Brexit: UK to leave single market, says Theresa May

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, SCRawl, Thanas, Edi, K. A. Pital

User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30291
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: Brexit: UK to leave single market, says Theresa May

Postby Thanas » 2017-02-10 09:21am

Callng Corbyn "hapless" is too kind for that class traitor and ridiculous idiot[. He clearly never wanted Britain to stay in the EU, nor oppose the bill.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs

User avatar
His Divine Shadow
Commence Primary Ignition
Posts: 11766
Joined: 2002-07-03 07:22am
Location: Vasa, Finland

Re: Brexit: UK to leave single market, says Theresa May

Postby His Divine Shadow » 2017-02-10 10:42am

Sure if he's upper class then yeah, and if so, good.
Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who did not.

User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30291
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: Brexit: UK to leave single market, says Theresa May

Postby Thanas » 2017-02-15 08:51am

Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs

User avatar
Tribble
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2049
Joined: 2008-11-18 11:28am
Location: stardestroyer.net

Re: Brexit: UK to leave single market, says Theresa May

Postby Tribble » 2017-02-15 09:01am



Well of course, everyone knows that the EU's objective now is to try and make life as difficult for the UK as possible to set an example for others who might be contemplating on leaving. I wouldn't be surprised if the EU one day says (if they have not done so already) "No trade deals whatsoever unless you maintain all EU rules including freedom of movement".
"I reject your reality and substitute my own" - the official Troll motto as stated by Adam Savage

User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30291
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: Brexit: UK to leave single market, says Theresa May

Postby Thanas » 2017-02-15 09:18am

Tribble wrote:Well of course, everyone knows that the EU's objective now is to try and make life as difficult for the UK as possible to set an example for others who might be contemplating on leaving.


Maybe if you were less biased against the EU and would actually read the article you would understand that the EU has jack shit to do with it and it is more like Britain's commitment to saving the Ocean necessitates those quotas? Unless you think leaving the EU will suddenly make the fish grow back....


I wouldn't be surprised if the EU one day says (if they have not done so already) "No trade deals whatsoever unless you maintain all EU rules including freedom of movement".


The EU has said that if they want complete free trade as they enjoyed under the EU before then yes, they would have to obey the rules.How unfair.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs

User avatar
Tribble
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2049
Joined: 2008-11-18 11:28am
Location: stardestroyer.net

Re: Brexit: UK to leave single market, says Theresa May

Postby Tribble » 2017-02-15 09:48am

Thanas wrote:
Maybe if you were less biased against the EU and would actually read the article you would understand that the EU has jack shit to do with it and it is more like Britain's commitment to saving the Ocean necessitates those quotas? Unless you think leaving the EU will suddenly make the fish grow back....


Yes, I did read the article, which states:

The EU will not allow any trade deal where the UK gets control over any fishing quota.
The EU demands that EU fishermen can continue to fly the UK flag and fish in UK waters

According to the article EU vessels caught ~683,000 tonnes in UK waters while UK vessels caught ~111,000 tonnes in other EU member states’ waters. Or in another words, non-UK countries take significantly more fish from UK waters than the UK takes from their waters. If the UK took control of the fishing industry and only allowed UK fisherman the rights to fish in UK waters (obviously vice-versa would also happen) this would still be a net benefit to UK fisherman even if the quotas remained exactly the same. Not surprising that the EU is opposed.

Thanas wrote: The EU has said that if they want complete free trade as they enjoyed under the EU before then yes, they would have to obey the rules.How unfair.


I'll be more specific - I wouldn't be surprised if the EU flat out refused the UK any trade agreement short of EFTA/EEA/Swiss type deal. That it will end up being "stay in the EU, join the EEA / have EEA type agreement or go to WTO rules, we're not going to give you even Canadian levels of free-trade".

Note that if you had bothered to read some of my earlier posts I did not say this was necessarily a bad thing, but nevertheless I will refresh your memory. IMO:

EEA membership > EU Membership >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hard Brexit.

I would prefer it if the EU played hardball and that ended up keeping the UK in the EU or EEA tbh.
"I reject your reality and substitute my own" - the official Troll motto as stated by Adam Savage

User avatar
Tribble
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2049
Joined: 2008-11-18 11:28am
Location: stardestroyer.net

Re: Brexit: UK to leave single market, says Theresa May

Postby Tribble » 2017-02-15 10:07am

Sorry, the article stated that the EU is drafting legislation where there is “no increase to the UK’s share of fishing opportunities for jointly fished stocks (maintaining the existing quota distribution in UK and EU waters)”.

