is practically nil unless someone is watching to make sure they don’t.

  20. Mr Black: Stop them, board them, escort to a port with a hangin’ magistrate & fine the hell out of the skipper, seize his boat until he pays. Yup, there are practical issues but a few of those would discourage many more. As for vessels, there is a ship in Reykjavik harbour – a museum piece from our previous contretemps with the Icelanders. Would the RN have to eat too much humble pie to ask them if we can borrow a few of their current ones for a while?

  21. Sorry to piss on your parade, TimW, but how do you do that with fish? They’re not nailed to the seabed. They move about

  22. I would just note that with the ocean going OPVs coming in to commission, the RN is actually in a better position to intervene (if, as was correctly conjectured above, it would be allowed to) than it was even in the Cod War.

    Our MCMVs were incapable in the face of Iceland’s designed for the job FPVs.

    We now have decades of experience in policing the Falklands FPZ which seems to have, the MoD doing something right for once, informed the OPV design.

  23. Tim
    “You miss what I actually want to happen. ITQs. Individual fishermen own the fish stocks as farmers do fields.”

    I think you missed bloke in spain’s point. It’s a commons. Making it a UK not an EU commons doesn’t change much.

    Anyway, I have a solution:
    Abolish the law forcing oil companies to take down platforms to seabed. Take the topsides off and let the rest rust as fish sanctuaries.
    Purge pipelines but leave them in place. If a trawler snags its nets, too bad.
    Saves money, creates no fish zones, enrages environmentalists. Triple whammy!

  24. bloke in france – “I think you missed bloke in spain’s point. It’s a commons. Making it a UK not an EU commons doesn’t change much.”

    But fishing permits are not a commons. I assume that what TW has in mind is something very much like New Zealand’s fishing rights system:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fishing_industry_in_New_Zealand

    http://fs.fish.govt.nz/Page.aspx?pk=81&tk=574

    But there is a simple solution – track down the last MacDonald. Declare him Lord of the Isles. Give him the power to determine who fishes for what in the part of the North Sea controlled by Britain. Sit back and watch.

  25. Surreptitious Evil – “Godfrey?”

    Well I wasn’t at school with him and so I wouldn’t use his first name. And to be honest he looks a bit like a jumped up third cousin and not a real MacDonald at all.

    But it doesn’t matter. I am sure he would do a better job than the MAFF and would have a greater incentive than the politicians if he intended his offspring to inherit the fish. He seems a decent sort at any rate.

  26. Sorry SMfS, but giving England’s fishing rights to a Jockster isn’t the best idea you’ve ever had. But neither is a quota management system administered from Westminster. The political class there don’t a sweet fuck about the the livelihoods of UK fishermen. They’d happily trade away any advantage in exchange for a wrinkle benefits their banker golfing buddies.
    Best idea would be to give the fishermen the management of their own fisheries, in common. And control of a few of those OPVs to protect them. So they wouldn’t have to rely on the caprices of the Admiralty. Don’t suppose it’d be be hard for a trawlerman to get the hang of firing a ship-to-ship missile.

  27. bloke in spain – “Best idea would be to give the fishermen the management of their own fisheries, in common.”

    Actually fishermen have not been particularly good either. They have a Tragedy of the Commons problem. They may slash and burn, expecting their children will find some other job. After all, fishermen have lobbied for greater cod quota right up to the point that the entire species crashed.

    But it would be nice if they were involved. It would be nice if they could be relied on. From the point of funding research and the like, a single man is probably better.

    As long as it is taken out of the reach of Whitehall much less Brussels.

  28. If you’d like to put me up for the job, SMfS, I’m sure I could find the time. I’ll even change my name to Neptune, if it helps. I would at least be impartial. I do occasionally fish. But I’ve never caught anything.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.