Should EU confront fishermen?
The blockade of Calais, halted for the moment as I write, is a very European affair. The trigger for the protest is the EU agreement on the number of cod that they are allowed to catch. This was agreed by ministers from the EU's 27 countries at a by now traditional pre-Christmas, overnight wrangle.
But now a couple of British MEPs are saying that the European Commission should get tough with the French for not making sure people enjoyed the EU right of free movement between countries.
The Conservative MEP Richard Ashworth says: "The French government continues to ignore its obligation to provide free passage for Britons travelling in the European Union.
"France continues to turn a blind eye to this kind of deliberate disruption to a crucial trade route and it is totally unacceptable."
Peter Skinner, a Labour MEP, thinks action should be taken because "for too long organised groups of protesters have been able to flaunt the law and breach European rules on the free movement of goods and services, with the French government seemingly unable or unwilling to do anything about it".
"The Commission should take action as they have done in the past when Labour's Neil Kinnock, who was the commissioner for transport, pursued the French authorities in the European courts."
Of course it is not only "Labour's Neil Kinnock" who has taken action against countries. It happens on an almost weekly basis: just the other day the transport commissioner issued a warning to Poland and Spain over port safety.
But in this case, so far, not a peep. There's not the whisper of a warning or a news release on their website and MEPs are finding it difficult to get an answer out of anyone. This may be just post-Easter sleepiness on the Commission's part or a desire not to get into a rumble with Sarkozy. I will update you if there is a response.
In the meantime, should the "guardians of the treaty" show a bit of muscle or keep their noses out of this dispute?
I’m Mark Mardell, the BBC's North America editor. These are my reflections on American politics, some thoughts on being a Brit living in the USA, and who knows what else? My 
© 2012~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~32~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Brits are obviously not alone in thinking that the EU meddles in their domestic policy and national rights !
Fishing should remain a nationally administered matter, with the UK again policing its own waters.
The EU would not DARE to suggest that the oil under UK waters did not belong to Britain, so why should they arbitrarily decree that fish in British waters belong to the EU.
I have every sympathy with the French fishermen's action. It's just a pity that the UK suffers most when such action is taken, whereas as Brussels and Strasbourg are unaffected.
At the most, the blockaders will be given a stiff caution and fined a euro each for daring to breach the edits of foreigners and plutocrats.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
The French constitution affords the people the right to protest. Preventing them protesting would result in a visit to the European Court of Human Rights.
People need to consider the big picture. The European Community is slowly eroding the feasability of small businesses, often family owned ones, to function in their chosen industry. This has happened to dairy farmers via milk quotas for example. It is now happening to European fishermen. Big corporations are seizing control of traditional industries (Wiseman Dairies for example)
At least the French do things that are noticed. Here in Britain we huff and puff about things but in the end we take it on the chin because that's the British way.
Complain about this comment
The Frogs are hopping mad again, and the Roastbeefs are stuck in the sandwich.
Complain about this comment
Why is they always block only the ports on the North Sea with such inconvenience to British users? If they really want to put pressure on their own government rather than the international or EU community wouldn't it be more sensible to block ports such as Marseilles?
The EU really must grasp the metal and challenge any country that hinders free movement as well as other issues such as safety of ports taken up with Poland. To make rules and not carry through their enforcement just makes a nonsense of the EU.
Complain about this comment
at I hate berry
He never said they couldn't protest, just that they shouldn't be able to block vital trade routes whilst protesting
Complain about this comment
If the EU is not prepared to enforce its own rules why should anyone else?
The simple reality is that the EU is a bureaucracy far removed from the daily life of people in the constituent countries. It is remote and indifferent.
Why every British government has felt it had to slavishly follow every EU guideline with gold-plated laws and regulations has always been beyond me.
We should join forces with all people across Europe who have a grievance with the EU and change it into a confederation of peoples rather than a proto-state of all Europe. Remember the British people only voted to become part of a free trade area.
Complain about this comment
Eh, it's only Britain that's been cut off, nothing to worry about you still have the chunnel.
Peter Skinner, a Labour MEP, thinks action should be taken because "for too long organised groups of protesters have been able to flaunt the law and breach European rules on the free movement of goods and services
I find this comment amusing considering it was the labour government that refused entry of a Dutch MP because of some anti-Islamic film, surely that would also go against the European rules. At least that's what I wanted to say and then I realised my error, he didn't even mentioned free movement of people... heh.
#5.Why is they always block only the ports on the North Sea with such inconvenience to British users?
My theory is that the French, along with the rest of continental Europe sees the EU following the Anglo-Saxon neoliberal approach to economics, which they don't like hence their targets have Britain in mind.
Or the slightly more logical and less Britain-centric answer would be: France is a large country which neighbours many countries so every time it goes on strike it affects all of its neighbours.
Complain about this comment
I never understood why huge ferries let little fishing boats get in the way the ferry operators should just drive straight through this illegal blockade.
Complain about this comment
"In the meantime, should the "guardians of the treaty" show a bit of muscle or keep their noses out of this dispute? "
Absolutely, it is time to get out the drones. Like in pakistan! Zap! That'll show em.
Complain about this comment
A little off-topic but since we're talking about France: has there been any notice taken by the BBC of the death of Maurice Druon?
Complain about this comment
Two things:
First, those contributors who think that the EU should get out of Fisheries Policy and leave it to the Member States are right - but for the wrong reasons. The truth is that the EU is on a hiding to nothing, trying to preserve fish stocks (through quotas) against the wishes of an industry determined to fish itself into extinction. Whatever quota is set, fishermen will complain and demand "compensation". Three things should be done:
a) Repatriate fishing policy so that people can't duck the issues by blaming Brussels
b) Give the right to fish certain areas of sea to fishermen sailing out of a particular port. Only by creating a sense of "ownership" in fish stocks can we give fishermen an interest in preserving them.
c) Set aside certain areas as no-fishing zones. These can act as national parks and reservoirs for fish species which will disappear in the rest of the sea due to overfishing.
Second, it's all very well suggesting that the EU intervene in a particular dispute, but all they can actually do is bring an action against the French government for failing to act. Even if successful, some years later, this will have no effect on the situation "on the ground".
Complain about this comment
I, for one, actually support the French trawlermen. They are seeking to protect their livelihoods.
The shame of it all is that the Scottish and English trawler fleets have been decimated by the EU control of the Common Fisheries Policy and successive supine UK Parliaments have not protected their own trawler fleet.
One can either expect the French government to give their fishing industry an increased forbidden-by-the-EU national subsidy or for the French government to ignore the agreed fishing quotas so that their trawlermen get their just reward for being militant.
It is a shame that the UK parliamentarians have not afforded their now-ex-trawler fleets the same sort of nationalistic support.
As ever the British rolled over, played the EU game with the CFP and it was British citzens and British trawler fleet who got stuffed. The French don't play the EU game except when it suits them and they get to see 'rewards' of being members of the EU.
Perhaps it is time the British peoples started blocking Folkestone, Dover, Ipswich and other coastal points of entry and ensured no more free passes into the UK until Britain get to see real benefits from being in the EU.
If militancy and civil dissent/unrest is good enough for the French it should be good enough for the British!