So in other words it's not just the quota, its the distribution of the quota that the EU feels is important. Apparently the EU is demanding to maintain the current setup where EU-nations are allowed to take significantly more fish out of UK waters then the UK takes from EU waters as a condition for any trade deal. Again, no surprise there.
"I reject your reality and substitute my own" - the official Troll motto as stated by Adam Savage

User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30291
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: Brexit: UK to leave single market, says Theresa May

Postby Thanas » 2017-02-15 12:25pm

Tribble wrote:
Thanas wrote:
Maybe if you were less biased against the EU and would actually read the article you would understand that the EU has jack shit to do with it and it is more like Britain's commitment to saving the Ocean necessitates those quotas? Unless you think leaving the EU will suddenly make the fish grow back....


Yes, I did read the article, which states:

The EU will not allow any trade deal where the UK gets control over any fishing quota.
The EU demands that EU fishermen can continue to fly the UK flag and fish in UK waters

According to the article EU vessels caught ~683,000 tonnes in UK waters while UK vessels caught ~111,000 tonnes in other EU member states’ waters. Or in another words, non-UK countries take significantly more fish from UK waters than the UK takes from their waters. If the UK took control of the fishing industry and only allowed UK fisherman the rights to fish in UK waters (obviously vice-versa would also happen) this would still be a net benefit to UK fisherman even if the quotas remained exactly the same. Not surprising that the EU is opposed.


That also depends on what is getting fished where. EDIT: To clarify, ten tonnes of swordfish in the mediterranean is worth way more than ten tonnes of herring.


Tribble wrote:Sorry, the article stated that the EU is drafting legislation where there is “no increase to the UK’s share of fishing opportunities for jointly fished stocks (maintaining the existing quota distribution in UK and EU waters)”.

So in other words it's not just the quota, its the distribution of the quota that the EU feels is important. Apparently the EU is demanding to maintain the current setup where EU-nations are allowed to take significantly more fish out of UK waters then the UK takes from EU waters as a condition for any trade deal. Again, no surprise there.


The current quota says that memberstates have to share. Britain, being one member, already gets a disproportionate quota (unless you think that a one to <7 ratio is proportionate for a ratio of 1 vs 27). There is no reason for that to increase. If it would be equal fishing in the EU and in Britain then that would give the British fish industry an unfair edge over the French one for example.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs

User avatar
Tribble
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2049
Joined: 2008-11-18 11:28am
Location: stardestroyer.net

Re: Brexit: UK to leave single market, says Theresa May

Postby Tribble » 2017-02-15 12:35pm

Thanas wrote:That also depends on what is getting fished where. EDIT: To clarify, ten tonnes of swordfish in the mediterranean is worth way more than ten tonnes of herring.


While this may be true, IMO UK fishermen have more to gain by having exclusive access to UK waters than they have to lose by losing access to EU waters.


Thanas wrote:The current quota says that memberstates have to share. Britain, being one member, already gets a disproportionate quota (unless you think that a one to <7 ratio is proportionate for a ratio of 1 vs 27). There is no reason for that to increase. If it would be equal fishing in the EU and in Britain then that would give the British fish industry an unfair edge over the French one for example.


Given that the UK has a disproportionate amount of territorial waters compared to most EU states, one could make the argument that they are being generous by opening up their fishing industry that much.

If the UK is no longer a member of the EU and has control over its own fishing industry than UK fishermen will benefit overall even if the UK agrees to the exact same quota of fish in UK waters and they are excluded from EU waters. The UK fishing industry is absolutely right in that regard, but the question is whether or not it is worth it for the UK to use political capital to strenuously fight over it vs something else like potential tariffs on the automotive industry. Hint: probably not.
"I reject your reality and substitute my own" - the official Troll motto as stated by Adam Savage

User avatar
Zaune
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5528
Joined: 2010-06-21 11:05am
Location: In Transit
Contact:

Re: Brexit: UK to leave single market, says Theresa May

Postby Zaune » 2017-02-15 04:33pm

The UK fishing industry is also mostly concentrated in safe Labour seats. We're just as likely to sell unlimited access to the Chinese and the Russians and let them hoover up everything while our own fleet is left to bicker over the scraps or take up rum-running.
There are hardly any excesses of the most crazed psychopath that cannot easily be duplicated by a normal kindly family man who just comes in to work every day and has a job to do.
-- (Terry Pratchett, Small Gods)


Replace "ginger" with "n*gger," and suddenly it become a lot less funny, doesn't it?
-- fgalkin


Like my writing? Tip me on Patreon

User avatar
Crazedwraith
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 9766
Joined: 2003-04-10 03:45pm
Location: Cheshire, England
Contact:

Re: Brexit: UK to leave single market, says Theresa May

Postby Crazedwraith » 2017-02-17 06:50am

Just who everyone wants to weigh in...

