Compromise

[Guest binatone]

If there's one thing that this government DON'T care about, it's public opinion.

I certainly agree with you to a certain degree.

But what they do care about is getting re-elected. That’s why in this so called democracy of ours, we get unpopular governments who don’t mind being unpopular as long as they get re-elected. And that’s why they are very couscous when it comes to making radical change.

Remember Thatcher’s downfall. Public opinion meant that because of Thatcher’s radical stance on the then poll tax, it meant that many of her back benchers and front seat colleagues would not get elected at the next election. Hence the knight of the long knives.

A woman who had leaded an unpopular party into government for three terms, because of public opinion had to go.

[Steve Coppolo]

I certainly agree with you to a certain degree.

But what they do care about is getting re-elected. That’s why in this so called democracy of ours, we get unpopular governments who don’t mind being unpopular as long as they get re-elected. And that’s why they are very couscous when it comes to making radical change.

Remember Thatcher’s downfall. Public opinion meant that because of Thatcher’s radical stance on the then poll tax, it meant that many of her back benchers and front seat colleagues would not get elected at the next election. Hence the knight of the long knives.

A woman who had leaded an unpopular party into government for three terms, because of public opinion had to go.

 

I don't want to turn this thread into a political one, but I remember over 1 million people marching through the streets of London in protest against us going to war with Iraq. Almost all of the reasons they gave for protesting have become reality. All the reasons Blair gave for going to war have since been exposed as fantasy. Yet he still got re-elected.

 

Look what Thatcher did to the miners, then remember the Wapping riots. Yet she still got re-elected. I believe it was her own party that got rid of her, not public opinion.

 

There isn't one industry that can count on public opinion to prevent the government of the day from bringing about it's decimation. I know from experience that the more public support you've got, the more the government will demonise you. Unfortunately, they control the media.

[Ken Davison South Wales]

When the EU started I personally could see there could be advanatages but as time has gone on our position has been eroded.

 

I see this as partly our fault as we sat on the fence trying to call all of the shots, a pact formed between Germany and France, and lastly a lot of bad mouthing by our media.

 

That is my opinion of the overal view for what it's worth.

 

The fishing policies have been a total washout as far as I can see, they suit no one on this side of the channel.

 

I can see the point raised that it would be difficult to manage "OUR" stocks as they know no boundaries, we could come up with a good management on our side only to see somone else scoping up the benefits.

 

All in all it is a bit of a quagmire and some else stated some times we have to take on strange bed fellows in order to win, the EU policies do appear very strange but we are probably better in fighting our corner than out.

 

I must admit I would rather think other wise.

 

I do agree that if RSA and the commercials were to fight shoulder to shoulder we would have a decent size mallet to hit them with, we would hold a substancial vote and I am sure a large number of our freshwater anglers would lend their weight.

Edited November 27, 2005 by Ken Davison South Wales

[Guest binatone]

I don't want to turn this thread into a political one, but I remember over 1 million people marching through the streets of London in protest against us going to war with Iraq. Almost all of the reasons they gave for protesting have become reality. All the reasons Blair gave for going to war have since been exposed as fantasy. Yet he still got re-elected.

 

Look what Thatcher did to the miners, then remember the Wapping riots. Yet she still got re-elected. I believe it was her own party that got rid of her, not public opinion.

 

There isn't one industry that can count on public opinion to prevent the government of the day from bringing about it's decimation. I know from experience that the more public support you've got, the more the government will demonise you. Unfortunately, they control the media.

Yes Steve you are correct about what you say, but Blaire was very cleaver on what he did with public opinion on the war.

He knew it was not a popular war and I think that he would of struggled a lot more in the last election was it not for him saying that if he and his party where re-elected then he would not stay a full term in office but would hand over the rains to brown.

But he did suffer because of his stance against public opinion against the war.

A lot of back benchers lost there jobs.

