Will Britain piss off and get on with Brexit II (mod warning in OP)

biko

Seth Brundle wrote: »

I posted similar tweets in the Arlene & the DUP thread but Tony Connelly is after posting a thread on Twitter containing a load of quotes from Brexit meetings contained within Michel Barnier's new book.
The thread is worth reading - I'd say the book is even better!

https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1389975583736598533

Michel Barnier, the anti-Brexit EU negotiator?
Yeah, I'm sure Nigel would open up to him alright.

Dyr

biko wrote: »

Michel Barnier, the anti-Brexit EU negotiator?
Yeah, I'm sure Nigel would open up to him alright.

I dunno, oul Michel said in a recent interview that one of his big lessons of Brexit was that the EU needed less bureaucracy and more democracy or risk other countries leaving and also said that the EUs inability to take risks was behind its poor vaccine rollout


If he came on here and posted stuff like that he'd be traduced as a Brexiteer

FrancieBrady

Boris has offered Jersey his complete support. :eek:


God help them.

Leroy42

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Boris has offered Jersey his complete support. :eek:


God help them.

Sending gunboats?

I wonder will those that decried the EU for even threatening Art 16 will be as quick to condemn the UK for attempting to militarise this dispute.

Surely they can fully appreciate that the French simply want to unilaterally ignore the rules and push implemention off for a few months?

Donald Trump

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Boris has offered Jersey his complete support. :eek:


God help them.

He should send them a few batteries. To keep them going in case the French decide to cut off the oul' electricity

Donald Trump

The Raging Bile Duct wrote: »

You should read Priti Patel's facebook page. It's going down like a lead balloon with the section of Britain that voted to leave the EU to keep out the foreigners. Not the Brexit I voted for, etc...

Apparently the Indian delegation who came to visit brought more than the documents they needed to sign!


A few of them after going down with corona.

Larbre34

Gunboat diplomacy, literally. Boris to a tee.

What use are bloody gunboats? Pretty sure you can't turn back on electricity with them. And the French fishermen will just ignore them.

What a useless collective this Tory government actually is.

Peregrinus

Larbre34 wrote: »

Gunboat diplomacy, literally. Boris to a tee.

What use are bloody gunboats? Pretty sure you can't turn back on electricity with them. And the French fishermen will just ignore them.

What a useless collective this Tory government actually is.

The naval boats are there to deal with the threat of a blockade of St Helier port by French fishermen.

The French fishermen deny that they intend to blockade St. Helier port.

If they don't blockade the port, this will "prove" to the Brexiter mind that sending gunboats works.

Kermit.de.frog

Chaos with Ed Miliband

Larbre34

Larbre34 wrote: »

Gunboat diplomacy, literally. Boris to a tee.

What use are bloody gunboats? Pretty sure you can't turn back on electricity with them. And the French fishermen will just ignore them.

What a useless collective this Tory government actually is.

It isn’t gun boat diplomacy, it’s the Royal Navy doing what any navy would do in the same circumstances.

Dozens of French fishing boats turn up threatening to illegally blockade Jersey and you expect the navy to sit back and do nothing?

Peregrinus

Aegir wrote: »

It isn’t gun boat diplomacy, it’s the Royal Navy doing what any navy would do in the same circumstances.

Dozens of French fishing boats turn up threatening to illegally blockade Jersey and you expect the navy to sit back and do nothing?

I expect them not to read and act on Daily Mail Online headlines, which is the only place so far that I have seen any report that the French fishing vessels have threatened a blockade. I think we can discount the veracity of anything in the Mail Online, and you certainly shouldn't be repeating it as if it were true, Aegir. It makes you look very gullible.

Other, more respectable media are reporting that the French fishermen have expressly denied that they intend a blockade, and that their vessels have, as the occasion arises, pulled off to make passage for shipping entering/leaving the port.

As far as I can see this is handbags at 12 paces, on both sides. There are agreed dispute resolution mechanisms in the WA and the TCA; the French should be invoking these, not honking about cutting off electricity supplies. The UK could probably help by not only calling on the French to do this, but committing to participate in, and abide by the outcome of, the dispute resolution mechanisms. Their initial response suggested that they wouldn't do anything to compel the Jerseyais authorities, which probably wasn't the most helpful possible thing to say.

Sending the naval vessels also probably doesn't help; it tends to inflame rather than to damp down, which is what is needed. But I get that they're in an awkward position here; if the fishing boats do start interfering with navigation and the UK aren't in a position to address that, they'll look woefully unprepared. But sending in the gunboats might have been less inflammatory if the UK had already established a preference for, and commitment to, a negotiated solution to the problem.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

FrancieBrady

Aegir wrote: »

It isn’t gun boat diplomacy, it’s the Royal Navy doing what any navy would do in the same circumstances.