The BBC wrote:Tony Blair has said it is his "mission" to persuade Britons to "rise up" and change their minds on Brexit.

Speaking in the City of London, the former prime minister claimed that people voted in the referendum "without knowledge of the true terms of Brexit".

He urged "a way out from the present rush over the cliff's edge".

Former Tory leader Iain Duncan Smith said the comments were arrogant and undemocratic but Lib Dem Nick Clegg said he "agreed with every word".

Former UKIP leader Nigel Farage said Mr Blair was "yesterday's man" while Downing Street has said it is "absolutely committed" to seeing Brexit through.

Prime Minister Theresa May wants to trigger formal Brexit talks by the end of March - a move which was backed in the House of Commons by MPs last week.

'Expose relentlessly'

Mr Blair, who was UK prime minister between 1997 and 2007, used the speech to the pro-European campaign group Open Britain to stress that those driving a withdrawal from the European Union "always wanted a hard Brexit".

He said the impact of leaving the EU would be bad for Britain, bad for Europe and the world.

In the absence of an effective opposition, he said pro-Europeans needed to build a "movement " reaching across party lines, he said, adding the institute he is launching would play its part in developing the arguments to rethink the country's position.

"The debilitation of the Labour Party is the facilitator of Brexit. I hate to say that, but it is true."

Mr Blair, who campaigned to remain in the EU, said that while he accepted that people voted to leave by 52% to 48%, he would recommend looking again at Brexit when "we have a clear sense of where we're going".

Pressed on whether he thought there should be a second referendum, he said: "All I'm saying is a very, very simple thing, that this is the beginning of the debate - that if a significant part of that 52% show real change of mind, however you measure it, we should have the opportunity to reconsider this decision.

"Whether you do it through another referendum or another method, that's a second order question. But this issue is the single most important decision this country has taken since the Second World War and debate can't now be shut down about it."

'Pain and gain'

Claiming "ideologues" were driving the Brexit process, he said the pain from leaving was large while "the gain is largely illusory".

While he fully accepted immigration was "a substantial issue", he said it had become the "primary consideration" and suggested the public were more concerned about arrivals from outside the EU.

Mr Blair stressed that the Conservative government only "has bandwidth for only one thing - Brexit", at the cost of the NHS, education, investment in communities, the rise in serious crime, the increased burden of social care and control of immigration.

"This is a government for Brexit, of Brexit and dominated by Brexit - it's a mono-purpose political entity and nothing else therefore truly matters," he said.

Brexit was the government's "waking thought, the daily grind, the meditation before sleep and the stuff of its dreams or nightmares. It's obsessed with Brexit because it has to be."

'Rallying call'

Mr Blair has faced criticism in the past for his government's decision to allow people from Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic to work in Britain without restrictions, while most EU states imposed transitional controls to slow the rate of migration.

BBC political correspondent Tom Bateman said the former prime minister's intervention on Friday is "quite an explicit rallying call" for those who campaigned on the Remain side.

But he added that not everyone on the Remain side agrees with Mr Blair, with one former campaign boss arguing that they should be working for the best version of Brexit, rather than fighting against it.

Iain Duncan Smith, who was a prominent Leave campaigner, said Mr Blair's comments were arrogant, utterly undemocratic and showed that the political elite was completely out of touch with the British people.

Brexit bill

And Mr Farage said the referendum was "not a blip" but the beginning of a "political revolution" that was fast spreading across Europe.

Speaking at UKIP's Spring conference, he described Mr Blair as a "former heavyweight champion coming out of retirement" who would "end up on the canvas".

Supporters of leaving the EU argue it will free up the UK to trade better globally and give the government better control of immigration.

Earlier this month, MPs overwhelmingly agreed, by 494 votes to 122, to let the government begin the UK's departure from the EU by voting for the Brexit bill.

The Commons vote prompted splits in the Labour party. Despite calls by leader Jeremy Corbyn for his party to back the government, 52 MPs rebelled.

Lib Dem attempts to amend the bill to include a provision for another referendum were defeated by 340 votes to 33.

The government has promised to invoke Article 50 - setting formal talks with the EU in motion - by the end of next month, but it requires Parliament's permission before doing so.


Unsurprisingly, the comment section is unconvinced. Not sure what can be done at this point..
To the brave passengers and crew of the Kobayashi Maru... sucks to be you - Peter David

User avatar
Zaune
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5528
Joined: 2010-06-21 11:05am
Location: In Transit
Contact:

Re: Brexit: UK to leave single market, says Theresa May

Postby Zaune » 2017-02-17 07:09am

Crazedwraith wrote:Just who everyone wants to weigh in...

