Lord West of Spithead, Former First Sea Lord, has argued that the UK has “insufficient ships within the fishery protection squadron to carry out enforcement”, during a recent debate.

Lord Cameron of Dillington said in the recent debate:

“As others have said, when we in our committee did our original report on the landing obligation at the end of 2018, it was obvious to us that no one was prepared for the dramatic change that was to be introduced to the common fisheries policy. The Government had not really addressed all the practical actions necessary to make it work; there was no data on the current level of discards; there was no data on the take-up of more selective fishing gear; there had been very little education of fishermen, particularly those of the inshore fleet with smaller boats; and there was no real preparedness for how such a new total ban would operate and be policed. Furthermore, the MMO was underresourced and underprepared for its inevitable policing and enforcement duties. The port authorities also had made minimal plans to deal with any increase in the landing of illegal fish.

Meanwhile, the fishermen, both large and small, were in a state of panic. They knew that, if properly enforced, the landing obligation and the associated problems of choke species would close them down and possibly bankrupt them—some said by March and others said, at best, by June 2019.

However, of course, as we all now know, the total ban on discards came into force on 1 January 2019 with more of a whimper than a bang. I have to admit that that was probably the best thing that could have happened in the short term for the survival of our crucially important fishing industry. It was not ready. No one was ready. But now we really have to move on as soon as practically possible to full and proper implementation if we are to ensure the long-term survival of this same crucially important fishing industry.

In their reply to our report, the Government state that the early part of 2019 was taken up with training and informing the various parts of the industry regarding their obligations under the landing obligation and how to best implement them. The Government state:

‘Following this initial period of education, the MMO is now moving towards a more enforcement-centred approach … We are stepping up enforcement … to include more detailed inspection of catches at sea in high-risk fisheries.’

There is thus in those remarks a tacit admission that the Government were slow to grasp the nettle in 2018.”

Lord West of Spithead asked:

“Does the noble Viscount agree that we have insufficient ships within our fishery protection squadron to carry out enforcement at the level he is talking about?”

Lord Cameron of Dillington responded:

“First, I am not a Viscount—I should perhaps correct that. However, the answer is at the moment, yes, but I am assured that we are building up to it.

The Government have been slow to grasp the nettle but are moving in the right direction. That is a good thing. In the meantime, bearing in mind that fish are an international commodity, it is important that we try to persuade our neighbours also to pursue and enforce a ban on discards. There is no doubt that the reluctance to enforce the landing obligation is not only a British phenomenon; it seems to be the norm across all EU fishing states. We heard from a Dutch fishing representative, who was adamant that the whole idea was ridiculous, and there was no doubt from our conversation with the fisheries Commissioner that even DG FISH was taking a very softly, softly approach.”

Lord Thurlow added:

“There is no effective means of policing agreed and the fisheries protection fleet needs beefing up; as the noble Lord, Lord West of Spithead, said earlier, the Royal Navy is unlikely to come to its assistance as it too is short of ships. The only real motivation for the fishing fleets, ours and the continental ones, are from the personal conservation interest of the skippers and the desire to obey the law. However, I am sure there is no motivation for foreign boats in UK waters, particularly in the present circumstances.”

115
Leave a Reply

avatar
26 Comment threads
89 Thread replies
43 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
42 Comment authors
r cummingsBob2GforLee HGunbuster Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest
Notify of
Levi Goldsteinberg
Guest
Levi Goldsteinberg

…and other things that have been agonisingly obvious for years

farouk
Guest
farouk

“”Lord West of Spithead, Former First Sea Lord, has argued that the UK has “insufficient ships within our fishery protection squadron to carry out enforcement”, during a recent debate.””

Most people who post on here, could have told you the above 10 years ago.

Sean
Guest
Sean

“ , the Royal Navy is unlikely to come to its assistance as it too is short of ships” Nice to see HMG publicly admitting this, so about increasing the T31 order. I must admit I’m a bit puzzled. I thought the fishery protection was supposed to be one of the tasks for the River 2’s, but now we seam to be forward basing them around the world in roles that I would have expected the T31s to fulfil. Maybe we just need to deploy a few Reapers to protect our fisheries. I’m sure a Hellfire would spoil the day… Read more »

Keefe
Guest
Keefe

According to the new Gov that is all we need more drones so we can get rid of more useless conventional kit, like say ships, at least so the Newspaper reported leaks suggest, Its all so reminiscent of David Cameon’s wonderful defence review that left us with such a well balanced armed forces, that are more then ‘adequate'[ in DC’S own words] for a country our size… I must be terrible at geography then as I did not realize the UK was the size as Belgium!