Dozens of French fishing boats turn up threatening to illegally blockade Jersey and you expect the navy to sit back and do nothing?

'Never bring a gun to a fight unless you intend to use it'.

Of course it's gunboat diplomacy, this was a signalled protest that was not going to blockade and was only intended to last for a few hours. Total over reaction designed to play to the rabble.

Kermit.de.frog

https://twitter.com/IsabelOakeshott/status/1390195815092731904


I had to double check to ensure this tweet was legit.

Professor Moriarty

FrancieBrady wrote: »

'Never bring a gun to a fight unless you intend to use it'.

Of course it's gunboat diplomacy, this was a signalled protest that was not going to blockade and was only intended to last for a few hours. Total over reaction designed to play to the rabble.

Elections today. Pure coincidence.

FrancieBrady

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Elections today. Pure coincidence.

Of course!

Timberrrrrrrr

Peregrinus wrote: »

I expect them not to read and act on Daily Mail Online headlines, which is the only place so far that I have seen any report that the French fishing vessels have threatened a blockade. I think we can discount the veracity of anything in the Mail Online, and you certainly shouldn't be repeating it as if it were true, Aegir. It makes you look very gullible.

Other, more respectable media are reporting that the French fishermen have expressly denied that they intend a blockade, and that their vessels have, as the occasion arises, pulled off to make passage for shipping entering/leaving the port.

As far as I can see this is handbags at 12 paces, on both sides. There are agreed dispute resolution mechanisms in the WA and the TCA; the French should be invoking these, not honking about cutting off electricity supplies. The UK could probably help by not only calling on the French to do this, but committing to participate in, and abide by the outcome of, the dispute resolution mechanisms. Their initial response suggested that they wouldn't do anything to compel the Jerseyais authorities, which probably wasn't the most helpful possible thing to say.

Sending the naval vessels also probably doesn't help; it tends to inflame rather than to damp down, which is what is needed. But I get that they're in an awkward position here; if the fishing boats do start interfering with navigation and the UK aren't in a position to address that, they'll look woefully unprepared. But sending in the gunboats might have been less inflammatory if the UK had already established a preference for, and commitment to, a negotiated solution to the problem.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

French fleet arrives in Jersey to protest fishing access as UK ships patrol

https://f7td5.app.goo.gl/xb2Sda

A fleet of French fishing boats have descended on Jersey after threatening to blockade the island's main port over a post-Brexit fishing rights row.

showed the French boats (in orange) heading towards the harbour then later massing near Elizabeth Castle, while the UK ships (light blue) appeared to be holding back.

The Commodore Goodwill freight ship was initially "trapped" and unable to leave the Harbour this morning, but was later allowed to pass, according to the Jersey Evening Post.

French fishermen said they would blockade the main port of St Helier to prevent supplies from being delivered.

Up to 100 French fishing boats were due to enter the harbour early on Thursday to prevent the Commodore Clipper, carrying cargo, from docking in Jersey, according to local paper the Bailiwick Express.

Seth Brundle

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

French fleet arrives in Jersey to protest fishing access as UK ships patrol

There's not much to say about all this but...

Peregrinus

Peregrinus wrote: »

I expect them not to read and act on Daily Mail Online headlines, which is the only place so far that I have seen any report that the French fishing vessels have threatened a blockade. I think we can discount the veracity of anything in the Mail Online, and you certainly shouldn't be repeating it as if it were true, Aegir. It makes you look very gullible..

Other, more respectable media are reporting that the French fishermen have expressly denied that they intend a blockade, and that their vessels have, as the occasion arises, pulled off to make passage for shipping entering/leaving the port.

80 ships turning up at a small harbour has the potential to create a blockade.

try getting a thousand people to start a peaceful protest in Grafton Street and see what happens. The organisers might have peaceful intentions, but they have no control over everyone. That's why that will be Guards there, to make sure there is no breach of the peace.

Peregrinus wrote: »

As far as I can see this is handbags at 12 paces, on both sides. There are agreed dispute resolution mechanisms in the WA and the TCA; the French should be invoking these, not honking about cutting off electricity supplies. The UK could probably help by not only calling on the French to do this, but committing to participate in, and abide by the outcome of, the dispute resolution mechanisms. Their initial response suggested that they wouldn't do anything to compel the Jerseyais authorities, which probably wasn't the most helpful possible thing to say.