[...]

Unsurprisingly, the comment section is unconvinced. Not sure what can be done at this point..

Hope the demographics that voted Leave starve or freeze to death first?
There are hardly any excesses of the most crazed psychopath that cannot easily be duplicated by a normal kindly family man who just comes in to work every day and has a job to do.
-- (Terry Pratchett, Small Gods)


Replace "ginger" with "n*gger," and suddenly it become a lot less funny, doesn't it?
-- fgalkin


Like my writing? Tip me on Patreon

User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30291
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: Brexit: UK to leave single market, says Theresa May

Postby Thanas » 2017-02-17 07:52am

Tribble wrote:
Thanas wrote:That also depends on what is getting fished where. EDIT: To clarify, ten tonnes of swordfish in the mediterranean is worth way more than ten tonnes of herring.


While this may be true, IMO UK fishermen have more to gain by having exclusive access to UK waters than they have to lose by losing access to EU waters.


I would tend to agree in general I would wait for specific numbers regarding the catches before I am convinced about that.


Given that the UK has a disproportionate amount of territorial waters compared to most EU states, one could make the argument that they are being generous by opening up their fishing industry that much.


I am not so sure about that, the coastline of the UK does not seem much larger than that of Italy for once.

If the UK is no longer a member of the EU and has control over its own fishing industry than UK fishermen will benefit overall even if the UK agrees to the exact same quota of fish in UK waters and they are excluded from EU waters.


If they would ban all foreign fishing then yes, but that is not going to happen for the simple reason that the UK fish industry needs access to EU markets to sell their fish. They also need access to the EU to import fish from.

http://www.seavision.org.uk/about/fisheries-aquaculture

The UK exports most of the seafood it catches[....]Main export markets for UK seafood are France, Spain, Italy, the Irish Republic and the USA which between them accounted for around 50% (by value) of the seafood exported from the UK.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs

User avatar
Sea Skimmer
Yankee Capitalist Air Pirate
Posts: 37039
Joined: 2002-07-03 11:49pm
Location: Passchendaele City, HAB
Contact:

Re: Brexit: UK to leave single market, says Theresa May

Postby Sea Skimmer » 2017-02-17 08:17pm

Thanas wrote:I am not so sure about that, the coastline of the UK does not seem much larger than that of Italy for once.


UK waters are far more valuable. The med is an enclosed sea, while UK waters , as well as some French and Norwegian, and everything Iceland, are fed from the Atlantic and Gulf Stream.

http://www.grida.no/graphicslib/thumbs/ ... s_034a.jpg

See this. The entire Med is only producing 800,000 tons of fish a year in a highly unsustainable manner. Italy only gets a fraction of that and much of the water is in the hands of non EU states. It's one of the basins on track presently to total population collapse and ecosystem change as already happened on the Grand Banks.

Your own link says UK waters are presently producing about 2.9 million tons of fish, with most of that by non UK hulls, three and a half times as much. This is one of those reasons why the British were able to become such a huge empire, the whole island being surrounded by a giant sea farm. Huge shallow sunken shelf being constantly fed by the whole Atlantic basin. The Grand Banks were even more extreme examples of this pumping effect, but we already obliterated those.

Agreed that no big change will come, but only because it's too close to war too fast. Also because nobody can agree on how far quotas really need to be cut before the fish stock has any chance of recovering size. The full effects of the whaling disaster are still not known, but we might have nuked 50% of the fish carrying capacity of the Atlantic by killing them all.
"This cult of special forces is as sensible as to form a Royal Corps of Tree Climbers and say that no soldier who does not wear its green hat with a bunch of oak leaves stuck in it should be expected to climb a tree"
— Field Marshal William Slim 1956

User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30291
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: Brexit: UK to leave single market, says Theresa May

Postby Thanas » 2017-02-24 08:17am

So in another blow to May it turns out the UK will have to pay around 60 billion before the EU will consider trade negotiations.

Link.

Theresa May’s hopes of conducting free trade talks with the EU from day one of the Brexit negotiations appear to have been dashed by an increasing number of member states taking a hard line on the process.

The British government believes there should be parallel talks on the terms of the UK’s withdrawal and the future trading relationship. The timeline is key to May’s hopes of completing a free trade agreement by the end of the two years allowed for negotiations under the Lisbon treaty.

However, political parties in the Czech parliament have joined senior figures in Rome and Berlin in backing the European commission’s line that there can be no such talks until Britain has agreed to pay its bills and has struck an agreement on the rights of EU nationals.