Complain about this comment
Is there any chance we could educate our MEPs in basic literacy? Or make them take a test before they're allowed to stand? The fact that Mr Skinner doesn't know the difference between 'flout' and 'flaunt' means he has just lost any credibility he might have on anything else he says.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#11, santori,
I'm just wondering why the BBC would be interested in the death of a French writer/politician, I'm afraid it's not exactly an International event.
#3, I_hate_barry wrote:
"The French constitution affords the people the right to protest. Preventing them protesting would result in a visit to the European Court of Human Rights."
We all have the right to protest and that is enshrined in law, but what we do not have is the right to use excessive force, whether that be blockades by ships, violent picket lines or the type of violent protests seen recently in London and Strasbourg against the G20 meetings. If the French fishermen want to protest then they can legitimately march on their deputies peacefully, they get away with their regular blockades since successive French governments are afraid of a new revolution occurring, and for the moment Sarkozy is about as popular in France as Brown is in England.
Here's a daft thought, maybe the EU should assign escort ships to escort British shipping into the French ports, using force if necessary, after all if EU police can operate in the UK (from various comments) then they can also be used to enforce the EU mobility laws.
Complain about this comment
People must be allowed to protest when their representatives ignore their wishes. The EU should compensate those inconvenienced for the failure of the EU experiment.
The British should be more active when they ignored by their 'representatives' - just keep your mobile phone/camera close and make sure that the police thug squads don't hide their id numbers.
Complain about this comment
Menedemus wrote:
"I, for one, actually support the French trawlermen. They are seeking to protect their livelihoods."
The rest of the post from Menedemus is a quite effective statement of the reality of national playmaking within the EU by member states, but this sentiment is seemingly in conflict with it.
Menedemus supports French workers because they are "protecting their livelihoods", but he advocates a national british policy that threatens these very same interests, by virtue of being focused on excluding them from certain waters and competing with them in the international marketplace.
I can't help but feel that when we compete, we are in a race of some kind. And with fisheries, we are racing our way to the bottom, a situation where we have no fish for an ever increasing population of protein starved Euro-proles.
And if someone's "livelihood" involves slash and burn ecological methods in the name of profit for remote investors, how much can we afford to respect people's right to work, if that work comes into conflict with the natural capacity of the ecology in an area?
Anyway, this is the current news for the EU, in terms of our quest to make ever increasing piles of stuff, ship it around the world, and sell it to each other:
"Eurozone industrial output plunged by a record 18.4% year-on-year in February, the biggest fall since records began in 1990, according to Eurostat."
Arthur C Clark and Rupert Murdoch are firm believers in the creed which says that human society is shaped by the visions of engineers and physicists, and that politicians and commentators.. well, they play politics and commentate.
With respect to that worldview, i would say biologists are going to have be admitted to the sacred club of people who matter. We seemed destined to witness a mad race between communications technology and overpopulation on one side, both of which are pressing the reality of a finite natural world in upon us, and robotics and energy technology on the other hand, both of which require an infinite marketplace if they are to progress to the point where they can save humanity from itself.
In short, german industrial robots lay silent for 20% of their productive time last year, and we still haven't decided how to kill the last wild fish in europe.
Is that what this system of a united Europe is promising the people for the future? A blind lurching struggle after economic growth, while the earth and sea are degraded? No wonder people don't like it. It is not exactly offering the solutions for the problems of our times.
Complain about this comment
#16 Wonder no more: he was a culturally and politically important figure. Having a look at the Arts and Culture page, I'm wondering why anyone would find, say, a Wilbur Smith Q & A more important.
Complain about this comment
I, also, support the French protests. The way the media is 'giving' the news is typically misleading. The fishermen are being depicted as idiots, and typically French because, as everyone knows, the French protest a lot. The latter PROBABLY is true. It's self evident that these people are protesting for good reasons.
The WhiteEnglishProud person, who's name is already self-explanatory as to his/her views otherwise such a name would not have even crossed this person's mind, does know what they're talking about. This type of 'White-proudness' typically consists of buying a £1.50 flag and supporting the national football team whenever they play. However should you ask these people about their own history, or serious matters such as social injustices, etc. not a clue. The difference between the typical Frenchman and typical Englishman lies in how each view their nation/culture. The typical French do not like things dictated to them, especially if there's anything involving injustice. However the typical Englishman does nothing. Example: when Mr Brown increased the taxes last year, thus affecting (English and non-English) families on low incomes; any protests? No. When Mr Johnson banned drinking Alcohol on London Transport; protests? Of course; because not being able to get wasted on the buses and tube is a real breach of human rights, a very serious violation of any human being's rights. Nevermind that there are pubs and bars, not to mention your own home, where you can drink yourself to death; at your will.
I do understand the frustration of holiday-makers, however not being able to earn money is much more serious.
So, as is self-evident from the above, what these French fishermen are protesting for is totally justified. Besides, as common-sense should dictate, the news would not give us the FULL story; for that Private Eye must be read.
Complain about this comment
Levlapozle
I guess you made an interesting point about WhiteEnglishProud but kind of undid it by making several massive generalisations about the French and English. If he/she had been BlackGhanaianProud we would probably applauded the person for having a strong allegiance to his/her roots. Instead you decided to give us your own racial stereotypes instead, I was so upset it almost made me lower my Cross of St. George to half mast, drink 10 pints of lager and beat up a foreign football fan
I too agree that the right to protest is paramount. Both nations histories are filled with famous protests from Anti-Corn Law, Poll Tax Riots, Peasants Revolt to the French protests on Labour Laws and their regular blockade of the Channel ports.
The problem is they are not just affecting a few holiday-makers - some of us earn a living by travelling to the continent, whether as drivers, sales representatives or those involved in the tourism industry. My sympathy stops when their protest stops me putting food on my family's table.
I have nothing against hard working fishermen being allowed to make a living - but perhaps they should consider who they are protesting against. They have made their point to me - sadly for them and myself I can do nothing to help their cause, so why should I have to pay?
Complain about this comment
Have i got this right, there are some travellers that still get the ferry to Calais, in early April??!
Complain about this comment
Its high time the french had a rap over the knuckles over this one firstly the fishing quoters they should stick to the rules like every one else quoters are quoters so stop pussey footing about you french fisherman, holding every other person to ransom like the pirates the other day and you know what happend to them take your dispute to the goverment,not inconvienecing every one else rember its the brits who helpet liberate you against the hun so stop giving them and everone else some stick we had enough of your nonsence last time. So REMEMBER the liberty we afforded you and return the complument.
Complain about this comment
While I can sympathize with the plight of fishermen who have no other work to do, there is no question, that continued fishing, where stocks have been drastically reduced, will risk loss of many species of fish, entirely.
Until governments find themselves forced to take action on over population, of humans, there will be no solution to the fishing problem. We simply eat more than is sustainable, with the number of people in the world today.
This is only one of a great many environmental issues that we will face in the next 10 yrs., and how we deal with them, is going to affect whether the planet will survive, or die. The choices will be hard, and people will be impacted, but the options are none.
Complain about this comment
HoHoHo! Hahaha! HeeeHeeHeee......!
