Something fishy is going on in the ENGLISH Channel (I am a firm believer in annoying the Europhiles by emphasising the "English" part of the name), and it's all down to Nanny's love affair with the cod.
Nanny and her acolytes (celeb chefs and green campaigners) have been telling us for a very long time that the cod was in danger; as such, strict quotas have been introduced to prevent over fishing.
Fair enough.
The trouble is, when Nanny introduces a rule she doesn't apply it with any form of common sense.
As such, hundreds of kilos of dead cod (caught by fishermen seeking other fish) have to be thrown back into the ENGLISH Channel in order to keep within Nanny's rules.
The fish are caught by accident by fishermen seeking Dover sole and other fish etc etc, the cod die after catching their gills in the nets and are then thrown back into the water.
ENGLISH Channel fishermen are also well pissed off that their cod quota is less than one tenth of the French quota, which is more than 70% of the total. French fishermen can land 3,377 tons of cod a year while British fishermen are limited to 366 tons.
There you have it folks, Nanny sticks up for cod and the French but not for her own people.
Nanny hates the British and in particular the English.
ReplyDeleteI have always wondered about the sense of throwing back dead fish that have been caught, but you know, if they are landed the fishermen are fined....Kerching.
The real Nanny State is the EU, which is our de facto government now and controls what used to be British fishing waters. If we think the latest bunch of idiotic laws, rules and quotas handed out by Nanny on the instructions of her EU mistress are bad we only have to wait for the ink to dry on the constitution (sorry treaty) before Nanny gets some very serious orders to whip naughty British schoolchildren into good little Europeans.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous (2:40) says,
ReplyDelete"...we only have to wait for the ink to dry on the constitution (sorry treaty) before Nanny gets some very serious orders..."
You obviously haven't been paying attention. Gay Gordon swears that it's not a constitution and anyway, even if it was, (but it isn't; honest) he has red lines, so it's OK.
And if GG says it's OK, it must be, 'cause he's committed to openness and transparency and efficiency and honesty and all that other bollocks; so sit down, shut up and be a good little prole., otherwise you too might be visited by Nanny's Aunty Freedom of Speech operatives!
Old news, catch up at the back.....
ReplyDelete"Gay Gordon swears that it's not a constitution and anyway, even if it was, (but it isn't; honest) he has red lines, so it's OK."
ReplyDeleteAnd our 'wonderful' politicians ALWAYS tell the truth, don't they?
(And a herd of pigs just flew past my window).
Yeah, because if they didn't make them throw them back I'm sure there wouldn't be a huge increase in "accidental" catches.
ReplyDeleteOf course, the quota system is a farce, but the reasons for making people throw fish back are valid even if they seem wasteful at first glance.
hulver,
ReplyDeleteNope, whichever way you look at it it is still a crazy situation.
The fish will die, throwing them back is simply pollution (as is everything these days it seems.)
If we can't come up with a more logical approach why not just ban fishing and really upset the French and Spanish?
How about catches up to quota being at market prices and anything over that at 50% of market price?
The extra catches would presumably also help to depress the prices, all to the good of the public PROVIDING the formula did not destroy the fishing industry. If it looks like it will, adjust it. But at all costs avoid the waste of throwing back since it so obviously stupid for all concerned.
Bet it is supported by the larger fisheries companies though as a way of keeping their margin high.
..."Nanny sticks up for cod and the French but not for her own people..."
ReplyDeleteAnd your problem with that is....?
Grumpy,
ReplyDeleteYou are quite right, who am I to question the integrity of that nice Mr Brown on the EU. I trust him 100 percent, just as I did that nice Mr Heath who told us all it was the 'common market' we were joining and the equally honest as they come Mr 'No backing down on the British rebate'Blair.
Did I mention the other tried and trusted politicians Kinnock and Mandy who also benefited mightly from clutching at EU Nanny's apron strings. I would trust them all with my very life.
Anon @ 4.51,
ReplyDeleteI think that you are very mean and unkind to all our magnificent politicians who - as you well know - only have OUR best interests at heart.
And when my attendants come to loosen the straps on my strait jacket later, I will write a letter about you to the Chief Tooth Fairy - then you'll be sorry.
Bugger!
ReplyDeleteI spend all that time and energy complaining about people wot carnt use the langwidge proper - and I can't spell "Principal" properly myself: no wonder I was purged.
whoops = now I can't get onto the right blog. I give up, I'm going back tp bed.
ReplyDeleteDear Grumpy,
ReplyDeleteA gentleman with a German accent and two other chappies with French accents recently visited my home - where they got the address from I can't begin to imagine as our government takes massive care of our data - they were wearing very spiffy black uniforms, with matching caps and finished off with a ring of stars armband. After asking for my ID card they introudced themselves as 'europol officers' and proceeded to give me a jolly good talking too about slagging off nanny and the EU.
I realise I have made a dreadful mistake and can only say now as I raise my glass of victory gin "I love Big Nanny"
Anon,
ReplyDeleteBloody Hell, my watch has stopped; is it thirteen o' clock already?