Sending the naval vessels also probably doesn't help; it tends to inflame rather than to damp down, which is what is needed. But I get that they're in an awkward position here; if the fishing boats do start interfering with navigation and the UK aren't in a position to address that, they'll look woefully unprepared. But sending in the gunboats might have been less inflammatory if the UK had already established a preference for, and commitment to, a negotiated solution to the problem.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

lets be realistic about this, 80 French fishing vessels turn up in Jersey's waters and the navy send two patrol ships (whose main function is fisheries protection) and sit one mile off shore in case anything untoward happens. I would be very surprised if any of the captains of the ships there were not familiar with these ships anyway. I would also be very surprised if the government "Ordered" these ships there in the first place, as this is very much in line with their role. Just as 80 fishing ships turning up at Kinsale would attract the attention of the Irish Navy.

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

'Never bring a gun to a fight unless you intend to use it'.

Of course it's gunboat diplomacy, this was a signalled protest that was not going to blockade and was only intended to last for a few hours. Total over reaction designed to play to the rabble.

like I said, try holding a peaceful protest in Grafton street and see how many Guards turn up.

If the government wanted to engage in gun boat diplomacy, then they would have sent a couple of destroyers, not two OPVs.

steddyeddy

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

https://twitter.com/IsabelOakeshott/status/1390195815092731904


I had to double check to ensure this tweet was legit.

Isabel is an absolute nut but unfortunately she's not alone in thinking like that.

FrancieBrady

Aegir wrote: »

like I said, try holding a peaceful protest in Grafton street and see how many Guards turn up.

If the government wanted to engage in gun boat diplomacy, then they would have sent a couple of destroyers, not two OPVs.

A Brexit 'protest' sailed down the Thames at one point...did they send 'gunboats'?

Destroyers? They're fishing boats ffs!

Sue de Nimes

FrancieBrady wrote: »

A Brexit 'protest' sailed down the Thames at one point...did they send 'gunboats'?

Destroyers? They're fishing boats ffs!

Did the Brexit protest block the Thames or cause any disruption of any kind?

The British are doing the same thing Ireland or any other country would do in the same circumstances.

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

A Brexit 'protest' sailed down the Thames at one point...did they send 'gunboats'?

Destroyers? They're fishing boats ffs!

British ships in British waters. Inland waters as well, which is why the Police were there and not the Royal Navy.

Fisheries protection and offshore patrols are the responsibility of the Royal Navy, so they sent the appropriate vessel.

Its a bit like the incident in Dundalk Francie, where an Irish navy vessel arrested Northern Irish fishermen, the one which you claimed the ship involved wasn't a warship.

Peregrinus

Aegir wrote: »

80 ships turning up at a small harbour has the potential to create a blockade.

“Ships” is perhaps a strong word for vessels of “12 metres or more”. But, yeah, 60-80 vessels have the potential to blockade a port. On the other hand, numerous vessels turning up to a port isn’t an unusual thing - that’s what ports are for, after all - so the potential to block a port is something that happens fairly regularly. And there’s a big difference between the potential to block a port, and an explicit threat to block a port.

I have to concede that Timberrrrr has turned up a Sky News report which says that the French vessels have threatened to blockade the port. (Though I note that it’s pretty much the only assertion in the report that isn’t backed up by a quote attributed to a named individual; I wonder why?)

Aegir wrote: »

lets be realistic about this, 80 French fishing vessels turn up in Jersey's waters and the navy send two patrol ships (whose main function is fisheries protection) and sit one mile off shore in case anything untoward happens. I would be very surprised if any of the captains of the ships there were not familiar with these ships anyway. I would also be very surprised if the government "Ordered" these ships there in the first place, as this is very much in line with their role. Just as 80 fishing ships turning up at Kinsale would attract the attention of the Irish Navy.

I think the decision to send the naval vessels in would definitely have been a political decision; it has significant political consequences, and this is not something the RN would weigh into without express political clearance. They’d advise the politicians of the situation, advise on the options for action open, and await a decision before acting.

But I do think the decision to send the Navy in is justifiable; indeed, I don’t see that the British had any other option. My criticism here is primarily of the French. To the extent that I would criticise the UK, I don’t criticise the sending in of the naval vessels, but rather earlier decisions — first, things the UK did before this particular dispute kicked off to create the impression that the UK wasn’t interested in utilising the agreed dispute resolution mechanisms (they’ve worked quite hard to create this impression; I don’t think it’s an accident; and I don’t think they can entirely disclaim responsibility for the consequences of such an impression being created) and, secondly, when this kicked off, not reacting in the first instance by invoking the agreed mechanisms, or immediately inviting the French to do so. All of that means that, when they did have to send the navy in, they were sending it into a situation that was already more heated than it needed to be.

FrancieBrady

Aegir wrote: »

British ships in British waters. Inland waters as well, which is why the Police were there and not the Royal Navy.

Fisheries protection and offshore patrols are the responsibility of the Royal Navy, so they sent the appropriate vessel.

Its a bit like the incident in Dundalk Francie, where an Irish navy vessel arrested Northern Irish fishermen, the one which you claimed the ship involved wasn't a warship.

The coast guard could have handled this Aegir.

Your inability to see when you are being manipulated by an over the top gung ho managed response to a problem the UK has created (probably deliberately) is as usual, predictable.

RobMc59

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The coast guard could have handled this Aegir.

Your inability to see when you are being manipulated by an over the top gung ho managed response to a problem the UK has created (probably deliberately) is as usual, predictable.

No disrespect Francie but that's a rather hypocritical attitude given your support of Irish warships arresting a couple of NI trawlers a few years ago.

https://www.thejournal.ie/dup-on-the-attack-over-heavy-handed-tactics-after-naval-service-detains-two-uk-registered-trawlers-4518726-Mar2019/

FrancieBrady

RobMc59 wrote: »

No disrespect Francie but that's a rather hypocritical attitude given your support of Irish warships arresting a couple of NI trawlers a few years ago.

https://www.thejournal.ie/dup-on-the-attack-over-heavy-handed-tactics-after-naval-service-detains-two-uk-registered-trawlers-4518726-Mar2019/

The deflection to an entirely different scenario is hilarious.

Meanwhile in Jersey, the French fishermen have done what they said they would do and moved into open water leaving the UK looking silly and OTT again.

RobMc59

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The deflection to an entirely different scenario is hilarious.

Meanwhile in Jersey, the French fishermen have done what they said they would do and moved into open water leaving the UK looking silly and OTT again.

I think you'll find(as Peregrinus pointed out)the ships were sent to ensure there was no blockade of the port in Jersey.

FrancieBrady

RobMc59 wrote: »

I think you'll find(as Peregrinus pointed out)the ships were sent to ensure there was no blockade of the port in Jersey.

I was reading French fishermen saying they had no intention to blockade the port and would only be there for a few hours, a couple of days ago.

Anyway Brittania stills rules the waves so all is well Rob.

Peregrinus

Peregrinus wrote: »

“Ships” is perhaps a strong word for vessels of “12 metres or more”. But, yeah, 60-80 vessels have the potential to blockade a port. On the other hand, numerous vessels turning up to a port isn’t an unusual thing - that’s what ports are for, after all - so the potential to block a port is something that happens fairly regularly. And there’s a big difference between the potential to block a port, and an explicit threat to block a port.

my analogy of a protest in Grafton Street would seem to apply. 1000 people milling around is a daily common occurrence with nominal policing. 1000 protestors suddenly attracts the attention of AGS, who would no doubt also have a dozen coppers in riot gear sat in a van just in case. That is all the Navy is doing by sitting a mile offshore.

Peregrinus wrote: »

I think the decision to send the naval vessels in would definitely have been a political decision; it has significant political consequences, and this is not something the RN would weigh into without express political clearance. They’d advise the politicians of the situation, advise on the options for action open, and await a decision before acting.

I disagree. Two ships sitting a mile away and observing is totally within the operational expectations.

If they decided to weigh in and start ramming fishing vessels then i would agree, that would be a political decision.

Peregrinus wrote: »

But I do think the decision to send the Navy in is justifiable; indeed, I don’t see that the British had any other option. My criticism here is primarily of the French. To the extent that I would criticise the UK, I don’t criticise the sending in of the naval vessels, but rather earlier decisions — first, things the UK did before this particular dispute kicked off to create tthe impression that the UK wasn’t interested in utilising the agreed dispute resolution mechanisms (they’ve worked quite hard to create this impression; I don’t think it’s an accident; and I don’t think they can entirely disclaim responsibility for the consequences of such an impression being created) and, secondly, when this kicked off, not reacting in the first instance by invoking the agreed mechanisms, or immediately inviting the French to do so. All of that means that, when they did have to send the navy in, they were sending it into a situation that was already more heated than it needed to be.

can the UK invoke the dispute resolution mechanism on behalf of Jersey? They have no control over the licences the States of Jersey issue, so I don't see how they could also step in if there is a dispute