ChariotRider
Guest
ChariotRider

A shortage of ships?! Who would have thought?

And the provision of OPV’s is in better shape compared to other capabilities in the fleet. Please note HMG!

Lee H
Guest
Lee H

Afternoon all Time for a bit of reality here before we going off and create new squadrons of fishery patrol vessels armed to the teeth ready to ward off the french, Spanish and Portuguese fishing fleets Firstly we are not at war, even when we leave the EU on 31 Jan we will still be bound by a variety of rules and regulations that govern how we fish, where we fish and how much we fish. Secondly it isn’t just patrol vessels that are utilised to monitor and protect our national waters, our allocated fishing grounds and coast lines. Whilst… Read more »

Gfor
Guest
Gfor

I am not sure you understand how things work now. Fisheries protection vessels are not actually used to patrol areas as you suggest. They react to reports of illegal fishing from other agencies and intelligence. Obviously they do conduct infrequent checks to fly the flag if they have the time, but you actually need physical assets with the opportunity to catch up to and board the offending vessels.
Drones are not the panacea for everything that many on here suggest.

Lee H
Guest
Lee H

You do not need to board the vessels, if you can surveil the illegal activity you can report it to the appropriate authority. We cannot do everything by ship, physical assets no longer provide the deterrent they once did.
Drones are not the panacea, they are however another “club in the golf bag”, part of a plethora of platforms and systems that can be utilised to deter people from committing offences in UK waters.

Gfor
Guest
Gfor

Unfortunately, most offences are committed by people legally in the fishing area doing illegal things i.e. overfishing, under sized catch, illegal nets and catch of incorrect species.
A drone would be useful for exactly none of these issues.

Nigel Collins
Guest
Nigel Collins

Too busy wasting money on other things, not to mention the £7 Billion in overspend by the MOD thus far and counting.

“Earlier this week, a leaked government-commissioned review led by former HS2 Ltd chairman Doug Oakervee claimed the project’s bill could reach £106bn.”

We haven’t got the money I hear people cry out, really?

https://news.sky.com/story/hs2-complexity-and-risks-of-high-speed-rail-scheme-were-under-estimated-11916226

Martin
Guest
Martin

What’s the transport Budget got to do with fisheries or defence? HS2 gets paid for from the transport Budget? I’m assuming you are in favour of some form of infrastructure spending so if not HS2 then the money is going to go on roads or other rail projects.

Nigel Collins
Guest
Nigel Collins

Where does the additional funding come from for projects like this, £56bn in 2015- now projected to be 106 Billion? and out of who’s budgets will the additional funding for this be found?

You forgot to mention the wasted £7 Billion by the MOD by the way when it was looked into by the NAO!

“What’s the transport Budget got to do with fisheries or defence?”

Plenty.

DaveyB
Guest
DaveyB

Love to see a breakdown of the wasted £7 billion, it certainly didn’t go on spares or manning.

Nigel Collins
Guest
Nigel Collins

“The Ministry of Defence’s (the Department’s) Equipment Plan will set out its equipment and support budget for the period from 2019 to 2029. It includes spending on equipment already in use and equipment in development. It accounts for more than 40% of the Department’s total spending, meaning stability of the wider defence budget depends on effective management of the Equipment Plan. Last year, forecast costs over ten years exceeded budgets by £7.0 billion, and could be higher in some circumstances.”

https://www.nao.org.uk/work-in-progress/the-equipment-plan-2019-2029/

Meirion X
Guest
Meirion X

What has HS2 got to do with the MoD over spend?
Even though, it’s projected cost is beyond the value of it’s propose.

Nigel Collins
Guest
Nigel Collins

It could be better spent elsewhere if we could deliver projects on time and within the budget.

“A leading mental health charity for military veterans says it will not be able to take any new cases in England and Wales, because of a funding crisis.”

