Most critical for many in the industry is the impact the Transition Period will have on UK fishing:
The transition period also offers clarity and predictability to interested parties, including international partners, on fisheries, as it extends the applicability of the Common Fisheries Policy (and terms of relevant international agreements) to the UK throughout the transition. The UK shall be bound by the decisions on fishing opportunities until the end of the transition period. It will be consulted at various stages of the annual decision-making process in respect of its fishing opportunities. Upon invitation by the Union and to the extent permitted by the particular forum, the UK may attend international consultations and negotiations in view of preparing its future membership in relevant international fora.
On environment protection and fishing and cooperation in police and customs matters, the Protocol establishes the basis for administrative cooperation between the competent authorities. A specialised committee is also established for overseeing the application of this Protocol.
Followed by the Withdrawal Agreement explainer provided by HMG:
Fisheries 121.
Specific arrangements are also made in relation to fishing opportunities, to enable a smooth transition to the new relationship between the UK and the EU. During the implementation period the UK’s fisheries rules will be aligned with those of the EU and the UK’s share of catch cannot be reduced. During the last year of the implementation period, the UK will be able to negotiate its own fishing opportunities for the following year. The UK and the EU intend to conclude a new fisheries agreement in time to determine fishing opportunities for the first year after the Implementation Period, in preparation for which during the Implementation Period the UK can be invited to form part of the EU’s delegation in international negotiations.
Singe Customs Territory 183.
The rules governing the single customs territory do not automatically apply in respect of fishery and aquaculture products. These products would be included when a UK-EU Fisheries Agreement has been reached that includes arrangements on access to waters and fishing opportunities. Nothing in this Protocol prescribes the content of that fisheries agreement, and the UK as a whole will not be part of the Common Fisheries Policy.
Statement on Brexit Withdrawal Agreement deal SFF response:
Bertie Armstrong, chief executive of the SFF, said: “We welcome the intervention of the Secretary of State for Scotland and his fellow MPs stating that they could not support anything less than full and effective sovereignty over UK fishing waters.Listen here:
During PMQs the Teresa May once again reiterated that being a sovereign state means that we would "take back control" in response to a question from Martin Vickers MP for Cleethorpes. He was followed by Kate Hoey who asked the PM when would the fishermen of Northern Ireland would enjoy parity of access with fishermen from Ireland.
Bertie Armstrong continued: “We have been saying for two years that the only plausible way forward for the industry is for the UK to become an independent coastal state with the power to determine who catches what, where and when in our waters. It was this sovereignty that was so cruelly stripped from this country when we joined the EEC in 1973, betraying generations of fishermen and denying them the right to a fair living.
“There can be no link between access to our waters for EU vessels and the trade of seafood products in the EU – it contravenes all international norms and practice and is simply unacceptable in principle.
“The Prime Minister has made a series of commitments to the industry and anything less than the fulfilment of those means the Sea of Opportunity will not be realised and makes ‘no deal’ a more attractive option.”
All this on the back of this comment from Michel Barnier's office yesterday:
This piece from the BBC Word Service was a Brexit Withdrawal Agreement response from Peterhead in Scotland - Rob Young reports talks to Jimmy Buchan.
Senior Lecturer in Politics with a real interest in fishing Christopher Huggins has picked apart the relevant fishing text of the Agreement and added his thoughts:
All this on the back of this comment from Michel Barnier's office yesterday:
This piece from the BBC Word Service was a Brexit Withdrawal Agreement response from Peterhead in Scotland - Rob Young reports talks to Jimmy Buchan.
Senior Lecturer in Politics with a real interest in fishing Christopher Huggins has picked apart the relevant fishing text of the Agreement and added his thoughts:
ARTICLE 130 Specific arrangements relating to fishing opportunities
1. As regards the fixing of fishing opportunities within the meaning of Article 43(3) TFEU for any period falling within the transition period, the United Kingdom shall be consulted in respect of the fishing opportunities related to the United Kingdom, including in the context of the preparation of relevant international consultations and negotiations.2. For the purposes of paragraph 1, the Union shall offer the opportunity to the United Kingdom to provide comments on the Annual Communication from the European Commission on fishing opportunities, the scientific advice from the relevant scientific bodies and the proposals from theEuropean Commission for fishing opportunities for any period falling within the transition period.3. Notwithstanding point (b) of Article 129(2), with a view to allowing the United Kingdom to prepare its future membership in relevant international fora, the Union may exceptionally invite theUnited Kingdom to attend, as part of the Union's delegation, international consultations and negotiations referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, to the extent allowed for Member States and permitted by the specific forum.4. Without prejudice to Article 127(1), the relative stability keys for the allocation of fishing opportunities referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article shall be maintained.