Maybe describing Brexit as "liberation" wasn't the smartest idea, eh Bojo?
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs

User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30291
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: Brexit: UK to leave single market, says Theresa May

Postby Thanas » 2017-02-24 08:59am

as one guardian commentator aptly summarizes:

So 4 decades ago the UK begs the EU to let them join. After turning the UK away twice, the UK keeps begging and eventually the EU allows it to join. When the UK joins it is a complete and utter basket case of a country which has to go cap in hand to the IMF for a bail out. After joining the EU, the UK becomes wealthy but thats obviously nothing to do with the EU......that is just a coincidence

As a member of the EU the UK co writes all the rules and regulation for the last 4 decades but bizarrely complains all the time that it is being treated unfairly even though it has co written the rules, has a veto on anything it doesn't like and has gotten rebates and opt outs other countries do not get. The UK pushes hard for eastern expansion of the EU because its boss (the US) wants a bulwork against Russia and the UK is only one of 3 EU countries that chooses not to implement a 6 year moratorium on migrants from these new countries.

And now the UK has freely chosen to leave the EU and everyone has said pity but ok, thats your free choice....but bizarrely this is somehow being painted as if the EU forced the UK to join, never consulted the UK on any of the rules, made it a poor country, forced it to accept eastern migrants and is somehow trying to prevent the UK from leaving....the exact polar opposite of what is actually the case.

The UK has literally turned into the US where everything is upside down and back side front and where truth has no meaning whatsoever.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs

User avatar
Alyrium Denryle
Minister of Sin
Posts: 21734
Joined: 2002-07-11 08:34pm
Location: The Deep Desert
Contact:

Re: Brexit: UK to leave single market, says Theresa May

Postby Alyrium Denryle » 2017-02-24 09:07am

Sea Skimmer wrote:
Thanas wrote:I am not so sure about that, the coastline of the UK does not seem much larger than that of Italy for once.


UK waters are far more valuable. The med is an enclosed sea, while UK waters , as well as some French and Norwegian, and everything Iceland, are fed from the Atlantic and Gulf Stream.

http://www.grida.no/graphicslib/thumbs/ ... s_034a.jpg

See this. The entire Med is only producing 800,000 tons of fish a year in a highly unsustainable manner. Italy only gets a fraction of that and much of the water is in the hands of non EU states. It's one of the basins on track presently to total population collapse and ecosystem change as already happened on the Grand Banks.

Your own link says UK waters are presently producing about 2.9 million tons of fish, with most of that by non UK hulls, three and a half times as much. This is one of those reasons why the British were able to become such a huge empire, the whole island being surrounded by a giant sea farm. Huge shallow sunken shelf being constantly fed by the whole Atlantic basin. The Grand Banks were even more extreme examples of this pumping effect, but we already obliterated those.

Agreed that no big change will come, but only because it's too close to war too fast. Also because nobody can agree on how far quotas really need to be cut before the fish stock has any chance of recovering size. The full effects of the whaling disaster are still not known, but we might have nuked 50% of the fish carrying capacity of the Atlantic by killing them all.


Really this is just to chime in, within my professional capacity. When it comes to fish stocks and over-fishing, Sea Skimmer is pretty much spot on. The med is Fucked. Like, really fucked. Fish landings have been mostly increasing, but that is due to technological improvements that just make fisherman better exploiters of fish stocks. When you actually look at the population structures of various fish species... oh god. It is bad.

The atlantic is better because the food supply for said fish is higher (I could ramble for hours about nutrients and algae...) but ultimately... those stocks are in decline as well.

Either way, Mediterranean fisheries are on a collapse trajectory. This is not helped by the fact that the italians are fucking infamous for poaching over their own catch quotas.
GALE Force Biological Agent/
BOTM/Great Dolphin Conspiracy/
Entomology and Evolutionary Biology Subdirector:SD.net Dept. of Biological Sciences


There is Grandeur in the View of Life; it fills me with a Deep Wonder, and Intense Cynicism.

User avatar
FireNexus
Cookie
Posts: 1498
Joined: 2002-07-04 05:10am
Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: Brexit: UK to leave single market, says Theresa May

Postby FireNexus » 2017-02-24 09:20am

Is there anything that can be done about it? Is the problem with fisherman just trawling up all the prey species (so that farming and adding them back would have a beneficial effect on the larger species) or that we've basically nuked the algae/zooplankton populations past the point of recovery? Or both?
I had a Bill Maher quote here. But fuck him for his white privelegy "joke".

All the rest? Too long.

User avatar
Alyrium Denryle
Minister of Sin
Posts: 21734
Joined: 2002-07-11 08:34pm
Location: The Deep Desert
Contact:

Re: Brexit: UK to leave single market, says Theresa May

Postby Alyrium Denryle » 2017-02-24 09:44am

FireNexus wrote:Is there anything that can be done about it? Is the problem with fisherman just trawling up all the prey species (so that farming and adding them back would have a beneficial effect on the larger species) or that we've basically nuked the algae/zooplankton populations past the point of recovery? Or both?