The conservative vote did not improve but people (his own labour voters) did not vote for him.

A very large majority was reduced significantly and it was his own doing.

Going back to what dale said. What I am trying to suggest is that public opinion may not alter the final decision of a strong government, but it will sway them in how they make there decisions prior to them reaching there goal. That is getting re-elected.

It’s not the politicians that you first need to be on your side, it’s the people that elect them.

I think that what you need to find out is what would be the public’s opinion on a recreational industry replacing a commercial industry?

[Jaffa]

Hi Binatone,

 

Fwiw I don't have much faith in the idea that the good old British public will continue to see comercial fishermen in a good light. Go back a few years and that would be the case, but times are changing very fast and their is a barrage of anti commercial stuff (much of it true) coming through the media now. Did you notice much rational comment in the papers, let alone sympathetic stuff, when the issue of bass pair trawling/greenpeace was on the go? The commercials will lose this one imho; many voters are way detached from the realities of commecial fishing nowadays

 

Fight this on any kind of faith in voters sympathies for the commercials and you lose imho.

 

Europe is a different thing altogether. I can see Johns point in supporting the Cod crusaders; It don't matter if its possible or not surely? It could produce clout surely?

[Jaffa]

Hi Leon, someone's got to do it, so........

 

Even Iceland has 20 species of fish that require International management, I'm told that we have 80 species.

 

If we did withdraw from the CFP, Europe would still be out there fishing and managing European fish stocks.

 

How they manage the European stocks and the marine environment, we would no longer have any say in.

I agree, there are species that need international management but this seems a spurious argument given that this is still the case with a bloc as big as the EU. Scotlands fishermen depend heavily on Monkfish. The fishery could be very sustainable given that its a recruitment fishery; monks found on the continental shelf are the overspill from breeding stocks on our continental slopes.

 

At this very moment Spanish financed, and third world crewed, boats are apparently laying waste to the adult stocks. Landings are into EU ports, fuelling etc is done through EU ports, it has been going on for years and yet their seems no prospect of it being ended?

 

IMHO it is not working and has no prospect of working.

 

In the case of a species like Monk, with a huge range (tagging expt's done in Shetland showed the wee buggers making it to Faroe! ). For deepwater species like these the CFP offers nothing.

 

Come up onto the shelf and "shallow water " species and things change. You say

 

But would that matter because we alone would be managing the marine environment and stocks up to the median line?

 

But a lot of the fish we catch this side of the line are often over the other side of the line.

 

And the food, spawning grounds etc are often over the other side of the line too, being managed by the EU countries for their benefit not ours, and we would not have any say in that management.

 

So, to avoid the situation where we were grabbing everything we can before it disappears over the line, and where the EU boats from many nations are waiting to grab it, or prevent them swimming back this way, we would need to enter into some kind of International Fisheries and Marine Management Agreement(s) with the EU nations, with Norway, with Iceland etc.

 

How would that work?

 

How true is a lot of this? Yes, there are species that cross the "lines", but given the points you often make on the changed pattern of Bass migration (they apparently stay mostly in our waters) , add all the stuff that's coming out from the DNA studies, which show many smaller sub stocks, that can be localised, and im not so sure this holds as much sway as it used to?

 

Even for those stocks that do "cross the fence" , Norway seems to manage dealing with these same kind of negotiations and have better stocks than any EU country. If the difference is the lack of importance of fish stocks to UK plc, then why not move control to Scotland PLC where they do matter politically?

[Guest binatone]

Hi Binatone,

 

Fwiw I don't have much faith in the idea that the good old British public will continue to see comercial fishermen in a good light. Go back a few years and that would be the case, but times are changing very fast and their is a barrage of anti commercial stuff (much of it true) coming through the media now. Did you notice much rational comment in the papers, let alone sympathetic stuff, when the issue of bass pair trawling/greenpeace was on the go? The commercials will lose this one imho; many voters are way detached from the realities of commecial fishing nowadays

 

Fight this on any kind of faith in voters sympathies for the commercials and you lose imho.