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51243098

Keefe
Guest
Keefe

I always suspect that the money, at least a large chunk of it was taken out of the defence budget by David Cameron so as to be available to spend on his pet project department of international aid , which was just incidentally useful to burnish his personal PC credentials,

AC
Guest
AC

No shit sherlock

Herodotus
Guest

Most of the work in fisheries protection could be done by supply vessels such as those used in the North Sea. A merchant crew with a small detachment of Marines/police/whatever would serve the purpose. You don’t need 2000 ton ships with a crew of 50!

HF
Guest
HF

That is a very good point.

Trevor
Guest
Trevor

Correct. The story is hysterical as are the responses. The issue is about ‘discards’ and such like… what ever that all is. Its not about £250 million plus frigates blasting shells over the bow of some trawler that should be trespassing some imaginary line in the sea.

Bob2
Guest
Bob2

Quite agree. rUK should copy Marine Scotland and make fisheries protection a civil service concern.

Helions
Guest
Helions

I have an odd question: Does HMG protect the fisheries around Diego Garcia (Indian Ocean Territories)? I assume DG has the same exclusive territorial waters as any other. If so, what assets patrol them (does the USN) and who fishes them?

Cheers

Lee1
Guest
Lee1

I think that is a marine reserve so yes the RN should be patrolling it. However I doubt they are. The US may well patrol it in an effort to protect the base though.

Levi Goldsteinberg
Guest
Levi Goldsteinberg

There are RMs based there, I know a few who’ve been posted out there. They float about on RHIBs doing all sorts of things but whether those RHIBs belong to the UK or US I’m not sure. I’d imagine the US also has soldiers doing the same.

Either way, the RM and RN definitely at the very least have a hand in protecting Diego Garcia

Helions
Guest
Helions

Thank you both for your replies.

Cheers!

andy reeves
Guest
andy reeves

all security issues at Diego Garcia are taken up by the Americans

Bob2
Guest
Bob2

There are 4 million square km of marine reserves surrounding our overseas territories. I doubt the RN regularly patrols/protects any of it, apart from the FI.

https://greatbritishoceans.org

The USN may ensure DG is safe, but I cannot imagine they care about fish stocks. Maybe Mauritius could patrol the area.

Helions
Guest
Helions

Hmmmm… Kind of a grey area then…

Cheers.

Gunbuster
Guest
Gunbuster

The RN does patrol the reserves around Diego. There is a detachment/ Naval Party. They also work closely with a number of research groups from Universities monitoring the area.

They are nominally in charge of customs as well for any people visiting the island. The US provides security only at their facilities.

Bob2
Guest
Bob2

Thanks Gunbuster for the clarification.

Do you know if the UK has hired a replacement vessel for patrolling the BIOT marine protected areas following the Pacific Marlin being scrapped?

The article below appears to state that the Indian illegal fishermen are simply delighted with the Pacific Marlin going. Not sure they would be so happy if a faster replacement had been put in place.
https://m.timesofindia.com/city/kochi/end-of-a-nightmare-for-fish-pirates/articleshow/57547875.cms

copper
Guest
copper

Pacific Marlin was replaced by the Grampian Frontier early 2017.

Bob2
Guest
Bob2

Thank you Copper for the information. It lead me to the below article on the ship in the biot:

https://sites.google.com/site/thechagosarchipelagofacts/eppz-mpa/patrol-vessel

Trevor
Guest
Trevor

Is Diego Garcia remotely interested in its fishing grounds? Can it’s people collect all they want, assuming they are interested? Does it have any fishing ports?

Bob2
Guest
Bob2

Trevor, I doubt the current occupants of DG care about fishing and the original inhabitants are currently living in Mauritius, so you are correct no local fishing. However, the UK government have designated the BIOT as a no-catch wildlife refuge. They have done the same for Pitcairn, Acsension, St Helena, Tristan de Cuna and the South Sandwich Islands. The government made a big song and dance about how the UK would have the greatest marine preserves on the planet. The trouble is what is the point having protected areas if you do not have the ability to implement the laws… Read more »

Martin
Guest
Martin

List under not the Royal Navy’s problem, fishing In English water is controlled by DEFRA who pay for the fisheries protection squadron but given how short the RN is on crew and hulls this should be done by a civilian agency as it is in Scotland.

andy reeves
Guest
andy reeves

privatise the north sea.