Did someone say the EU Commission was going to "get tough with France"?
Oh no! Not again! Well how many times will it be "..time to get tough with France.." before the pro-EU lobbyists in the UK finally have the nerve to admit the 'EU is France/France is the EU' and thus nothing of a tough nature has ever/will ever occur?
Paris got stuffed by Berlin in 3 continental wars and knew it would result in the same debacle if there was another; thus, rightly France wanted to avoid all possibility of a future war with its neighbour (and to be fair Berlin having lost the 2nd and 3rd tour of European Capitals also wanted to avoid future wars). Both wanted the EU and as the BENELUX nations had also suffered from the violence and had fear and respect for their much larger Economic-Trade neighbours they joined in a natural alliance of the willing.
All the stuff after that is simply layer upon layer of aggrandizing EUrotocracy with an undeniable direct-hot-telephone-line from Paris to Berlin and thence to all the National nonentities inc. UK/England whose Membership will rank as an historic folly.
"The French Government continues to ignore its obligation," France, Mr Mardell! "There's not a whisper," France, Mr Mardell! "Should the 'guardians of the treaty' show a bit of muscle," France, Mr Mardell!
From President Coty to De Gaulle to Pompidou, D'Estaign, Mitterand, Chirac, Sarkozy the Elysee Palace with one unique raspberry sound say, 'Hohohoho, Hahahaha, Teeheeeteeeheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee to you all!'
Complain about this comment
Levlapozle
"The WhiteEnglishProud person, who's name is already self-explanatory as to his/her views otherwise such a name would not have even crossed this person's mind, does know what they're talking about"
Thank you for inadvertantly supporting my view. I think that regular contributors to this forum would recognise that in fact overal my Monikor has little to do with my views in general.
My post was intended to provoke reaction to the topic we are meant to be discussing and not as an invitation for baseless personal or even general attacks.
Blueatherts
What prey was the intresting point?
I do however agree with yyour final point
"I have nothing against hard working fishermen being allowed to make a living - but perhaps they should consider who they are protesting against. They have made their point to me - sadly for them and myself I can do nothing to help their cause, so why should I have to pay?"
I would only add without controls fish stock will become depleted and they will do themselves out of a job in the long run. Whilst i support the right of legal protest this was another illegal blockade which breaks the fundermental right of E.U citizens and businesses. Whilst i dont seriously condone ferry's running them down, I do believe that the French police or military should have broken this blockade
Complain about this comment
22. Yes, it may have slipped your notice that many thousands of families are short of money this year, through no fault of their own. April is a cheap time of year for travel, and a ferry is a cheap way of travelling. Shame on you.
Complain about this comment
"The Conservative MEP Richard Ashworth says: "The French government continues to ignore its obligation to provide free passage for Britons travelling in the European Union. France continues to turn a blind eye to this kind of deliberate disruption to a crucial trade route and it is totally unacceptable."
Is this a joke?? "France continues to turn a blind eye" and "the French government continues to ignore its obligation". Who the hell do they think they to make such comments?
It is in the French constitution that people are offered the right to protest.
now if this blocus by the fishermen is fair or not is another debate. I dont think it is, but this is only my opinion.
Of course the French government is more than worried when such actions are taking place. It is not only "the poor English people" who are hostages, but the French people too!
What do you want the French gov to do against Fishermen within 2 days of action? Send war ships and destroy the fishing boats?? Launch missils and a massive attack??
The French government did its best to stop this conflict as fast as possible, because it was in the interest of everyone. And knowing how perserverant fishermen can be, it is really good news the blocus is now over.
To "quietoldinthetooth":
"quoters are quoters": agree on this one.
"So REMEMBER the liberty we afforded you and return the complument": completely off topic. It would be good not to put in the same bag the French, and the "French fishermen of Calais". The first group contains 65 million people, the second one maybe 20 or 30 people.
To "ikamaskeip":
"Paris got stuffed by Berlin in 3 continental wars and knew it would result in the same debacle if there was another": ridiculous comment. History has not started in 1870, as far as I know.
Complain about this comment
Now aside from all the political wrangling, the nationalistic views and the despair at getting home.
There is perhaps a bigger point that is being missed.
Fish stocks are being depleted, we, as in everyone in Europe are overfishing.
Trawlernets are just too efficient, and quota's cause odd scenario's where fish are thrown back in the sea dead.
If France gives in and allows fishing quota's to be increased it will only further harm fish stocks, that are already dangerously low.
Didnt I read on the BBC a while back that advice was to halt fishing completely in some area's and the EU was unwilling to go that far?
Maybe this is a point that should be ignored, let everyone worry about the politics. Allow the rape of the oceans to be continued, and afterwards, when we cannot find any cod maybe then when the question is asked, why was nothing done? Perhaps then we can ask those fisherman who where on strike.
Complain about this comment
Is there not a certain irony in the fact that the French are prepared (with reasonable degrees of success) to tackle piracy far from their own shores, but not prepared to take on their own fisherman in their own ports?
Complain about this comment
I'm pleased to see such a wide set of views on this subject. We clearly do need to control the levels of various species in our oceans to sustain both our food supplies and fishing industries. The fact that fish from other continental areas have replaced British staples, such as cod, must be seen as a pretty bad sign, not only for the local fish levels, but in terms of cost and environmental impact of getting these fish to our shores in the first place. I know some 'experts' have claimed that the stocks of cod have reached higher levels - but it seems very recent that the depletion of cod was being brought to our attention - have levels seriously increased that rapidly?
Mrshamilton - what an excellent point, the main victims seem to be tourists on a shoestring budget as well as us poor souls trying to make a crust in EU land! If these guys have a problem with EU quotas - why take it out on queues of school outings stuck on their coaches? (If only the French had been so resolute in 1940 about blocking cross border travel!)
imaskeip; Had to smile about that - but surely the Franco-Prussian War cannot be classed as 'a Tour of European Capitals' and the Kaiser's army only took Brussels during the 1914-18 conflict.
WhiteEnglishProud
Well I thought "The WhiteEnglishProud person, who's name is already self-explanatory as to his/her views otherwise such a name would not have even crossed this person's mind, does know what they're talking about"
was an interesting point - and so must you as you para-phrased it yourself. Doesn't mean I thought it was right, I found it interesting that someone could make such an assumption based on the name you had chosen.
I even went on to say that it would have been considered as acceptable if someone had called themself 'BlackGhanaianProud' - I was defending you - kind of.
Complain about this comment
The ferry companies should all look at switching their operations from Calais to Ostend that would solve the problem permamently.
Complain about this comment
#29, Allattar,
I fully agree with your comment. Hopefully the fishermen were not authorized to increase their quota, that would have been the biggest mistake, but they were "only" given money from the government.
But if we go into further details of this issue, fishermen are only a link in the global system. At the extremity of this system lie... we, consumers.
Humanity is just doing a dramatic pillage of oceans... but who cares? As long as we have the fresh fish in our dish at the end of day. But for how long?
Complain about this comment
Axel 3175 and #28.