In case the single customs territory (i.e. backstop) kicks in, fishery and aquaculture products will not be automatically covered. The exception to this is if an agreement on access to fishing waters is in place. Both sides seek to get an agreement on that by July 2020
ARTICLE 6 Single customs territory, movement of goods
By derogation from the third subparagraph, fishery and aquaculture products, as set out in Annex I to Regulation (EU) 1379/2013 ("fishery and aquaculture products"), shall not be covered by the rules set out in Annexes 2 and 4, as well as the rules referred to in the fourth subparagraph, unless an agreement on access to waters and fishing opportunities is applicable between the Union and the United Kingdom. In accordance with Article 184 of the Withdrawal Agreement, the Union and the United Kingdom shall use their best endeavours to conclude and ratify such an agreement before 1 July 2020.
46. Fisheries and aquaculture – Commission Regulation (EEC)
No 3703/85 of 23 December 1985 laying down detailed rules for applying the common marketing standards for certain fresh or chilled fish3 – Council Regulation (EEC) No 2136/89 of 21 June 1989 laying down common marketing standards for preserved sardines and trade descriptions for preserved sardines
Council Regulation (EC) No 2406/96 of 26 November 1996 laying down common marketing standards for certain fishery products2 – Council Regulation (EC) No 850/98 of 30 March 1998 for the conservation of fishery resources through technical measures for the protection of juveniles of marine organisms3 , in so far as it concerns provisions relating to minimum sizes of marine organisms – Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy, amending Regulations (EC) No 847/96, (EC) No 2371/2002, (EC) No 811/2004, (EC) No 768/2005, (EC) No 2115/2005, (EC) No 2166/2005, (EC) No 388/2006, (EC) No 509/2007, (EC) No 676/2007, (EC) No 1098/2007, (EC) No 1300/2008, (EC) No 1342/2008 and repealing Regulations (EEC) No 2847/93, (EC) No 1627/94 and (EC) No 1966/20064 , in so far as it concerns provisions relating to marketing standards
Regulation (EU) No 1379/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on the common organisation of the markets in fishery and aquaculture products amending Council Regulations (EC) No 1184/2006 and (EC) No 1224/2009 and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 104/20001 , in so far as it concerns provisions relating to marketing standards and consumer information – Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy, amending Council Regulations (EC) No 1954/2003 and (EC) No 1224/2009 and repealing Council Regulations (EC) No 2371/2002 and (EC) No 639/2004 and Council Decision 2004/585/EC2 , in so far as it concerns provisions relating to marketing standards for fishery and aquaculture products – Council Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008 of 29 September 2008 establishing a Community system to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, amending Regulations (EEC) No 2847/93, (EC) No 1936/2001 and (EC) No 601/2004 and repealing Regulations (EC) No 1093/94 and (EC) No 1447/19993 – Council Regulation (EC) No 1035/2001 of 22 May 2001 establishing a catch documentation scheme for Dissostichus spp. 4
So, in case of the backstop kicking in, my reading is this means potential tariffs & non-tariff barriers on fish if there's no agreement on fishing opportunities. As many of us have been highlighting, this was always on the cards given how intertwined fishing and trade are Moving on to the political declaration on future trading relationship. As rumoured fishing features here too.
UK's position as an independent coastal state is emphasised. But so is the need to co-operate. Clear hint that if an economic partnership is sought an agreement on quota shares, fishing opportunities will need to be in place.
I keep banging on about how fishing and the wider deal are inextricably linked (see https://twitter.com/chris_huggins/status/1060805950553100288 …) so the same linkages being made here really shouldn't surprise anyone. But there's a but.
Remember this is a broad political declaration. To my mind it offers plenty of room for manoeuvre. It says there needs to be an agreement, but that's about it. So two things immediately come to mind:
Firstly, an agreement regarding fishing would have to be in place anyway. Much of the fish in UK waters are shared stocks, and UNCLOS mandates coastal states to cooperate where that is the case. Fish don't see a big line 200nm off the coast & think "I shouldn't cross that"
Secondly, an agreement on fishing for an economic partnership. Fine, but what would such an agreement look like? We don't know yet. It's entirely possible the UK could reach an agreement with the EU that allows for a fairer distribution (in UK eyes) of quota.
Final thought though - getting this through cabinet was the easy step. It's by no means signed off. And worth highlighting that while fishing is small, it also has political significance (Statement on Brexit Withdrawal Agreement deal SFF response). So watch this space.
The NFFO (National Federation of Fishermen's Organisations)were quick to post a response:
WITHDRAWAL AGREEMENT
Like many others, we are studying the text of the draft EU/UK withdrawal agreement to understand its implications for the future of the UK fishing industry. Our provisional view is that this is an extremely important first step towards a new future for the UK as an independent coastal state, denied us 40 years ago when the UK signed up to the Common Fisheries Policy. It is, however, only a first step. Further challenges lie ahead in securing the actual access arrangements and quota shares consistent with that new status
The key passage on fisheries reads:
FISHING OPPORTUNITIES
The parties agree to:
● Cooperation bilaterally and internationally to ensure fishing at sustainable levels, promote resource conservation, and foster a clean, healthy and productive marine environment, noting that the United Kingdom will be an independent coastal state. While preserving regulatory autonomy, cooperation on the development of measures for the conservation, rational management and regulation of fisheries, in a non-discriminatory manner. Close working with other coastal states and in international fora, including to manage shared stocks.
● Within the context of the overall economic partnership, establishment of a new fisheries agreement on, inter alia, access to waters and quota shares, to be in place in time to be used for determining fishing opportunities for the first year after the transition period.
Recognition that the UK will be an independent coastal state, carries with it the important implication that the automatic right of EU vessels to fish in UK waters - the principle of equal access - will end. Similarly, quota shares between the UK and the EU member states will no longer be governed by the 1983 agreement known as the principle of relative stability. The reference to regulatory autonomy, likewise, is weighted with meaning because it is a recognition that after any transition period, the UK will determine the rules for all vessels, domestic and foreign, which fish within the UK exclusive economic zone. The European institutions – the Council of Ministers, the European Parliament and the European Commission – will no longer determine the rules under which vessels fish in UK waters. The implied corollary is that UK vessels fishing in EU waters will be subject to EU rules.
It would be hard to overestimate the seismic significance of this shift. The agreement binds the parties to work cooperatively to ensure that fishing remains within sustainable levels. It concedes, however, that under international law, the UK will negotiate as an independent coastal state, with the rights and responsibilities of that new status under UN Law of the Sea.
Future Agreements
Much of the content on fisheries in the withdrawal agreement follows by default from the UK’s altered legal status. The parties agree to cooperate and the substance of any future agreement between the EU and UK on access and quota rights will take place in time to take effect after the end of any transition period. The EU, in its initial negotiating mandate, made clear that it would seek to make an agreement on a future EU/UK trade deal contingent on maintaining existing access to fish in UK waters and status quo on quota shares. The explicit reference to future fisheries negotiations between the UK and EU taking place within the context of the overall economic partnership, signals that this is where the EU will seek to maintain its negotiating leverage, albeit with a much-weakened hand to play.
The most relevant reference point here is Norway, which maintains its own fisheries policy outside the CFP. Shared stocks are managed jointly with the EU and other countries through annual reciprocal fisheries agreements. These annual agreements set the overall level of total allowable catches on the basis of scientific advice. They also agree access arrangements and quota shares (based on an objective assessment of the fish resources by species in each respective zone.) Quotas are exchanged annually on a reciprocal basis. Unlike many other Norwegian goods, Norwegian fisheries products do not have unfettered access to the European single market and are subject to various tariffs.
Setting aside the complex and controversial questions surrounding parliamentary approval for the withdrawal agreement, much still hinges on the negotiations ahead. The UK’s legal status has altered and its leverage in fisheries negotiations has dramatically changed but unless that new status is used to address the gross distortions in quota shares, fishermen will question what it has all been for. English fishermen in the Channel who have struggled with a 9% share of the cod quota (compared to France’s 84% share) have a legitimate expectation that this will be addressed – and quickly. This is only the most extreme of many examples of where the UK has been systematically disadvantaged by the CFP over 40 years.
To deliver the fair share of fishing opportunities that they rightly see as theirs, British fishermen, in this second round, will expect our negotiators to be as tough, astute, and hard-nosed as they need to be to realise the benefits of our new status as an independent coastal state.
BRUSSELS/PARIS (Reuters) Report:
Upset over fish, France leads EU criticism of draft Brexit deal
Michel Rose, Francesco Guarascio
France on Thursday led calls among European Union states for changes to the draft agreement on Britain’s exit from the bloc, adding to uncertainty over the fate of the deal as British Prime Minister Theresa faced an uproar at home.
May’s cabinet on Wednesday endorsed the draft to end Britain’s four decades in the bloc, a nearly 600-page, dense legal text that is far from certain to pass in the UK parliament and prompted several British ministers to resign on Thursday.
The other 27 EU states staying on together after Brexit plan to rubber-stamp the draft at a Nov. 25 leaders’ summit. But France spearheaded a group of states in raising objections to what has so far been agreed on fishing between the EU and UK after Brexit, diplomatic sources and EU officials said.
“On the draft agreement, several member states will ask for improvements on fishing,” a diplomatic source close to the negotiations said, listing concern about the issue in France, Denmark, Spain, Portugal and the Netherlands.
Finland and Ireland were also worried about future fishing arrangements, other diplomatic sources told Reuters.
Britain’s rich fishing waters are currently available to other EU states under mutual access arrangements with set quotas. While the EU has wanted to safeguard that scheme after Brexit, Britain wants to take unilateral control of its waters.
In the end, the draft Brexit deal leaves the case without a firm resolution at this stage. It says the two sides would try to agree on the future of fisheries by July 2020, during the transition period after Brexit, to form part of an eventual new EU-UK trade deal.
The draft leaves fisheries outside of the single EU-UK customs zone that could be triggered if the sides find no other way to ensure an open Irish border - the so-called “backstop” mechanism that has long held up an overall deal.
“Not all member states were very happy with that,” an EU official said, adding that it would not be easy to agree on the future fishing schemes.
Conceding access to its waters was highly disputed around the time Britain joined the then-European Community in 1973.
Territorial clashes between French and British fishermen have flared sporadically in the past decades, most recently last August when French vessels rammed British trawlers off the coast of Normandy in the so-called “Scallop Wars”.
A separate political declaration on future relations between the EU and UK - which forms a package with Britain’s withdrawal agreement but has no legal authority - says the two sides should also take conservation into account in their future fish deal.
CAN IT GET ANY BETTER?
Some other EU diplomats, however, expressed doubt that the bloc would bring down the whole deal over fisheries.
May holds onto her Brexit plan and job - for now
They said France’s opposition was tactical and that member states concerned with fisheries could still seek more reassurances in the declaration on future ties - which is now being discussed among the 27 member states - rather than demand changes to Britain’s formal withdrawal deal.
The draft agreement has infuriated hardline eurosceptics in May’s Conservative Party and the Northern Irish party that props up her minority government by tying the country’s economy closely to the EU for years ahead and hence potentially limiting Britain’s scope to forge its own trade deals around the world.
As May’s critics at home cried betrayal, the EU side has said that was the best agreement possible given the existing red lines from both sides, namely that May’s government decided to leave both the EU’s customs union and single market through Brexit while keeping open the border between Britain’s Northern Ireland province and EU member state Ireland.
The EU official suggested the draft deal could not be improved without a considerable change in this basic approach. “We think we have on both sides exhausted the margin for maneuver under our respective mandates,” the person said.
Some other sources in Brussels, however, stressed more negotiations could not be ruled out as the political situation in Britain was changing by the hour.
Selection of feedback from social media:
BRUSSELS/PARIS (Reuters) Report:
Upset over fish, France leads EU criticism of draft Brexit deal
Michel Rose, Francesco Guarascio
France on Thursday led calls among European Union states for changes to the draft agreement on Britain’s exit from the bloc, adding to uncertainty over the fate of the deal as British Prime Minister Theresa faced an uproar at home.
May’s cabinet on Wednesday endorsed the draft to end Britain’s four decades in the bloc, a nearly 600-page, dense legal text that is far from certain to pass in the UK parliament and prompted several British ministers to resign on Thursday.
The other 27 EU states staying on together after Brexit plan to rubber-stamp the draft at a Nov. 25 leaders’ summit. But France spearheaded a group of states in raising objections to what has so far been agreed on fishing between the EU and UK after Brexit, diplomatic sources and EU officials said.
“On the draft agreement, several member states will ask for improvements on fishing,” a diplomatic source close to the negotiations said, listing concern about the issue in France, Denmark, Spain, Portugal and the Netherlands.
Finland and Ireland were also worried about future fishing arrangements, other diplomatic sources told Reuters.
Britain’s rich fishing waters are currently available to other EU states under mutual access arrangements with set quotas. While the EU has wanted to safeguard that scheme after Brexit, Britain wants to take unilateral control of its waters.
In the end, the draft Brexit deal leaves the case without a firm resolution at this stage. It says the two sides would try to agree on the future of fisheries by July 2020, during the transition period after Brexit, to form part of an eventual new EU-UK trade deal.
The draft leaves fisheries outside of the single EU-UK customs zone that could be triggered if the sides find no other way to ensure an open Irish border - the so-called “backstop” mechanism that has long held up an overall deal.
“Not all member states were very happy with that,” an EU official said, adding that it would not be easy to agree on the future fishing schemes.
Conceding access to its waters was highly disputed around the time Britain joined the then-European Community in 1973.
Territorial clashes between French and British fishermen have flared sporadically in the past decades, most recently last August when French vessels rammed British trawlers off the coast of Normandy in the so-called “Scallop Wars”.
A separate political declaration on future relations between the EU and UK - which forms a package with Britain’s withdrawal agreement but has no legal authority - says the two sides should also take conservation into account in their future fish deal.
CAN IT GET ANY BETTER?
Some other EU diplomats, however, expressed doubt that the bloc would bring down the whole deal over fisheries.
May holds onto her Brexit plan and job - for now
They said France’s opposition was tactical and that member states concerned with fisheries could still seek more reassurances in the declaration on future ties - which is now being discussed among the 27 member states - rather than demand changes to Britain’s formal withdrawal deal.
The draft agreement has infuriated hardline eurosceptics in May’s Conservative Party and the Northern Irish party that props up her minority government by tying the country’s economy closely to the EU for years ahead and hence potentially limiting Britain’s scope to forge its own trade deals around the world.
As May’s critics at home cried betrayal, the EU side has said that was the best agreement possible given the existing red lines from both sides, namely that May’s government decided to leave both the EU’s customs union and single market through Brexit while keeping open the border between Britain’s Northern Ireland province and EU member state Ireland.
The EU official suggested the draft deal could not be improved without a considerable change in this basic approach. “We think we have on both sides exhausted the margin for maneuver under our respective mandates,” the person said.
Some other sources in Brussels, however, stressed more negotiations could not be ruled out as the political situation in Britain was changing by the hour.
Selection of feedback from social media:
WATCH | "I've had 200+ emails from constituents since last night calling for the PM to go."
WATCH | "I've had 200+ emails from constituents since last night calling for the PM to go."— Leave.EU (@LeaveEUOfficial) November 15, 2018
Cornwall MP @sheryllmurray blasts the sell-out of our fishermen and the potential breaking up of the Union as "totally and utterly unacceptable" as she confirms she's put her letter in. pic.twitter.com/5XBJys2KAw
A small reminder of the scale of the fishing industry in comparison to the rest of UK GDP.