George Royce
Guest
George Royce

Successive government have allowed our Armed Forces to become a shell of its former self. They have been in a possessive state of ‘managing decline’ when we should be working towards becoming an international superpower once again.

Pathetic and the only way to clear that kind of thinking out is to elect proper Conservatives.

HF
Guest
HF

The current and previous ones seem like ‘proper conservatives’ to me.

julian1
Guest
julian1

“international superpower” really? you mean defence budget of 15%

andy reeves
Guest
andy reeves

options for fast growth are out there a deal with america for ‘first dibs’ on retiring u.s forces kit. the Americans spend Billions on the up keep of the ‘just in case’ equipment. unfortunately even though the rest of the world, ALL OF IT trades retired assets, we, the good old united kingdom are too stuffy and self centred and snobbish, to use other nations casts offs. even in the area of manpower, some 12,000 applicants to join the Gurkha, are not given the chance to join the royal navy,air force, or marines.

Frank62
Guest
Frank62

“proper Conservatives”, have got us into this position. They’ve done nothing to grow the fleet, just a steady decline & gapping of major capabilities. The only growth area has been in spin or bare-faced lies. The Falklands war was directly triggered by Tory cuts(Scrapped Ark Royal, planning to sell Invincible, cutting escort numbers, scrapping or questioning future of Endurance etc) which convinced the Argentine Junta the UK had no further interests in the S Atlantic. We were distancing ourselves from the Falklanders until the invasion. Often overlooked after history re-wrote it as Thatchers finest hour rather than the fiasco her… Read more »

Trevor
Guest
Trevor

A shell?? You are hysterical. We have only today just gone back to sea with a 3 billion pound aircrsft carrier. Who else other than the USA can current do that, and also of course have 12 state of the art stealth bombers on board?

The moan on this thread is about laws covering discarding fish from trawlers….nothing, zero, to do with the royal navy or indeed this nonsense about Diego Garcia.

Keefe
Guest
Keefe

I agree , although would argue that we lack the number and GDP to match the real superpowers, but with out doubt UK should be aiming to work its forces up to what will be required in the new more fractured world we know live in, the old alliances and relationships are showing signs of breaking down and it seems we are heading back to the world of pre WW1 and WW2, therefore UK should and must be able to act as a true Global Great Power, if not as a superpower, but as you say the myopic obsession or… Read more »

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

George we cannot be a super power ever again, population size and access to resources matters hard when it come to power and wealth. We could probably lever a wee bit more hard and soft power from our population but not much and the question will always be why should we….as long as we can defend our nation and it’s interest that’s all we need. Everything else needs to be focused on eduction, wellbeing and economic development ( infrastructure). All we would do by putting military spending above a reasonable point would be to destroy our nation in the long… Read more »

J Peter Wilson
Guest
J Peter Wilson

How about using de-weaponising the MQ-9A Reapers, when they are replaced by the Protector (based on the Predator B), and transferring them to Broader Force to use as monitoring our UK seas and support our Fisheries Protection ships?
Ideally, they could be based at RAF Waddington as their main task would be to monitor the EEZ mainly in the North Sea and Channel areas.

Daniele Mandelli
Guest
Daniele Mandelli

Are they cleared to fly in UK Airspace? I don’t think so.

Even so I like the idea.

WeeWill
Guest
WeeWill

This fact was one of the primary drivers for the Protector programme. The regularity work alone is vast!

andy reeves
Guest
andy reeves

give ALL the Archers to the border force and get them to perform real work instead of being university ‘fanny boats’.

Gunbuster
Guest
Gunbuster

A 20m archer say 10 miles off the coast in the North Sea?
Really?
I was on one in the Irish sea during some heavy swells and barfed my ring up for 8 hrs until we got back into the mersey estuary and some sheltered waters They are horrible sea keepers and the equipment on them is old and outdated. The main engines are/where from Cheiftan tanks! They only carry a v small rib for getting from anchor to shore and have limited food and water capacity

A none starter.

Grubbie
Guest
Grubbie

Totally useless then? Screening new starters for chronic barfitis?

