Brexit and Fishing - The Latest

Brexit and Fishing - The Latest

We’re at the end of another week and there’s been no progress on fishing. There are only twelve working days left to the self-imposed deadline.

The research group “The UK in a Changing Europe” has just published an excellent analysis of the issues around fishing and it makes depressing reading. The link to the full report is here: Brexit and Fisheries

There are some very interesting disclosures. As the UK seeks to obtain a position similar to that enjoyed by the three non-EU countries, Norway, Iceland and the Faroes, the report points out that those countries have carefully ensured that the benefits of their respective shares of fishing rights belong to their own nationals, by ensuring that vessels registered are also owned entirely or mostly by them.

As I’ve written before, the UK along with most other EU member States has permitted unrestricted ownership of both vessels and quota. Allowing people to benefit from something initially given out by the State for free was never a good idea, but tied in with the neo-liberal views of the Tories and Blairite Labour. With the UK out of the EU it looks like a form of insanity, because effectively the UK’s negotiators are trying to secure benefits for a “British” fleet a significant percentage of which isn’t British at all. Anyone thinking that after Brexit they’ll see the end of Dutch supertrawlers is in for a nasty surprise.

The final section contains very stark warnings for anyone who thinks that Scottish politicians will have much say in what happens after Brexit. Perhaps some of the Tories who gained seats in the North East by promoting the “benefits” of Brexit will be allowed to flex their tiny muscles, perhaps not.

What is tragically clear is that for the vast majority of Scottish boats, who (a) fish on the West coast (b) fish non-quota species and (c) export to Europe the outlook is totally bleak.

The final section of the report is worth quoting in full.

“Implications for devolution

Leaving the CFP and developing a new approach to fisheries policy presents challenges for the UK’s devolved settlement. Fisheries policy is a devolved competence, meaning in Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales it is up to up to the national administrations to decide on policies and how to enforce them. However, successful fisheries policy requires administrations to engage in international negotiations on shared fish stocks with neighbouring countries and international trade. These functions are not devolved and power in these areas remains firmly within the UK government’s control. As an EU member state, the CFP provided a general framework within which fisheries could be devolved, and leaving the CFP removes this common reference point. As the UK seeks to develop its own approach to fisheries, there is the potential for it to expose tensions in the relationship between the UK government and the devolved administrations. If the UK is to develop a successful postBrexit fisheries policy, these barriers will need to be overcome. As noted at the start of this report, the fishing industry varies in scale in each of the nations of the UK and has very different interests. On the one hand, this variation highlights the limits to a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach to future fisheries policy. But the need to engage in areas outside of the devolved nations’ competence, along with the fact that UK fishing vessels can fish anywhere in UK waters regardless of where they originate, also highlights the need for cooperation across the UK. To achieve this, the government has proposed that fisheries be subject to a ‘common framework’. The Fisheries Bill proposes to achieve this through Joint Fisheries Statements, in which the UK fisheries administrations jointly set out their policies for achieving key objectives. The bill also sets out powers for the devolved administrations in a number of areas, including licensing and marine conservation. Yet the proposed legislation also sets out that fishing opportunities will be decided at the UK level (albeit in consultation with the devolved administrations). An effective UK government veto over what is decided at the international level has also been criticised: it has been a point of tension with the devolved administrations, particularly with Scotland. As the dominant player in the UK’s fishing industry, Scotland has called for a greater say in how UK fisheries policy is made and for a seat at the table in negotiations with neighbouring coastal states.

Overall, while there is common agreement on the need to work together on fisheries policy, the process involved and who should have influence remains contested. As the UK government handles English UK fisheries directly, there is a worry in some quarters that UK fisheries policy may become dominated by English interests. While the size of the Scottish fishing industry should protect it, there is a fear that the relatively small size of the Northern Irish and Welsh fishing industries will see their interests lose out. The Conservatives have been able to appeal to fishing interests in the devolved nations, particularly in Scotland, where it is argued that their stance on fishing has helped them to win a number of coastal constituencies, but their voters will want to see their promises delivered on. The implications for devolution go beyond territorial politics. Even with cooperation, it will be up to the devolved administrations to implement and administer policy. Scotland has invested significantly in its ability to govern fisheries policy. Marine Scotland has significant policy making and scientific capacity in this area. However, this scale of investment is not matched in Northern Ireland or Wales, where administrative and scientific capacity is much smaller. Transferring policymaking powers from Brussels to these devolved administrations will need to be backed by the necessary resources. A long period without a devolved government in Stormont has also led to Northern Ireland’s voice and interests to be largely overlooked. The situation in Northern Ireland is further complicated by the question of the border, or in the case of fisheries the lack of an agreed maritime border between Ireland and Northern Ireland. Whatever happens, once the future regime is settled, all four governments will need to work together. Fisheries has become a disproportionally ‘loud’ area of policy dispute since the 2016 referendum, which has seeped into constitutional politics. This has put the day-to-day working relationships of officials at the devolved and UK levels (particularly between Marine Scotland and DEFRA) under considerable strain and led to a lack of communication and cooperation at the political level. For any post-Brexit settlement to work, those functioning relationships need to be re-established to allow effective cooperation.”