Look, you are being a tad over-sensitive: I never implied 'history' began in 1870; clearly there are always additional factors stretching over centuries. I was suggesting that as a result of the 2 occupations of France's Capital City by Prussia and Nazi Germany and the near-run-thing on the River Marne it was these events that brought about political and economic conditions for a raprochement between the 2 ancient rival neighbours on mainland Europe.
Do not want to write more as the main thrust of my comment was that France was and is the EU aided and abetted by Germany.
Complain about this comment
santori
Angry as Russia is at the moment with France, over the child dispute of 2 citizenships, two names in 2 different child passports and 2 courts ruling the custody to 2 different parents - all of this, accordingly in 2 different countries -
death of Maurice Druon was of course major headlines, and very sad headlines they were, here yesterday.
Don't know about how internationally, but we considered him own as well as French, Siberian dad. He became a frequent visitor to Russia - post-Perestroyka of course, when it again became possible, sang Siberian songs in top class manner! (and those have very tricky tunes not easy to manage the melodies) and a so historical writer, a classic, and all.
Good we didn't try to "split" Maurice Druon, as minimum.
Complain about this comment
"The French government continues to ignore its obligation to provide free passage for Britons travelling in the European Union."
Since Great Britain is not part of the Shengen agreement, I don't see why its citizens should have any right to enter on the French soil. You want to stay alone, why don't you enjoy it now?
Complain about this comment
The French fishermen may well be annoyed at cuts in their quoto, but they are still far better off than their British counterparts. The fishing grounds around the British isles were the most plentiful in Europe before the disaster of the common fisheries policy. Now they have been raped by commercial fleets from everywhere but Britain, who has seen her own fleets cut to a tiny rump through the imposition of absurd and unfair quotas. As far as I know the French still have a protected "box" in the sea in Biscay into which no foreign fishing vessel may stray. No such protection exists for British fishermen in British waters needless to say - so much for the "common" fisheries policy, or the notion of fish being a common European resource.
The only way to both protect fish stocks, which in some cases are close to a collapse which will rival the one off Canada decades ago, and from which Canadian stocks have still not recovered, and to defuse such arguments in the future, is to return fishery protection to individual member states of the EU, each responsible for its own territorial waters. The present scandal is just one more example of the inability of the EU to manage everything on a continent-wide basis. Of course that won't happen because it would entail the Euro fanatics having to conceed that the "one size fits all" mentality is not always appropriate. Compared to that, what does the total devastation of fishing stocks for several generations, if not far all time, matter?
As for the blockade of French ports, in total defiance of the fundamental principle of freedom of movement for all EU "citizens", and the obvious inability, or unwillingness, of the EU to ensure that it is not withheld from Britons who are always seemingly at the mercy of militant French fishermen, then it simply demands once again an answer to the question: "What exactly is the EU for?" Clearly it is not for the free movement of goods and services as we have been led to believe.
Complain about this comment
"Paris got stuffed by Berlin in 3 continental wars and knew it would result in the same debacle if there was another"
Imaskeip, revisionism can be fun, you should know, but lets be more precise, the 1870 war was won by the Prussians, not the Germans, and the first world war was won by the allies, including the french, who by the way were the ones who lost the greatest number of soldiers, so watch your mouth and respect the sacrifice of those men. As for 1939, we got our asses kicked, no doubt, although it has long been proved that the courage of the french forces were not the cause of the debacle, but terrible military choices in preparing for war (lack of tank divisions and the absurd Maginot line) and a quasi coup d'état by Pétain and his followers ), so one does wonder for how long are we so called "surrender monkeys" are gonna have to listen to dumb generalisations and prejudiced crap from ignorant people like you ?!
Complain about this comment
Since many who condemn the French authorities for inaction may not be aware of this I'll just inform you that, according to yesterday's edition of the local paper, the court at Boulogne instructed the fishermen to free access to Calais or pay a fine of 1 000 Euro per hour per boat. At Boulogne the fine would be 5 000 Euro per hour per boat (no I don't know why there's a difference but clearly even the lower rate was convincing - for the moment)
I'd just point out that although the three ports blockaded do indeed serve the UK the traffic affected was from all over Europe. That's why blockading them is such an effective way to get yourself noticed and make your point.
Complain about this comment
greypolyglot
"the court at Boulogne instructed the fishermen to free access to Calais or pay a fine of 1 000 Euro per hour per boat"
do you know if that court instruction will still be valid next time they decide to strike or whether as soon as the strike ended,the threat is gone and the court process will have to be repeated?
Complain about this comment
To Cilpale (36):
mmm, interesting point actually. The UK not being part of the Shenghen zone, ie in the zone of free passage and trade whithin the EU, there is actually no free passage and trade across the Channel. Just look like now the comments from the UK's minister are even more off track. However, it is justify the people to be angry because there were stuck somewhere in Dover or Calais. I definitely do not support this kind of selfish actions... even if, I admit, it is the best way to put pressure on the government shoulders. Anyway.
To WebAliceinwonderland (35):
a bit off topic I know, but why Druon is so famous in Russia?
To Ikamaskeip (34):
You are right, I am being over sensitive... but I sometimes read so many childish comments and stupid stereotypes. So I was sure this topic on fishermen on strike and messing traffic across the Channel would be a perfect new reason for bashing.
To Howayschweiz (30):
Well, the only reason is you cannot treat the same way armed pirates and your own fellow countrymen who just stand there with small fishing boats. Even if it is very boring for people awaiting for ferries, I 100% understand, there is no comparison. If the army deployed in Calais and if there is a single incident with confrontations and death of demonstrators, you can be sure there will be a massive scandal. Whereas the somalian pirates, it is sad to say that but who cares what happens to them? I think a situation like in we saw in Calais is much more complicated to deal with because you have to accommodate with everyone with of course no violence. This is almost unfeasible.
Complain about this comment
To WhiteEnglishProud (40):
hmm don't know. I would guess this court instruction is valid just for a period. But I fear if the fishermen strike again in a few months, the court process would have to be repeated again. However, if it is found these are the same people, the instructions would become increasingly repressive... and therefore dissuasive.
However, this actually shows France is using all the "legal" ways possible to end as fast as possible this unpopular strike. So this is just one more evidence of the absurdity of the comments from some of the British MEPs and Richard Ashworth.
Complain about this comment
One of the probable reasons that the cod-fishers are blockading the ports on the north sea is that these are the ports that traditionally house the largest amount of fishers that hunt for cod. For the past 1000 years the hunting grounds for cod have been in this part of the European seas: the central North Sea, the Northern North Sea, the entrance to the Baltic Sea and the coast of Norway.
It's still shorter than housing your cod-fishing enterprise further to the south and sailing around the British Isles as a way of reaching the fishing grounds in the north.
Soit, but it is of course typical for the fishermen to cause a lot of trouble. Not too dissimimlar from how farmers and truckers always make a mess when on strike...
Complain about this comment
Cracklite and #38.
Another tad sensitive Frenchman! Look, I refer you to my Comment #34 in reply to Axel3175.
Seriously, to any French and or Germans (inc. Prussians) my initial Comment #25 was a rushed and I thought lighthearted version of the complex issue that led to my main Comment... France, supported by Germany, is the beginning, middle and end of the EU.