We need to dial back the fishing massively. Massive cuts to catch quotas, institution of marine preserves over large chunks of the ocean, and brutal enforcement actions against poachers.

The cause is pretty simple. We have eaten the fish. Some species we've fished to the point of demographic collapse and difficulty achieving the population density necessary for successful spawning. Tuna for example are pretty long lived fish, and egg production goes up with age. They do mass pelagic spawning and throw billions of eggs into the water column, only a fraction of which survive predation. We have eaten so many tuna that the really big females are practically gone, and number of young tuna surviving to adulthood is low.
GALE Force Biological Agent/
BOTM/Great Dolphin Conspiracy/
Entomology and Evolutionary Biology Subdirector:SD.net Dept. of Biological Sciences


There is Grandeur in the View of Life; it fills me with a Deep Wonder, and Intense Cynicism.

User avatar
FireNexus
Cookie
Posts: 1498
Joined: 2002-07-04 05:10am
Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: Brexit: UK to leave single market, says Theresa May

Postby FireNexus » 2017-02-24 09:52am

So, we're going to lose our fish stocks is what you're saying. Too bad, I guess.
I had a Bill Maher quote here. But fuck him for his white privelegy "joke".

All the rest? Too long.

User avatar
Tribble
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2049
Joined: 2008-11-18 11:28am
Location: stardestroyer.net

Re: Brexit: UK to leave single market, says Theresa May

Postby Tribble » 2017-02-24 09:56am

Thanas wrote:as one guardian commentator aptly summarizes:

So 4 decades ago the UK begs the EU to let them join. After turning the UK away twice, the UK keeps begging and eventually the EU allows it to join. When the UK joins it is a complete and utter basket case of a country which has to go cap in hand to the IMF for a bail out. After joining the EU, the UK becomes wealthy but thats obviously nothing to do with the EU......that is just a coincidence

As a member of the EU the UK co writes all the rules and regulation for the last 4 decades but bizarrely complains all the time that it is being treated unfairly even though it has co written the rules, has a veto on anything it doesn't like and has gotten rebates and opt outs other countries do not get. The UK pushes hard for eastern expansion of the EU because its boss (the US) wants a bulwork against Russia and the UK is only one of 3 EU countries that chooses not to implement a 6 year moratorium on migrants from these new countries.

And now the UK has freely chosen to leave the EU and everyone has said pity but ok, thats your free choice....but bizarrely this is somehow being painted as if the EU forced the UK to join, never consulted the UK on any of the rules, made it a poor country, forced it to accept eastern migrants and is somehow trying to prevent the UK from leaving....the exact polar opposite of what is actually the case.

The UK has literally turned into the US where everything is upside down and back side front and where truth has no meaning whatsoever.


To be specific the UK electorate was never consulted on joining the EU (remember the referendum was only to join the EEC), and in the case of the Lisbon Treaty the electorate was flat out lied to by the party elected into office, which had promised to hold a referendum on the European Constitution Lisbon Treaty, then immediately ignored that promise and signed up anyways without consulting anyone. A major backlash was inevitable even if the EU had worked as well as intended. A similar thing could now potentially happen to France and the Netherlands, which incidentally held referendums where the electorate voted against signing the European Constitution Lisbon Treaty yet were promptly ignored by their respective governments.

Note the difference in Ireland. The electorate voted to reject the Lisbon Treaty, the government took the time to figure out why (partly because a lot of people were not educated enough on the Treaty to want to sign off on it and partly because the people who did know about the Treaty noticed a few things that they objected to) went back to the EU and pushed for some amendments, conducted a campaign to properly educate voters, then held a referendum on the new version... which passed. And now ~80% of the population support the EU.

IMO in a representative democracy democratic legitimacy is important and really shouldn't be put on the back burner in the name of progress.
"I reject your reality and substitute my own" - the official Troll motto as stated by Adam Savage

User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30291
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: Brexit: UK to leave single market, says Theresa May

Postby Thanas » 2017-02-24 10:24am

Tribble wrote:To be specific the UK electorate was never consulted on joining the EU (remember the referendum was only to join the EEC), and in the case of the Lisbon Treaty the electorate was flat out lied to by the party elected into office, which had promised to hold a referendum on the European Constitution Lisbon Treaty, then immediately ignored that promise and signed up anyways without consulting anyone.


They had promised to hold a referendum on a Constitution. After the Lisbon treaty was neutered it no longer was a constitution and thus it should not need a referendum.