 

Europe is a different thing altogether. I can see Johns point in supporting the Cod crusaders; It don't matter if its possible or not surely? It could produce clout surely?

Well I suppose the proof will be in the pudding as they say. I have always been guided by experience jaffa, I know of no way of judging the future but by the past.

I think at times that we are all making too much out of nothing?

Still that wont help you catch anything on a cold wet night like tonight will it?

[Jaffa]

When was the last time anyone remembers a UK Fishery protection boat/ navy considering firing at a foreign ship in our waters, then deciding to use a helicopter to drop ropes to snarl up the offending trawlers prop. Smart, decisive action.

 

Norway vs a corrupt Political giant in the new Russia, yet they still stand up for themselves; because it matters to them.

 

Here, in response to the threat of EU fines, from the same EU that poured in the money that did the damage, our brave lads use guns to escort trawlers to port and hold them under who knows what powers?

 

Off topic, but my local force, Tayside Police, recently arrested a women under the Prevention of Terrorism powers, for walking through Dundee docks. Apparently If she'd been on a pushbike she'd have been legal!

[Ian Burrett]

No one will argue that the cfp has ben a distaster for the North Sea fishing stocks but the North Sea is an eco system that has to be managed as a full system because of the migratory tendencies of fish stocks.

 

The cfp has failed because each nation's minister has tried to get the best deal for their own commercial fleet and not considered what is best for the whole

 

IMO Withdrawing from the cfp isn't an option. What is the point of putting in management sytems on a local scale if the the breeding stock or feed like the sandeels are being wiped out acros the other side of the North sea?

 

Do you think the other European countries would listen to any of our arguments we put forward, no matter how sensible if we pulled out?

 

It's the thinking of all European MP's that has to be changed by making decisions that are for the benefit of the whole eco system and fish stocks and not for the benefit of each individual countries commercial fleet.

 

A situation is probably arising where by next year, it will be possible to kill tope in the Scottish side of the Solway Firth but steam a few hundred yards South to the English side and it will be illegal.

 

That's just one example that demonstrates how ludicrous it would be if stocks were managed on a local basis.

 

 

There has been concerns expressed that the BMP will give the French an advantage over the UK commercial Fleet. How would pulling out of the cfp help this situation. At least within the cfp we have a chance to take our policies to Brussels and hopefully bring them into line so there is an equal playing field.

 

 

 

Personally I would like to see politicians taken out the equation and have a European think tank with all interested parties having representation. The tradition fishing rights of individual countries should have no bearing on the decisions made. It should start with a clean sheet and compensation paid out to commercial fisherman, where necesary to avoid the wasteful discards and other temporary short comings. I can't see any difference between this and farmers setaside.

The compensation would be based upon historical official landings so those that were involved with the black market would lose out.

 

Yes it would mean endless meetings, committees etc, but unfortunatley that's the way democracy works.

 

The sea is just one big pond and has to managed as such.

Edited November 28, 2005 by Ian Burrett

[JB]

Thank you for responses. However, we appear to be at cross purposes. My intention in starting this thread was not to set up a debate as to the pros and cons of the CFP. I will say again, as I have said in every post I have made on this thread so far, I do not think our politicians will let us leave the CFP.

 

My post was about angling politics, and how I would tackle it if I where a big wheel in RSA circles. Not that I want to be; nor do I know very much about angling politics. But not knowing about a thing does not stop people posting on this forum - and nor should it, as we can all learn from the answers given.

 

May I ask you to indulge me by re–reading my first post and giving your opinions on the possible political advantage to anglers of supporting the cod crusaders.

 

Also, something to bear in mind: perhaps the cod crusaders also think it is impossible to withdraw from the CFP – although I’m sure they would never admit it. But if they aim high, they might get something to their advantage.