Hence my impression of gusts of laughter eminating from the Elysee Palace.
No offence meant: Sincere apologies for tweaking Nationalistic traits.
Complain about this comment
To Ikamaskeip
lol no worries. It only seems we misinterpreted your post 25... it refers to the world wars, as we can oftenly read in some comments with pointless bashing. In the end, it is a bit boring for us to be most of the time referred to all this stuff, so that easily explains our reactions. That was not your case, so sorry for that. By the way, it seems Cracklite is even more over sensitive than me on this subject!!!! :P
Complain about this comment
No...
EU should confront Sarkozy and his Fascist Policies !
Complain about this comment
Stay out of this dispute. How about the right of free assembly and free speech? Why does that one trump the right of free passage? Maybe we should scrap this whole idea of a European Union. It is beginning to look more and more like a platform for big businesses and bureaucrats without any accountability. The firshermen are right and the Brits are wrong. I have noticed a tendency amongst British officials to preach and accuse and meddle, all the while wanting to keep their own independency.
Complain about this comment
And to the gunhoes who think it's just like Pakistan, just zap them. It's obvious you have blinders on. Clearly, the drones have done so well in Pakistan that Pakistan is now a flourishing democracy western style.
Complain about this comment
"Since Great Britain is not part of the Shengen agreement, I don't see why its citizens should have any right to enter on the French soil. You want to stay alone, why don't you enjoy it now"
In that case we would be fully justified in restoring the 12 mile limit for our territorial waters. That would then exclude all fishermen from the continental mainland from those waters and restore to our own fishermen the rights there that have been taken away from them.
Complain about this comment
42. Axel3175:
this is just one more evidence of the absurdity of the comments from some of the British MEPs and Richard Ashworth."
Courage. Many of my compatriots are unable to refer to France without mentioning WWI, WWII, garlic, Gauloises, onion-strings, bicycles or squat toilets. Sorry. Given time and enough trafic trans-Manche the old stereotypes will surely die off in the end.
Complain about this comment
Apologies accepted Ikamaskeip, but you must realise that constantly explaining current events in the light of past war, and especially in the light of the 1939 debacle when those events concern the French, is not making any sens, and it's getting old, so old...I just wish that the people I'm referring to will eventually get the message, but I fear it will take about a millenia.
Complain about this comment
Axel3175 "why Druon is so famous in Russia?".
LOL, you never collected 20 kilos of paper to submit to a "paper collection point", to get 1 coupon, giving you right to buy 1 "deficit" category book in a book-shop. :o) USSR habits.
I did, and not once, and many trolleyed their old newspapers and magazines to be able to buy exactly Moris Druon, smth from his historical novels' serie, about French kings. That was a serie "The damned kings".
I don't know why we all liked to read of French history simply liked.
Besides, Druon was "our people", joined De Gaulle movement in war, and USSR hugely supported De Gaulle. That's why I think Druon books were allowed to be sold in the USSR, in spite of their clearly LOL "alien to socialism" angle, neverending total monarchy and kings and queens' stories. French resistance man - our side in war. Thanks to French resistance - we got a chance to read about kings and queens :o)
Plus his father was from Orenburg, went to work in Nice in 1908, and then committed suicide there, and family stayed and then the revolution and all.
Also, it's all the Chant de la Liberation / song of French Resistance / partisans, connections. Moris Druon wrote words in French to it, translated from Russian. The music and the Russian text was our St. Petersburg girl, Anna Smirnova, also an immigrant, took in France the first name from the telephone book and became Anna Marly.
But Smirnova was from a very good family; Stolypin in relatives (tops Rus. minister pre-revolution and very decent. was our hope. lost chance. all crossed over by revolution.); she is relative to Lermontov (2nd top Russian poet, after Pushkin), so it's a tangle of things how all are cross-related, starts from Lermontov (1830)- ends by French resistance hymn! (may be also should mention that Lermontov family were originally from Scotland LOL).
Warm feelings in the result of all this tangle.
How can a book be bad, for which you once trollyed 20 kilos of old newspapers? :o)
Funny thing was remembered yesterday, from Druon memoirs. How he flew once to Orenburg, to see cousins, and happened to be in the same airplane as Chernomyrdin (Rus. ambassador to Ukraine. famous for catchy phrases).
Chernomyrdin asked stewardess for red French wine, and Dryon for simply a beer.
So Chernomyrdin stood up, walked to Druon and very worriedly and seriously asked him: Only beer?
- Yes.
- No vodka?
- No.
- Seriously, this is no good. Order some vodka at least, to add to your beer. Beer without vodka - money to the wind!
Druon wrote he laughed like mad. :o)
Complain about this comment
And of course if Druon wasn't the French Minister of Culture, but somebody else were - like hell we in the USSR would watch all French films, have cultural exchange, museums touring with exhibitions, we basically stayed connected due to his effort. Anyone else would be considered "capitalistic and counter-indicated, for the Soviet people".
But he had immunity, the very author of the French Resistance song, and, by origins, pre-dispositioned to Russians. Only his effort that we had glimpses of French-Soviet cultural exchange programmes.
I think if not for him - nobody in USSR would even know who is Brigitte Bardot. They'd gladly prohibit her movies as well.
So we feel obliged. As minimum, for Brigitte Bardot films!
Complain about this comment
#52 and 53 WebAliceinwonderland
Great stories as always. I'm always grateful for these insights into Russia.
Lermontov derives from the Scots name Learmonth. Did you know that we weave a specific Lermontov tartan?
Complain about this comment
Alice
There's a picture of the Lermontov tartan here
Complain about this comment
MalcomW2 :
According to French fishermen, the Bay of Biscay is regularly invaded by Spanish fishing boats and nobody does anything about it.
Fishing quotas may be a good idea. The real problem is that those quotas change every year and so fishermen never know what to expect. Some scientists say cod is not disappearing from the ocean; instead, it’s moving into deeper waters because of global warming.
If fishermen had any respect for what come from the EU commission, they would not complain about those quotas, which after all should be the way to save their way to make a living. Instead, they view them as capricious and biased.
It is absurd to invoke the fundamental principle of freedom of movement for all EU "citizens" in that case. If a road is blocked by a major snow fall, or an overturned truck, should the EU fine the country which let the road be blocked?
What’s the EU for? you ask. I don’t know anymore. It has taken a life of its own. Member states, which are the EU, are seen as small unruly children, which can be punished if they dare disagree with any obscure ruling of the commission’s bureaucrats.
Axel3175:
“You cannot treat the same way armed pirates and your own fellow countrymen who just stand there with small fishing boats.”
You are right of course. It would be well to remember that Somalian pirates became so because their fishing activity was destroyed by big foreign fishing boats which fished with much more efficient equipment than they had, and left them nothing to fish. That’s how they now make a living. It’s not a good idea to push people to despair.
And for all of you who started an argument on the various wars between France and Germany, please do not forget Joan of Arc. I, personally, feel very strongly about Julius Caesar’s invasion of Gaul, followed by such a lengthy occupation that the French language, oops the Gaulish language, got horribly corrupted by Latin word. Those people took shameful advantage of the fact that the French Academy had not been invented yet.