Granted that escaped the notice of people because most of the British media never even bothered to spell out what the original Lisbon treaty and the altered version that was passed were supposed to be.

IMO in a representative democracy democratic legitimacy is important and really shouldn't be put on the back burner in the name of progress.


In the 1950s most Germans probably would not have voted in favor of the European or democratic institutions that were put into place as they were imposed upon them. Was that a wrong decision in hindsight?

The mass of voters tend to use those referendums not as decisions on the issues at hand but with regards to how they feel about their current government.

I would agree that in principle there should be a referendum but not in cases where there cannot be an honest debate because two thirds of the media are openly lying about and bitterly hostile against the general idea.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs

User avatar
Tribble
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2049
Joined: 2008-11-18 11:28am
Location: stardestroyer.net

Re: Brexit: UK to leave single market, says Theresa May

Postby Tribble » 2017-02-24 11:21am

Thanas wrote:They had promised to hold a referendum on a Constitution. After the Lisbon treaty was neutered it no longer was a constitution and thus it should not need a referendum.

Granted that escaped the notice of people because most of the British media never even bothered to spell out what the original Lisbon treaty and the altered version that was passed were supposed to be.


Erm, the vast majority of the contents of the European Constitution was put into force via the Lisbon Treaty, it's essentially the same thing. Even the architects of the European Constitution and Lisbon Treaty stated as much, with Valéry Giscard d'Estaing going so far as to state at one point that the Lisbon Treaty is mostly the European Constitution, just reorganised, spread out and deliberately eschewing constitutional vocabulary in order to try and avoid the need to trigger a referendum.

In any even, even if the Lisbon Treaty was technically not a constitutional document it was still a major treaty change with significant transfers of sovereignty to EU institutions and the public should have been consulted before signing of on it. In the UK's case there was already precedent set by having a referendum on the EEC, and the EU and Lisbon Treaty were of far greater importance than that.

Trying to pull the wool over people's eyes by pretending differently and using technicalities to try and get away from any scrutiny is precisely the kind of attitude which ends up with things like Brexit.

Again, case in point - Ireland held referendums on the Lisbon Treaty, and now Ireland has one of the highest levels of supports for the EU. Working with the public on issues like this IMO is far better in the long run than trying to BS things past them.

I'm rather surprised you fail to see the implications of a government making a major promise such as holding a referendum on a major treaty change, getting elected based on that promise, then using technicalities to avoid that promise and sign up for a treaty which is essentially the same without consulting anyone. And Btw the promise to hold a referendum was something that every single party in the UK agreed to do if elected. This wasn't a minor issue, it was a central part of the election. I knew from the moment the government ignored that promise that a referendum on the UK's membership was inevitable, it was just a matter of when, not if.

If you actually believe that's how things should be done and that's how the EU and its members should be operating... well, you and are going to have to disagree on that point.

In the 1950s most Germans probably would not have voted in favor of the European or democratic institutions that were put into place as they were imposed upon them. Was that a wrong decision in hindsight?


Could you be more specific here? Are you referring to imposition of Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany, which was imposed by the Allies after WW2?

Thanas wrote:The mass of voters tend to use those referendums not as decisions on the issues at hand but with regards to how they feel about their current government.


Even assuming you are correct, that does not excuse a government from making a major treaty change without public consultation. Even though the Lisbon Treaty was technically not a Constitutional Document there were still more than enough substantial changes to warrant one. And this is particularly the case in the UK as there had already been a precedent set by holding a referendum on the EEC membership.

Thanas wrote:I would agree that in principle there should be a referendum but not in cases where there cannot be an honest debate because two thirds of the media are openly lying about and bitterly hostile against the general idea.


Again the UK had voted to join the EEC via referendum. Ireland agreed to join the Lisbon Treaty via referendums, after resolving the issues I discussed earlier. It's quite possible to have a meaningful debate and hold referendums on the issue and I am of the firm opinion that had the UK government gone the Irish route with regards to the Lisbon treaty instead of what it did things would have turned out much better in the long run.
"I reject your reality and substitute my own" - the official Troll motto as stated by Adam Savage

User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30291
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: Brexit: UK to leave single market, says Theresa May

Postby Thanas » 2017-02-24 12:39pm

Tribble wrote:Erm, the vast majority of the contents of the European Constitution was put into force via the Lisbon Treaty, it's essentially the same thing.


No. They are not. Pretending they are is pretty much ridiculous. For example, the basic rights charter that was supposed to become a European basic law still does not affect everybody directly because the principle of subsidiarity was applied to it and it only applies when implementing EU law. Even moreso because Britian was granted an opt-out to it.

