Iceland has rejected commencing talks to join the EU.

Starmer?

Keir Starmer got absolutely nothing of value for those 12 years of fishing stocks Absolutely no idea as a PM. Unfortunately, Burnham is looking just as bad so far with his U-turns and his tinkering at the edges with non important stuff.

Maybe he’ll improve come the autumn with a bit of luck.

Yes Starmer.
I remember reading at the time he gave away another 12 years of fishing rights to the EU , 1 year before complete rights returned to the UK.

he

He was so bluddy keen to get his ‘reset’ that had he waited he would have had something to bargain with. Brussels must have laughed their socks off. What a complete idiot.

Sarnia

Meandrogrog

Maremia

So, Farage managed to 'stop the boats',
only it was our fishing boats.

It was the EU who destroyed our fishing fleet.

Ably assisted by Boris!!!

It was fishermen who started the decline in the industry by selling their quotas to EU fishers.

However, the contraction of the fleet has continued after Brexit. As I said, the industry as a whole is making profits but it is with fewer large boats. The smaller ones have gone out of business.

I'll say this again, do you consider its economic success to be a good thing, or is the diminution of fishing communities as the small boats go out of business, most likely as a consequence of the costs and complexity of exporting to one of their largest markets, a problem? It was always on the cards as a consequence of leaving the EU.

Remind me. What ‘better access to the EU markets’ did we actually get for giving up 12 years of fishing rights to the EU?

Waiting.
Still waiting.
Nothing AT ALL!
Well done Labour!

FriedGreenTomatoes2

Remind me. What ‘better access to the EU markets’ did we actually get for giving up 12 years of fishing rights to the EU?

Waiting.
Still waiting.
Nothing AT ALL!
Well done Labour!

That isn’t true though is it?

Well At the height of Iceland's recently concluded EU Referendum campaign, a group of top Icelandic lawyers issued a report on the EU Fisheries policy and its likely effects on Iceland and her economy. The report was said to have made clear Iceland could not maintain total control of its fisheries and territorial waters inside the EU.
However the said lawyers then protested strongly that they had NOT said that as such. What they meewed and mawed about, as only lawyers can, is that the EU could give Iceland a "carve-out" from its Fisheries Policy thus maintaining Iceland's control.
They were then forced to admit that the EU had never ever given any Member State any carve-out of its Fisheries Policy....never, not once. So how on Earth would plucky little Iceland overcome fundamental EU policy?
A re-run of the farcical 1970s Cod Wars against us in the UK? Think Spanish, French, Dutch, Portuguese, Danish, Swedish, Greek, and Italian mega-industrialised fishing fleets. No chance.
So it can be said that a group of bone-headed lawyers helped the EU lose its ploy to grab Iceland's fish...just like a coterie of traitorous British lawyers have recently destroyed the UK fishing industry.

The fishing agreement negotiated by Starmer’s government represents only 0.003% of out total GDP. The EU was always going to tough it out regards fishing rights and we recognised that we would need to concede this for the greater prize of things like sanitary and phytosanitary arrangements, the export of shellfish, and things like coastal investment.

The whole agreement covered a large variety of areas, including defence and security and tackling illegal immigration.

We are seeing the benefit of much of these agreements including the fact that illegal immigration has dropped 50% in the year since the agreement.

So it isn’t true that Starmer got nothing he got a great deal, and one which is very dear to your heart - a drastic reduction in illegal immigration.

I’d like to see some real reduction in arrivals …

50% reduction? 🤣🤣😁
You’re having a larf surely?

That saying “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics"
comes to mind.

Revised figures - I was muddling the 50% with the reduction of asylum seekers in hotel accommodation.

The actual figure is 43% reduction in total illegal immigration this year to date.

50% drop in asylum seekers in hotel accommodation.

That should gladden your heart.

These figures are the best since Brexit, which of course let you down so badly with the immigration promise.

43 per cent reduction in total illegal immigration this year to date

Worth repeating

Yes achieved by Starmer as part of an agreement with the EU.

I am looking forward to further negotiations on closer working, much as Canada is doing. It is in both our best interests.

A balance is needed in the world to counteract the mad and dangerous leaders the world has.

Yes WhiteWave, I agree with that intention.

Going back to your question MaizieD, about the smaller boats and businesses losing out.
Profit and efficiency matter, but local boats meant money going to people in that area. No longer their own masters.
Another issue is that more efficiency means more catches.
The 'silver darlings' were hunted to near extinction.
Another issue is that climate change will alter the variety of species to exploit.

Iceland have the very best of both worlds and I think their action is what suits them and heir countryman.

Whitewavemark2

Yes achieved by Starmer as part of an agreement with the EU.

I am looking forward to further negotiations on closer working, much as Canada is doing. It is in both our best interests.

A balance is needed in the world to counteract the mad and dangerous leaders the world has.

I completely agree.

Maremia

Going back to your question MaizieD, about the smaller boats and businesses losing out.
Profit and efficiency matter, but local boats meant money going to people in that area. No longer their own masters.
Another issue is that more efficiency means more catches.
The 'silver darlings' were hunted to near extinction.
Another issue is that climate change will alter the variety of species to exploit.

I was really thinking of it in terms of the ‘success’, or not, of Brexit for the fishing industry. Is Brexit a success for the industry because it has increased the over all value of it or is it a failure because it has adversely affected individuals and their businesses?

Though, TBH, this whole thread is absurd because the gloating OP fails to note that Iceland already enjoys advantages with regard to the EU which the UK cut itself adrift from. I can see that there is a reasonable argument for not being
particularly bothered about actual accession to the EU

I fail to see why the OP refers to the EU as “failing@, this isn’t a view many of us share.

Can absolutely see why Iceland decline pushing for membership, they already enjoy many EU benefits, with none of the cost.

I’d settle for that.

As I stated earlier, best of both worlds.

Similarly Norway

Also, did note from looking up the actual result that it was very close, 80%+ turnout and approx 12,000 between N & Y.

So many advantages to becoming closer to the EU.
Glad we seem to be taking those steps.

As others have said, Norway has an excellent relationship with the EU, which seems to suit both parties.
It seems that Iceland has a satisfactory relationship with the EU which suits both parties.
How did this become a matter about immigration levels into Britain?

Maize, I think an answer to your question depends on whether you are a now bankrupt fisher family, or a successful conglomerate. Are these companies owned by Brits?
Not sure about the advantage or not to the UK as a whole.
But maybe Lady Google has a perspective.