Delenda est EU.
Complain about this comment
#56 MariaTee
Ah, the what-ifs of history! If the Dauphin had not been so inconsiderate as to die young before impregnating Mary Queen of Scots, then France and Scotland would have been united long before we took up with our southern neighbours! They would have found it a little more difficult to avoid Schengen then!
Of course, the French centralist state would be giving the Scots even more problems than the UK one.
Complain about this comment
In the state of Michigan we have fish hatcheries for Great
lakes.Maybe different regions should consider something like it for Oceans ans seas.Maybe you do,I don't know.
Complain about this comment
#58 faeyth
Norway and Scotland are already planning to farm cod. this site describes the norwegian plan"
The Scottish proposal is modelled on the Norwegian system, but will be in on land tanks rather than in our sea lochs - where the potential contamination of wild fish has been a problem with salmon farming.
Complain about this comment
#36, Cilpale wrote:
"The French government continues to ignore its obligation to provide free passage for Britons travelling in the European Union."
Since Great Britain is not part of the Shengen agreement, I don't see why its citizens should have any right to enter on the French soil. You want to stay alone, why don't you enjoy it now?
**
It seems that you are one of those perfect believers who doesn't want to understand the rules and regulations of the EU, the Schengen agreement (not shengen) is to abolish border controls, nothing more nothing less. Consequently for your improved education this is the agreement, The Schengen Agreement is a treaty signed between five of the ten member states of the European Community in 1985. It was supplemented by the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement some five years later. It provided for the removal of systematic border controls between the participating countries.
The Amsterdam Treaty incorporated the Schengen Agreements into the mainstream of European Union law. Ireland and the United Kingdom opted out of Schengen's border control arrangements, while participating in certain provisions relating to judicial and police cooperation.
The borderless zone created by the Schengen Agreements, the Schengen Area, currently consists of twenty-five European countries.
**
Therefore, don't tell me the UK doesn't have the right to enter French soil because there is no difference between coming from England or coming from Belgium or any other country in EU law, since Schengen does not affect our EU mobility rights. If you're French it's time you left the EU as you don't fit the EU principle one bit and your neighbours don't forget that it's not just the Brits the French create the 'bordel' for.
As for the court judgement, lol, lets see the new EU police force or defence force get used for something other than talking, if the French gendarmes or military don't have the political clout to enforce EU law then the EU police should, otherwise they need to be disbanded as yet another expensive impotent waste of our money.
Complain about this comment
Thank you very much Alice, really intersting story. Between you and me, before yesterday I did not know at all who was Maurice Druon. Thanks.
Complain about this comment
Some other states farm,I was talking about hatching and releasing into Great Lakes It cost million of dollars for out state government but our fishing industry is in the Billions,however other states and Canada don't actually contribute as much but we see it as a benefit for our fisherman so we do it.The fish are released as babies into the lakes.The MICHIGAN Department of Natural Resources website should have info about it.
Complain about this comment
To Buzet23,
I think we can now move on to other things: the strike is over, and finally last for "only" 2 or 3 days. Force police would have been completely useless and, even worst, it would have been totally counter productive because potentially seen as provocation. Talks are always better than use of force in this kind of situation. So in the end, much ado about nothing very serious, really. Plus believe me, fishermen do not create that much 'bordel' compare to the strikes in the ferry companies. As long as this actions from fishermen is rare, I think it is a mistake to focus on them too much.
As for the Schengen zone, when you enter or leave the UK to the continent, you have to show a valid ID or a passport. So, in some ways, this necessarily affects your "mobility rights": you need to prove your identity.
In the defense of Cilpale, his (or her) comment was very offensive but I understand it as mainly directed at the British MEP's (following their critics). Unfortunately, this kind of actions from fishermen has already happened not only in France, but also in Spain and other countries. And it could also happened in Belgium or in the UK. No country is fully protected from individual actions like this one. So I think criticism is too easy in this case... until the day where it happens in your own country. You can always discuss whether this is justify or not, but please do not make the confusion between individuals and a whole country.
Complain about this comment
1. At 10:07am on 16 Apr 2009, newsjock wrote:
" ... The EU would not DARE to suggest that the oil under UK waters did not belong to Britain ... "
Don't be so sure:
1) I was living in Germany at the time of the Falklands war. As far as I was aware the German name for the North Sea was "the German Sea". One news commentator on German TV insisted on calling the North Sea the "European Sea." He then stated that because the oil was in the "European Sea" it was European oil and should be under the control of the "EU" or whatever its predecessor was called then. He insisted that the Falklands war was really about oil. As I see it, he thereby displayed the German concern about oil. He was engaging in what I believe Sigmund Freud called "projection."
2) I read recently in a British newspaper (the Mail?) that the "EU" treaties give the "EU" the "right" to take control over the energy supplies within the "EU" and that means our oil. This is the sort of thing that is sometimes discounted as a scare story. I investigated another "scare story" about plans to let police officers from other "EU" countries operate in the UK only to find that it was true.
3) I am told by a German, who I think knows what he is talking about, that in the "European Commission" they are constantly complaining about the Brits behind their backs and about how difficult they are*. So I ask myself why they tolerate us in their "EU". One of my answers is that they are worried about oil supplies and want the UK and the Falklands in the "EU" because of the oil.
* We are not difficult enough. Since our "democracy" does not work we should work on getting them to throw us out.
The EU would not DARE to suggest that the oil under UK waters did not belong to Britain, so why should they arbitrarily decree that fish in British waters belong to the EU.
Complain about this comment
The threats to blockade the Channel Tunnel are a reminder that it is no use at all. Trade goes through it rather than on ships. Ships can be redirected to other ports. It is more difficult to move the Channel Tunnel. The Channel Tunnel weakens the UK rather than strengthening it. It should never have been built it is Eurorubbish.
Complain about this comment
I mentioned the tendency of the French police to be gutless when faced with a large number of people and their very contrasting tendency to use fascist violence on some poor individual to a British digger driver. He quoted Gilbert and Sullivan back at me who had apparently been aware of this tendency in the 19th Century.
Complain about this comment
oldnat @54, 55
Thank you; I want :o) approximately everything! in that tartan store.
No didn't know there is his tartan; hardy many of them left. 10 yrs ago there were just 3 relations left, in the Russian Genealogical Society.
Lermontov behaved as a Russian poet, which means he was killed at 27. All ours have long developed a strange liking to die either at 27 or 37 (37 especially ruinous age). For Lermontov it meant he was a rising star and short-cut in flight. Killed on a duel, in Caucases mountains, fought that Caucasian war that lasted about 150 yrs. Tsar shipped him off to Caucasus war in the hope he will be done with one way or another. Our tsars always neurotic about way too free poets.
My parents once took me to see Lermontov estate, trundled 100 km in a car along afwul sandy roads. Kind of central Russia, Volga, not far from city of Penza. Nice place, all kept, a museum estate. His parents quarreled early, his mum died, with father was also smth wrong as I remember, so he was raised by his grandma in that estate. Was kind of a too serious and unhappy small boy, from the very beginning. Large mansion house, the park, wooden houses of his grandma peasants in service, all kept. His coffin in the family ? that? kind of where all family gets buried place, a candle above always on. Oh, sad to remember.
