EU getting impatient

[AtW]

I hope the irony isn't lost on anyone. The French designed the CFP purely so they could absolutely rape foreign waters with impunity.

If they were so successful and defending their national interests, what do you think is different this time for them to fail do it again?

[Mordac]

If they were so successful and defending their national interests, what do you think is different this time for them to fail do it again?

And yet we're told this isn't what the EU is about (blatant self-interest). The mask is falling off...

[AtW]

And yet we're told this isn't what the EU is about (blatant self-interest). The mask is falling off...

EU protects blatant self-interest of its members

[darmstadt]

I hope the irony isn't lost on anyone. The French designed the CFP purely so they could absolutely rape foreign waters with impunity.

Do you have proof of that or is it just a wide ranging Trump-like statement?

[Whorty]

And yet we're told this isn't what the EU is about (blatant self-interest). The mask is falling off...

Who said this? We said from day one that the EU is there to protect its member's interests - that was one of the benefits of the UK being a member you muppet. Now we've left then we will be (blatantly) looking after our self interest whilst the EU will be for their own. It's really not rocket science mate to understand this

[Mordac]

Do you have proof of that or is it just a wide ranging Trump-like statement?

The European Union’s Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), dating from 1970, basically consists of an agreement between the then six members of the European Economic Community (EEC) that fishing vessels belonging to member states would have free and equal access to the waters of all other members (Directive 2141/70, later replaced by 101/76).

The clear purpose was to gain unrestricted access to the rich (being strictly conserved) fish stocks of the United Kingdom, Ireland and Norway, which together with Denmark had just applied to join the EEC, the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC, amalgamated with the EEC in 2001) and the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom).

It had nothing to do with management or conservation. It was a ruthless political gambit, with no legal basis, to give powerful commercial interests in other member states an entry ticket to the well conserved Norwegian, UK and especially Scottish waters, which they would otherwise have been unable to exploit. Later, as EU global ambitions expanded, the control of the surrounding seas was seen as another function that could be added to the EU’s powers to help it on its way to becoming a European state.

From: How the EU Common Fisheries Policy Permanently Damaged Scotland: A Warning for Iceland

[Mordac]

Who said this? We said from day one that the EU is there to protect its member's interests - that was one of the benefits of the UK being a member you muppet. Now we've left then we will be (blatantly) looking after our self interest whilst the EU will be for their own. It's really not rocket science mate to understand this

I phrased that badly. I think you'll find the EU exists to protect the EU's interests. Member states (especially the non-compliant ones), and particularly their electorates, are somewhat of an inconvenience.

[darmstadt]

From: How the EU Common Fisheries Policy Permanently Damaged Scotland: A Warning for Iceland

So you don't actually have proof that it was the French as you stated as such in your original comment. Instead you post part of a website from this guy, a nationalist Scots who has now ****ed off to Canada:



Arguments for and against the Common Fisheries Policy - Debating Europe is a good site to see various views from different people. Personally I think this zealous argument over fishing will do the UK along with the trade negotiations more harm than good. The financial sector is far more important and will affect much more than fishing.

[Whorty]

I phrased that badly. I think you'll find the EU exists to protect the EU's interests. Member states (especially the non-compliant ones), and particularly their electorates, are somewhat of an inconvenience.

The 'EU' is the member states; they are not separate despite the narrative from Brexiters. The members pay into and run the EU via their democratically elected representatives. If a member isn't getting their view across the maybe the member should be looking at their MEPs to find out what they are doing and why they aren't going to the EU meetings

I know it's hard to grasp, but now we've left the EU they really don't give two flying fooks about us and our wishes, unless this aligns with what the EU member states' wishes.

Again, we knew this pre 2016 but somehow brexiters thought we held all the cards and hence we could bully them to bend to our desires - this was never the case. Do you feel duped yet, or are you still pretending this is what you voted for?