WeeWill
Guest
WeeWill

Thanks GB, I stand corrected on how I thought Archers could be / were used then! Are they purely fair weather and estuarine ops only? Or can they cope close in to shore in worsening sea states (wouldn’t help in this scenario, I’m just curious)?

Mark
Guest
Mark

When you consider that the Irish Navy went up to 90m hulls for the West Coast and pretty much keep the Peacocks for the Irish Sea and coastal work the idea of 20m boats is something I don’t want to think about tbh.

WeeWill
Guest
WeeWill

Without looking at specs, I’d equated the Archer Class to the size of the Border Force cutters when in fact those boats are twice as long and have an extra ~2 m beam. Anyone any experience of how these handle rougher open seas?

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

I’ve always found corkscrewing around in a small boat very pleasant, but then I’m one of the lucky ones who never ever get motion sickness, even when all around me has turned to chunky chunder city. But that does not take from the fact inshore craft can be fuck all use ( even if the can make way) and are actual a bit of a hazard to life and limb if you try and use them as working boats outside of sheltered waters. Getting pounded by a head sea in bit of weather is a rinsing, but if your forced… Read more »

Gunbuster
Guest
Gunbuster

I can count on one hand the number of times I have barfed at sea in 30 + years. 2 of them where on an Archer. 2 on FF’s after rather excellent runs ashore and I was still a little, no, a lot hung over and the last one was on the Brum off Portland during Michael Fish’s “we don’t get hurricanes in the UK” Hurricane in 87…that night was a right giggle even if everyone was chucking.

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

I was only 14 during the what hurricane affair. Did have to help put all the fences back up after mind.

Bob2
Guest
Bob2

Marine Scotland have two Reims-Cessna F406 aircraft supporting their three fisheries protection vessels. Does DEFRA have anything similar for rUK waters?

copper
Guest
copper

Defra/MMO share MCA assets.

Helions
Guest
Helions
Ian
Guest
Ian

Hi Helions ….we have some Batch 1s and a Batch 1.5 already built could these not be utilised…….

Helions
Guest
Helions

I think those hulls have already been counted. A variant of this might fill the bill.

https://www.homelandsecurity-technology.com/projects/sentinel-class-fast-response-cutter-patrol-boats/

Cheers

HF
Guest
HF

Could have stopped after ‘ships’.

Steve R
Guest
Steve R

From the largest, mightiest navy in the world to not enough frigates and destroyers to deploy, and now not even enough to protect our fishing…

Dear god, how the mighty have fallen! Makes me sad just thinking about it.

andy reeves
Guest
andy reeves

the american navy will never e immune, at the moment the Americans can sustain their forces, whereas we cannot, a strong economy promotes a stronger national wealth.sadly, in tandem with the mass loss in the shipbuilding industry the u.k cannot expand the fleet quickly, because there’s nowhere to do it.! in short, unless the the’ only made in the U.K’ policy is finally dropped things aren’t going to change. this policy cannot be defended when you’ve nowhere to sustain it.

Trevor
Guest
Trevor

Sadly you and others are bonkers mad. Lord West is always moaning about something. Just look at our peers. France and Netherlands. They have 1 carrier between them and limited number of escorts. The issue is the balance of our armed forces. And within that what each balance should be. In terms of numbers of personnel the RAF is small but it’s power projection is massive and is the most visible and active. Its surely a moot point that we should maintain our heavy land armour and its a moot point that we need any more “fleet escorts” than we… Read more »

Mark
Guest
Mark

How is the Netherlands a Peer to the UK, you are talking about a vastly smaller sized population/economy

Meirion X
Guest
Meirion X

I thought you knew the saying, ‘the Jack of all trades is a master of none’?

WeeWill
Guest
WeeWill

For situations like this, I dream of a healthy RN / RM reserve that co-staff the Archer Class with Border Force personnel, ‘timesharing’ the hulls with the university lot. And just to keep the forum sweet, let’s up-gun them with those FFNW 20 mm cannons 😬

Cymbeline
Guest
Cymbeline

Sounds good, but unfortunately Border Force are too busy running around after/looking for clandestines, not to mention drugs, fags and other nasty things, they just dont have the staff. Much better for the Fisheries Protection to get the added resources.

andy reeves
Guest
andy reeves

give all the desk based admirals at the ministry, an archer each, and put them to sea. if they don’t want to do it, they can retire, and get rid of some of the dead ood that is costing the nation a good amount of£ for nothing in return.

andy reeves
Guest
andy reeves

maybe take up some ships from trade?

Herodotus
Guest

Absolutely, plenty available at minimal cost with a plentiful supply of civilian crew…keep the navy for what it is for….kowtowing to US interests!

phill
Guest
phill

These European fishing vessels could make good target practise for our choppers,give them a 30 minute warning so they can hop in their liferafts and then blow the ships into tiny pieces.

andy reeves
Guest
andy reeves

put 20 mm cannon onto those trawler and fishing boats that foreign fishermen have bankrupted their owners lying dead and neglected at once proud fishing ports like Grimsby.

Nigel Collins
Guest
Nigel Collins

Enough for a few more fisheries protection vessels and staff, I would have thought?

andy reeves
Guest
andy reeves

give all l them bloody archers proper job to do, maybe even ‘tweak the t31 design and call it a patrol ship.

Sjb1968
Guest
Sjb1968

There at least 2 decommissioned MCM’s vessels in Portsmouth that could brought back into service and the MOD could purchase ex HMS Clyde but where is the manpower going to come from?
As for using the private sector this will result in even less opportunities for new officers to gain crucial experience in a relatively low risk environment. By chance I was talking to an ex skipper of a B1 River and he was adamant they were good drafts as the crew have regular leave, which makes them popular. All important when you are struggling to retain people.

Gunbuster
Guest
Gunbuster

The MCMVs have been stripped of equipment. It would be cheaper to STUFT some off shore patrol vessels. Some are helo capable, have cranes and deck space for nice big ribs and accom aplenty for augmentees from the DOE.

Matthew Smith
Guest
Matthew Smith

Keeping HMS Clyde is exactly what is needed, it will be of more use in any fisheries dispute than any frigate or MCMV – dropping a Sandown has been on the cards for a while and this should be the course to free up the crew.

Stephen
Guest
Stephen

A few more O.P.V.s wouldn’t go amiss I.M.O., equipped with U.A.V.s

Steve
Guest
Steve

Fishery protection should not be a military role, as it is a complete waste of money using military ships to chase down foreign fishing boats and then politely ask them to move on, its hardly likely to end up in a shooting match. A couple of coast guard cutters would be more efficient and come at a fraction of the price.

Fishing brings so little to our economy, that the money is way better going else where.

Steve Taylor
Guest
Steve Taylor

It’s the oldest standing task the Royal Navy has it goes way back.

And what makes fisheries any different from any other resource?

Probably a more valid spend than spending billions running around Afghnaistan and Iraq for a decade or more. I bet more was spent on that than the RN has ever spent on fisheries.

Steve
Guest
Steve

Not really comparision between Iraq/Afgan.

Fishy protection is a standing task in UK waters with zero or next to zero threat, using military assets for that is a waste of assets that are better used else where.

Its not like the whole issue is new, fishy protection issues have dated back to the 60s, plenty of time to get cutters if it was really a priority.

Steve Taylor
Guest
Steve Taylor

We are talking about spending money here and where politicians choose to spend our money. So yes it is a valid comparison. I know to many on sites like this tasks like FP aren’t as glamorous as running a sandy hole playing SAS. But defence covers a wide spectrum. If there were no threat there would be no patrol.

Fisheries protection issues have dated back to the 60s? The Crown has maintained fisheries protection capability since 1481.

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

To be honest the marine environment is always a threat, take your eye of the ball or not know what you are doing in your evolutions and you or some else will be hurt or die, simple as, the sea alway takes it tithe. As for is fisheries is it the job of the military, probably Not, in the same way as drug interceptions and hurricane aid is not. But and this is very big but…if you don’t know what you are doing the sea will kill you. This means just to exist in its environment a navy must always… Read more »

Sjb1968
Guest
Sjb1968

But the ships also escort foreign warships through the channel, provide security around offshore facilities around the UK as well as monitor fisheries, which is worth £1.4Bn. There are several thousand UK registered fishing vessels alone plus those from the EU. A couple of coastguard cutters would be not enough but something smaller than a B1 River would be cheaper but they do far more than just fishery protection.

Steve
Guest
Steve

1.4b for the uk economy is really nothing, considering the economy is 2.6t and its not like that value is suddenly going to go to 0, if we don’t have fishery protection, its likely to fluctuate by a few million. In regards to protecting the offshore facilities, protecting them against what? If the day hits that we have to protect them, typhoons would be able to get there way faster and have way more firepower than a river. It really bugs me that the media talks about the fishing like it is a fundamental part of the UK economy, whilst… Read more »

Steve
Guest
Steve

doing some research it accounts for just over 0.1% of the economy.

Sjb1968
Guest
Sjb1968

It is a very small part of the UK economy because it was sold down the river when we joined the ECC. It could probably be twice the size and whilst that is not a huge it would be supporting some of the most deprived communities in the country. Those areas were self supporting but have become in part dependent on subsidy and it needn’t be so.
The bitterness in those areas therefore goes back to the very start of the in or out debate and why when given the chance they voted leave.

Steve
Guest
Steve

That’s believing the stories without checking the facts behind them. Total amount from UK waters including amount caught by EU ships is only marginally more than the amount caught by UK ships in UK water plus amount UK ships catch in EU waters, because almost all the big fishing ships are from the UK.

Fishing isn’t going to be the big boost from brexit that some would like us to believe

Sjb1968
Guest
Sjb1968

Foreign boats catch 60% of the fish in UK waters and foreign boats tend to be larger. Take a look at Lativian super trawler in the channel just late last year. He should be fishing in the Baltic shouldn’t he?
A realignment of the percentage caught by UK boats to benefit the U.K. would make a real difference to the country’s fishing communities. I live in Devon and have seen the impact of the CFP first hand on both my relatives who are trawlermen and on my own angling.

Steve
Guest
Steve

I think you need to check these stats. The main impact to UK fishing was the massive over fishing by our own boats in the 60s-70s.

If I remember correctly 60% if the amount of UK fish sold abroad not caught.

Either way makes next to no difference to the overall UK economy and money should go else where, where it would make a bigger difference.

Steve
Guest
Steve

Found it, 23% of fish are caught by other EU states.

Sjb1968
Guest
Sjb1968

Steve overfishing was and I believe still is a huge issue but unlike Iceland and others we did not control our waters as we were part of the CFP so we have seen the perverse scenes of fish being dumped because the vessel has no quota. As for the stats they are very misleading whichever ones you rely upon because many large UK boats are in reality foreign owned and operated. Allegedly 23% of some English quotas are caught by a single Dutch boat that is registered in the U.K. in terms of money being better spent elsewhere that money… Read more »

Steve
Guest
Steve

Check the official stats. You can find them with a simple Google search. The Dutch vessel was clearly fake news (I hate that term but it applies here) as it’s impossible considering total fished by Dutch ships.

Agreed on no threat period but I would like someone to tell me what threat a river class is able to handle. They suck up sailors that could be on one of the frigates on dock training duty (aka not manned due to lack of sailors) that could actually fight

Steve
Guest
Steve

Dont’ get me wrong, i am not against policing our own waters, but in an era where we need ships in the gulf and where we have said ships tied up due to lack of crews, i think military personal / budget could be spent more effectively.

Sjb1968
Guest
Sjb1968

Our lack of resources in the Gulf was just the case of the proverbial chickens coming home to roost after two decades of cutting the Navy beyond what was sensible. Whilst it seems recently ministers have been keen to tell those in uniform to get more of their assets back to sea the reality is the budget has meant less manpower, slower build periods and refits deferred. An increase in the budget is required.

Sjb1968
Guest
Sjb1968

SDR20 will certainly be a real test of whether realistic investment is coming or just more of the same. Let’s hope it is the former.

Sjb1968
Guest
Sjb1968

I didn’t say 23% of the entire English fishing quota and Fishing News is not renowned for fake news unlike the tabloids. The 3 B1 Rivers cost about £25m to run and even allowing for the extra manning to keep them at sea longer they require 150 sailors when 1 type 23 requires a crew of 185. Sadly whilst we should be able to run all our escorts the late replacement of the type 23s with leaner manned vessels is the root cause exacerbated by the increased costs of keeping of old vessels going long after their planned OSD. As… Read more »

Gunbuster
Guest
Gunbuster

Ahh… Lord Spithead formally known as Admiral West who when he was the First Sea Lord sacrificed the Surface Fleet on the altar of carrier strike so that Brown could keep jobs at Rosyth (which was then his constituency). I met the clown and listened to him speak in various sit downs in Senior Rates messes when he visited ships. He was a comsumate politician by then and no longer a real admiral, answering the ships crew concerns with his bland none comital answers. We didn’t trust anything he said then and I still don’t now. He always wants to… Read more »

John Clark
Guest
John Clark

Absolutely Gunbuster, cheap boring political posturing, stating the bleeding obvious!

As you quite rightly point out, he ( and many of his colleagues) stood by and watched the RN being gutted like a fish by Labour and the Tories, while they were in bloody charge!

I have no time for him or his like….

Steve Taylor
Guest
Steve Taylor

He is underwhelming in person ain’t he?

Becareful casting doubt on ‘carrier strike’ on sites like this and SaveTheRoyalNavy.

You will get all the WAFU fanboys upset.

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

What’s a WAFU ?

Gunbuster
Guest
Gunbuster

A derogatory term for the fleet air arm.

Wet And F***ng Useless

andy reeves
Guest
andy reeves

would make a prime minister

Henry Root
Guest
Henry Root

Most of the Welsh fishing rights have been sold to Spain by successive governments. England and Wales in particular have been mismanaged.
I see some really helpful comments suggesting we “whack” French fisherman.
There’s no shame or dishonour in the armed forces standing up to an illegitimate government, a government which with the help of Capita, have devastated your numbers.

Henry Root
Guest
Henry Root

I don’t see how people can defend the UK effectively or make peace, if they are joking about whacking French trawlers. Who would want to join an organisation with its head in the tabloid press, a press which is unique in the world? How are you going to recruit in such an immature environment of tabloid phone hacking, Piers Morgan and TheSun being today’s role models. Thatcher ended City & Guilds and replaced it with the inferior NVQ system, which leans on employers to finish the engineering apprentice ready for employment. We have an apprenticeship system that pays less than… Read more »

John Clark
Guest
John Clark

I’m not just blaming Labour, both the Tories and Labour have jointly damaged our armed forces.

Labour, through misguided wars (with no objective) and sheer economic incompetence.

Conservatives, though the appalling 2010 SDSR, that cut key capabilities to the bone and axed others in a reckless and dangerously short sighted way.

Defence has been a low priority since 1960 for governments of both colours, it’s time to bring it front and center again.

Keefe
Guest
Keefe

Without doubt, but without the general public holding are dear leaders to account they will continue to treat defence as nothing more then a resource to make quick savings. You only have to look at the fury shown, when ever the NHS seems to be under threat of cuts, supported by a mix of genuine public anger but also canny spin by the NHS itself that uses its contacts in the BBC and other media organisations to constantly propagandise for the dept’s. ever increasing demand for money and a politically active staff base that will readily demonstrate to defend their… Read more »

Herodotus
Guest

Hard to imagine the equivalent of ‘Dreadnought Fever’ sweeping the country today. Can you imagine crowds gathered outside Buckingham Palace chanting ‘we want eight…and we won’t wait’. Most of them were spindly, bow legged grandads that were clearly malnourished as children. In the long-run, they would have been better off demanding a National Health service for their grandchildren! The NHS was still forty years in the future!

andy reeves
Guest
andy reeves

we should be adopting a total no tolerance policy in Gibraltars waters as well, with 8 or so more 20 mm armed
archers to augment the Gibraltar squadrons numbers come back and e’ll confiscate your vessel and sink it!

Mark
Guest
Mark

Cause that would end well…

Helions
Guest
Helions
r cummings
Guest
r cummings

The OPVs are a good asset and they do a lot more than fishery protection They will be invaluable in the event of amy disaster at sea or on an offshore installation. They are a visible deterrent to drug snugglers, gun runners, illegal immigrants etc. They shadow Russian trawlers/eavesdroppeRd. They are a physical reassurance to not just the fishery fleet but to merchant ships and small craft in UK waters. All that could of course be done by a Coast Guard as in the USA. The benefits of it being done by the RN are – Opportunity for Junior officers… Read more »