Russian literature still feels robbed by that duel, he had all makings of a ? just more in that style - we'd be happier.
As it were - not more than one book of poetry, and several excellent, excellent novels. It is a commonplace fact here, not disputed, that Lermontov prose language is the best Russian literature had so far.
Tolstoy was jealous, seriously. Not on the plots and depth of characters, but to write like Lermontov - one needs to be a poet first. Though it is prose, it reads like ? "white verse"? (un-rhymed poetry.)
Anyway.
Unfortunately Lermontov held Pushkin for authority and model :o) himself being younger, and when his favourite Pushkin was killed on a duel (at 37 - had 10 years more to write) - I am afraid this gave Lermontov some wrong ideas! for orientation.
Russia was shuddered; one; then - the other! what the heavens are thinking about. only Leo Tolstoy left.
___________
an extract, dear moderators, an extract. And kind of too late to worry authorship rights. :o)
(Our Lermontov was very modest. LOL. :
...I'm not a Byron, I'm - another! Like he,
the chosen one from homeland driven,
But nameless wanderer. And given
A Russian soul by destiny.
I'll earlier end. I earlier started.
This little I'll attain.. In my
heart buried, as in some uncharted
part of the sea, hopes broken lie.
Who can your secrets probe O clouded
deep, and the thought that in me dwells
reveal, and leave it no more shrouded?
I - or the Lord... And no one else!
:o)
Complain about this comment
BBC, I am completely flabbergasted that my comment placed yesterday (#15) has been removed for breaking house rules.
Is there anything that the BBC will not censor for fear of upsetting a small minority and losing face?
You cant please all of the people all of the time - fact. Hence we have blogs such as this to debate and express opinions on topical matters.
Seriously BBC folk, epic fail.
Complain about this comment
"I mentioned the tendency of the French police to be gutless when faced with a large number of people"
Would you prefer the American way, policemen using gunfire ?! The french police isn't gutless, it's following direct orders from the Elysee Palace to use restrain, to not uselessly kill or even injure protesters. It's a civilization choice, it's a sound choice, I'm quit proud of it, we behave humanly, you'd prefer force, violence, now what does that tell us about the land of soccer hooligans ?
Complain about this comment
Events have moved on. My tardiness in responding has robbed me of the opportunity to utter that timeless (and yes, hackneyed) phrase: "The French are revolting!"
(Yes, yes: cliches and stereotypes galore.... but what do you expect from a perfidious rosbif? Vive la difference!)
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
"The EU would not DARE to suggest that the oil under UK waters did not belong to Britain."
A Scotsman would though. Especially when talking to his southern neighours ;-)
Complain about this comment
Isn't there a precedent for using small fishing boats for ferrying men and equipment across the Channel?
Maybe the French fishermen could diversify a bit - not only could they make another sort of killing during the closed season, they could also help introduce the concepts of "libre" and "gratis" into the principle of free movement.
Complain about this comment
Should the EU confront its own fishermen? It might as well. With few exceptions it is far too timid to confront the pirates. Of course in some parts of the world, they are one and the same, changing hats when the opportunity arises. Fisherman and pirates are not that different. The only distinction I can see is the nature of the catch they haul in. Not so you say? Not from the point of view of the fish.
Complain about this comment
ikamaskeip wrote:
"HoHoHo! Hahaha! HeeeHeeHeee......!
Did someone say the EU Commission was going to "get tough with France"?
Oh no! Not again! Well how many times will it be "..time to get tough with France.." before the pro-EU lobbyists in the UK finally have the nerve to admit the 'EU is France/France is the EU' and thus nothing of a tough nature has ever/will ever occur?"
I think there is a big gap between the way people understand the EU, in theoretical terms, and how it actually operates in the real world, in practical terms.
Where that gap comes from is anybodies guess. But I have also noticed that the media constantly refer to the EU as legitimate. Everything done by the EU is as the EU says it must be. There is no "formal opposition" to the EU, and so when the EU comes onto the media stage and declares a given position, there is nobody waiting to give the other side of the story.
Now I do not mean to suggest that the media are in love with the EU, or even that they are biased towards it. I don't think they are, I just doubt the intellectual ability of the average journalist. And also the budget of the average journalist. When journalists are confronted with bald statements from someone standing behind a pretty, and very large, flag, what are they going to do?
Ask questions? Apply some healthy real-politik? Be even the faintest bit like a formal opposition?
The press are not trained to be an opposition to government. They have deadlines, they have jobs to protect. They have to "get along". And so, without any formal opposition, the EU faces no real opposition. Everything it says, that is the way things will stand in the record.
And, consequently, iskam is having hysterics. My nerves are also a bit frayed. Each day we read the news as if the past fifty years never happened. Each day we see more of the same old lies from the EU. Each day the media reprint these massive non-sequiturs (commission getting tough with france), and we just have to accept that this is how it is in the world.
What offends me most about the EU is the way it has no history. Nothing it ever does enters the public consciousness. I don;t understand how that works. Maybe Orwell would have understood. But the EU is constantly reinventing itself as whatever it thinks people want TODAY. It totally controls the commentary on the EU, and so it can change its history like a rich man's daughter changing a dress.
Consequently, one cannot talk about the history of the EU without being deemed a complete crank. It is exactly like Winston, in 1984, when he sits at his desk, reading today's new history in disbelief, because he can remember that such events did not happen. But you can't say anything. You're a crank if you insist upon a history of reality.
And in this environment, everything becomes theoretical. Everything "might" have happened, but nothing certainly did happen.
So when someone refers to the EU always spending money in ways that the auditors refuse to accept, that is THEORY. Nevermind that it has happened every year. In actual point of fact. Nevermind that the history of the EU has been a history of corruption and theft of taxpayer money. These facts are non facts, in a purely theoretical world. The fact that the EU is a hive of financial corruption, and has been for decades at least, becomes a mere possibility in a purely theoretical world.
The FACT that the EU has a long history of denying any democratic participation whatsoever ceases to be a fact, and becomes a mere possibility. Purely a theoretical conjecture. Might be true, who knows?
The fact that the EU parliament has no powers to defend it prerogatives, such as they are, and that the EU structure is NOT built with checks and balances to executive party based power........ this is mere theory. Sure, one can point out the many votes that achieved nothing, the huge amount of law that has been written without any democratic process whatsoever. One can even collect a hundred statements from the press of past years, where EU elites open scorned the concept of democratic process.
Nevertheless, all this evidence is useless. Because these are not facts. They can't be. Everything in the world of the EU is conjecture. Theory. Academic problems for chaps drinking tea. Corruption is not corruption, and dictatorship by the party is not dictatorship. None of it is real, and nobody should get upset, because we are not talking about reality.
We have no history, the EU has no history.
And therefore it is entirely possible that the EU will GET TOUGH WITH FRANCE. It is theoretically possible, and the Eu say it could happen, so we should report that in the media, and put it forth as a reasonable possibility.
Sure it is possible. Anything at all is possible, in the world with no history.
Complain about this comment
#72 lacerniagigante
I thought I was very restrained in not having responded to that in the first place!
Complain about this comment
Entertaining post, democracy threat, but filled with fallacious arguments. Let me recap: when history doesn't match your vision of the EU and it's so called lack of history, then Europeans turn "true" history (actually your version of history!), in a foggy, shapeless theoretical history for there own comfort or/and benefit, right, more or less ? But couldn't this argument work both way ? maybe it's your caricatural and prejudiced view of the EU that is a lie, and yet a theory that no one can say for sure doesn't exist, and why ? Well because nobody can pretend to be completely objective, our opinions differ, and that's fine with me, only I don't pretend that I know the absolute truth, and that too is fine, because if history has taught us one thing, it's that there are as many histories as there are historians. History can be more or less blurry and subject to interpretation, and sometimes not for the good reasons, I'll concede: birth of nations and nations identities, nationalistic pride, etc...
Complain about this comment
The sheer blind hypocrisy of British politicians referring to France's 'obligation to provide free passage for Britons' while continuing to endorse the UK's non-participation in Schengen simply beggars belief.
Complain about this comment
#78, threnodio
I'm just wondering that if the UK had not signed up to the ridiculous Human Rights laws that make it extremely difficult to repatriate an illegal entrant under the guise of refugee or asylum seeker, the UK would have maybe signed up to Schengen. After all the primary reason touted for not accepting it is that it's to control illegal immigration, therefore if everyone wants all 27 countries to adopt Schenegen then lets make sure the laws allow those who enter illegally can be quickly returned to their country of entry within the EU or their home country.
Complain about this comment
" if everyone wants all 27 countries to adopt Schenegen then lets make sure the laws allow those who enter illegally can be quickly returned to their country of entry within the EU or their home country."
Easier said than done, we're talking about human beings here, not kettle !
Complain about this comment
#79 - Buzet23
It's a fair point but the Home Office has become heavily reliant on the national security argument. My own view is that they are deliberately scare mongering by confusing illegal immigration (which they milk by appealing to national prejudice)and potential security threats (which they milk by promoting fear).
The problem with this is that they take their eye of the ball. The terror threat is largely home grown. If 25 other members can manage their borders without opting out of Schengen (without the benefit of a moat), so can the UK. What that would do, however, would be to take away the excuse the Home Office relies on to justify mindless thuggery on the streets providing you are wearing a police uniform when you commit it.
The 'ridiculous Human Rights laws' you refer to were created by parliament and judicial precedent within the UK. All the EU directive does is set a benchmark to wihich domestic legislation must adhere. The black letter of the law is for parliament to decide and the buck stops there. Until they have the bottle to address these wider questions, I still think that to raise the issue of the French fishermens blockade in the context of Schengen is hypocrisy of the worst kind.
#80 - Cracklite
A case of the pots calling the cattle black, maybe?
Complain about this comment
Cracklite wrote:
"Entertaining post, democracy threat, but filled with fallacious arguments."
Which you then fail to identify. You claim that my arguments are based on hazy, foggy interpretations of history. Now this is despite the factual incidents I listed. The lack of a parliament until the late 70's. The routine failure to meet audit requirements. Facts. So called because you can verify them, if you wish.
But you would rather not. You would rather give me your opinion that I present fallacious arguments. You back this opinion up with the view that there are as many histories as historians.
OK. I mean, that is normal. It is much easier to claim that everything is subjective than it is to verify facts.
When you verify facts, well that takes time. It takes effort. It takes a certain curiosity, and the ability to accept the consequence of research.
So I understand your position that everything is subjective, and that the world has as many histories as it does historians. You are lazy and you feel very self important. Therefore, you prefer to tell me I am presenting fallacious arguments, and you say absolutely nothing about the facts I have presented.
And you present no facts whatsoever that can be verified, and therefore you make no comment that might influence a person who has not already made up their mind on the issue. Which is regrettable. You had an opportunity to make a case, and yet all you did was sneer, and state that everything is subjective.
However, your comments do count as one sort of fact. In my argument, I was suggesting that the political world of modern Europe has become a place with no history. You came forward and suggested that, in your view, there can be no objective history. This would seem to substantiate my argument. In a Europe with no political history, one would predict people to come forward and say they do not believe in an objective history. That makes sense.
But there is an objective history. There must be, or we couldn't both post on the same blog.
There is no better definition of an axiom that a statement one must presume to be true, in order to mount an argument against the statement itself.
You may live in a fog, and others may also be lost, but this does not mean there is no ground beneath your feet.
Complain about this comment
"The terror threat" is such a weird term.
It is one of those incredible pieces of English language which have come to mean, in conversation and written discourse, the precise opposite of the reality they actually represent as words.
We all know, when we hear those words "terror threat", that something dangerous is nearby. And yet, a little casual research shows that a person has statistically more chance of choking on peanuts than being killed by a terrorist. I mean, really. You really do face a larger threat from peanut eating than you do from terrorists.
Oh well, the world is bored. Bored, and increasingly removed from empathy as a virtue.
I am beginning to think humanity needs wars, really horrific wars, every few generations, because as a species we get bored, and drift away from empathy as we become fascinated with our own fear. Roosevelt said we had nothing to fear except fear itself, and everyone seems to think he was being a nice old man giving comfort when he said that.
Maybe he was. But maybe he was also passing a dreadful judgement upon his fellow humans. We may only have fear to fear, but what a terrible adversary it is. What other enemy reaches into the minds of whole nations, and twists them to believe whatever some halfwit on a television says?
Look at that guy, the British foreign minister, Milibrand. Or whatever.
Imagine if you had an enemy who could make millions of people listen to, and believe, what a guy like that says. Not that is terrifying.
Complain about this comment
Yes, the EU should confront fishermen - but not over quotas. They should clmap down on exisitng laws and limit destructive techniques. As usual, the French, Spanish et al back the laws and then break them.
I'm an ex-professional fisherman from a traditional background. We used to observe mesh sizes in the nets (not too small, let the immature fish through); we used to try to observe seasons, to give key species a chance to breed; and we didn't use bottom-ploughing, destructive beam trawls in nursery areas and the shallows. All these mean nothing to those who only look at weight of fish and quotas. I've seen fish going up for auction in France so small that, had I tried to land them on the other side of the channel, I would have been prosecuted and probably lost my boat - or at least all my nets plus a very stiff fine. The French, Belgians and Dutch have made a desert of their own waters and, since the cretinous Thatcher mob gave our fish away for a discount on out EU contributions, they've ruined ours. The shops are full of the foul scrapings of the abyssal zones, the shops full of stuff our cat wouldn't touch,'ordinary' fish like cod are technically extinct (not enough left to breed back into their place in the food chain) and the government still thinks that the ministry of ag, fish, and food (or whatever it calls its pathetic self these days) is just a joke, a parking place for juniors and pasture for clapped out time-servers.
Fishing's not a joke - it's food, healthy food, and industry and jobs and national pride and the backbone of the navy we we're going to need very soon. We deserve better and the French deserve proper policing, not sympathy. But while we are ruled by tabloid headline and townie twerps, nothing will change. Not enough fishermen count in a vote, that's our problem.....
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS