Consequences Of Brexit [Part 8] Read First Post Before Posting

[retep]

3 minutes ago, L00b said:

I could never possibly enjoy them as much as your own elite (to whom Brexit will profit most, and will 'profit' least of all to the smaller boat owner-operators that make up 77% of the UK industry).

Another reason to get out of the EU as it seems they were allowing illegal activities.

[L00b]

5 minutes ago, retep said:

Another reason to get out of the EU as it seems they were allowing illegal activities.

'Allowing'? How so?

[retep]

1 hour ago, L00b said:

'Allowing'? How so?

This for starters,

"EU ministers’ decision to continue overfishing could face legal challenge"

https://www.clientearth.org/eu-ministers-decision-to-keep-overfishing-could-face-legal-challenge/

[L00b]

44 minutes ago, retep said:

This for starters,

"EU ministers’ decision to continue overfishing could face legal challenge"

https://www.clientearth.org/eu-ministers-decision-to-keep-overfishing-could-face-legal-challenge/

Controversial, certainly. But I'm not seeing the illegality that you alleged, so I look forward to this 'legal challenge' (methinks people at your link  are mistaking non-binding political declarations for binding legislative texts...wouldn't be the first time that's happened, in the past 4 years ).

 

Interesting that you UK fisheries minister defended his and his fellow EU ministers' decision. So, does that make him an accessory and can we look forward to his arraignment, then, if you're right?

 

All the same, after your little stint of whattaboutery here, I'm still failing to understand how Brexit changes anything about the UK elites raking it from the UK fisheries they own, under EU quotas or not. Where's the sunlit uplands for 77% of the UK fishing industry? Perhaps you can explain?

Edited December 30, 2019 by L00b

[altus]

14 minutes ago, retep said:

This for starters,

"EU ministers’ decision to continue overfishing could face legal challenge"

https://www.clientearth.org/eu-ministers-decision-to-keep-overfishing-could-face-legal-challenge/

From this reportlinked to from your article:

Covering the last five years, the report picks out France, Ireland, the

United Kingdom, Spain, Belgium, Portugal and Denmark as those countries behind the drive for unsustainable limits.

You're arguing here that when the EU don't stop the UK from doing something bad it's the EU's fault. If they had stopped us you'd be complaining that they were ordering us about.

[retep]

1 minute ago, altus said:

From this reportlinked to from your article:

 

You're arguing here that when the EU don't stop the UK from doing something bad it's the EU's fault. If they had stopped us you'd be complaining that they were ordering us about.

If the UK is in charge of policy then the people can control them at the next elections, explain how you can control the EU.

[L00b]

7 minutes ago, retep said:

If the UK is in charge of policy then the people can control them at the next elections, explain how you can control the EU.

Nicky Morgan and Zack Goldsmith both say you're wrong on that one.

[retep]

18 minutes ago, L00b said:

Nicky Morgan and Zack Goldsmith both say you're wrong on that one.

The power of the people was shown at the recent election.

[altus]

43 minutes ago, retep said:

If the UK is in charge of policy then the people can control them at the next elections, explain how you can control the EU.

The UK government was in charge of whether it argued for unsustainable fishing quotas. How did the people control them during the recent elections?

[L00b]

33 minutes ago, retep said:

The power of the people was shown at the recent election.

You are oh-so-correct : they voted Nicky Morgan and Zach Goldsmith out at the GE2019... 

 

...so Johnson made them life peers, then kept them in his Cabinet 

 

Ah, I've just caught up the news about the French company winning the license to monitor British fishing boats (today's Times). That will explain today's fish-based vitriol, I can safely take it?