So you cannot just say they are the same thing. They are clearly not and the treaty of Lisbon does not have the same force as a constitution, nor does it supercede national constitutitons.


In the 1950s most Germans probably would not have voted in favor of the European or democratic institutions that were put into place as they were imposed upon them. Was that a wrong decision in hindsight?


Could you be more specific here? Are you referring to imposition of Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany, which was imposed by the Allies after WW2?


I am talking about the European coal and steal association and the structure of the federal republic, as well as the first beginning of the European community.

Again the UK had voted to join the EEC via referendum. Ireland agreed to join the Lisbon Treaty via referendums, after resolving the issues I discussed earlier. It's quite possible to have a meaningful debate and hold referendums on the issue and I am of the firm opinion that had the UK government gone the Irish route with regards to the Lisbon treaty instead of what it did things would have turned out much better in the long run.


With the British press that would have taken a major understanding, never mind the fact that Cameron did not want to negotiate in good faith (pandering to UKIP while trying to play the international diplomat on the bigger stage) and that Corbyn has never been a supporter of the European Union and sabotaged the referendum campaign whenever he could at worst and at best was impressively inept.

So you tell me - who would have been the politican that would have had an honest debate in the climate of half the British press hounding the EU? I mean ridiculous lies and falsehoods were peddled with the British press lapping it up. That is not an honest debate, that is a propaganda campaign. Honestly the only party that ever did anything worthwhile to promote the EU was the SNP.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs

User avatar
Tribble
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2049
Joined: 2008-11-18 11:28am
Location: stardestroyer.net

Re: Brexit: UK to leave single market, says Theresa May

Postby Tribble » 2017-02-24 01:31pm

Thanas wrote:No. They are not. Pretending they are is pretty much ridiculous. For example, the basic rights charter that was supposed to become a European basic law still does not affect everybody directly because the principle of subsidiarity was applied to it and it only applies when implementing EU law. Even moreso because Britian was granted an opt-out to it.

So you cannot just say they are the same thing. They are clearly not and the treaty of Lisbon does not have the same force as a constitution, nor does it supercede national constitutitons.


How is it pretending when people like Valéry Giscard d'Estaing flat out admitted what the Lisbon Treaty was intended to be from the start?

And again, even assuming you are correct that still doesn't negate my main points that

A) the UK already had a precedent for referendums via the referendum on EEC membership
B) regardless of whether or not they were Constitutional documents the Maastricht Treaty and Lisbon Treaty were at least a big a game changer as the EEC (if not more so), particularly when it came to sovereignty issues
C) All political parties had promised a referendum on a major treaty change such as the European Constitution, and refusing to honour it and pretending like the Lisbon Treaty was insignificant enough to warrant one caused significant democratic legitimacy issues which IMO ultimately led to the Brexit referendum (though not necessarily Brexit itself) and
D) Ireland is a clear case which demonstrates that ensuring democratic legitimacy via holding proper consultations with the public, getting the public's input and trying to accommodate the public's concerns can lead to much higher level of support for things like the Lisbon Treaty and the EU than ramming it through parliament.

Note that in this particular instance I'm actually criticising the national governments of the UK, France and the Netherlands far more than the EU itself. The UK especially.

Thanas wrote:I am talking about the European coal and steal association and the structure of the federal republic, as well as the first beginning of the European community.


What do you think early 1950s Germany would have preferred?

Thanas wrote:With the British press that would have taken a major understanding, never mind the fact that Cameron did not want to negotiate in good faith (pandering to UKIP while trying to play the international diplomat on the bigger stage) and that Corbyn has never been a supporter of the European Union and sabotaged the referendum campaign whenever he could at worst and at best was impressively inept.

So you tell me - who would have been the politican that would have had an honest debate in the climate of half the British press hounding the EU? I mean ridiculous lies and falsehoods were peddled with the British press lapping it up. That is not an honest debate, that is a propaganda campaign. Honestly the only party that ever did anything worthwhile to promote the EU was the SNP.


Erm, the signing of the Lisbon Treaty was done by the UK in 2007 and it was enacted in 2009, with the Labour Party under PM Gordon Brown in charge with a majority government.

I presume you were talking about the 2010 election which occurred after the Lisbon Treaty was already signed and in force. Or maybe the 2015 election? Either way by then I agree that public and media sentiment made an honest debate very difficult, particularly after the stunt the Labour Government had pulled. That really soured the public's mood on the whole thing, and I knew from that point onwards an in/out referendum was inevitable.

Perhaps the culture in Germany is different so things like that simply aren't a big deal, but I saw a Brexit referendum coming from a mile away.
"I reject your reality and substitute my own" - the official Troll motto as stated by Adam Savage


Return to “News and Politics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests