June Mummery MEP – “Yellowhammer predictions on fisheries nothing but extreme ‘project fear’”
Brexit fishing champion slams Government “worst case” predictions for a no-deal Brexit
June Mummery MEP – Press Release
Thursday 12th September 2019
East of England MEP, June Mummery has slammed the Government over its controversial ‘Yellowhammer” assumptions, saying, “this is nothing more than Project Fear in the extreme.”
The Brexit Party fishing champion continued, “what people in the fishing industry are terrified of is Boris Johnson pushing through a slightly amended version of Theresa May’s Withdrawal Agreement, which would prove disastrous for fishermen, large and small.”
Mrs Mummery’s comments came after the publication of the Government’s ‘Yellowhammer’ Brexit document that details a series of “reasonable worst-case assumptions” following a no-deal Brexit.
Speaking from Brussels, Mrs Mummery said, “the political establishment has known we were leaving for over three years but have chosen to do nothing about these supposed worst cast assumptions; which are nothing more than guesses if we are truthful.”
“Theresa May herself spend plenty of time telling is that no-deal was better than a bad deal!”
“What I want to know is, why has nothing been done before?
“It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to guess that there may be some EU vessels coming into British fishing grounds on day one of a no-deal Brexit. Why have the Government not put in place plans to buy extra patrol vessels; assets that we will need to police our seas anyway?
“Where are the plans to involve the police forces of the countries where vessels are identified as being potential lawbreakers, or the publicity campaigns to warn of the consequences.”
“The simple fact is, nothing has been done; not one thing! The Yellowhammer document is nothing more than another attempt to pull the wool over people’s eyes and scare the public into accepting a fourth attempt to get May’s disastrous Withdrawal Agreement through parliament.
“Well, I say enough is enough! There could well be a little disruption on day one of a no-deal Brexit. However, if the Withdrawal Agreement goes through, we will continue to give 80% of the fish caught in Britain’s waters to EU vessels; keep the hated Common Fisheries Policy and will only be able to watch on as hundreds of small-scale fishers go to the wall.
“That’s why I so no to the Withdrawal Agreement and no to project fear!”
British Fishing the Global Test On Brexit? & Why Remainers Are Wrong That We Can’t Take Back Control.
It is great to see the Fishing for Leave campaign having global impact yet again & that our industries’ voice is being heard – even in Australia! Is British fishing now one of the global test on Brexit?
Well done to Skipper Gerry on the Carhelmar for his excellent letter that’s touched a nerve nationwide.
Taking back control can double UK fishing to a potential £6-8bn.
Resources in UK waters are ours by right of international law under UNCLOS.
It is why Iceland, Norway, and Faroe catch 90% of the fish in their waters – after some reciprocal swaps.
It’s why they have their rightful share of international Total Allowable Catches (TAC) under the international principle of Zonal Attachment – where a nation receives TACs based on the predominance of species in its waters.
This is in stark contrast to the mere 40% we get under unfair EU Relative Stability shares & EU Equal Access to our rich grounds.
It is pathetic the suggestion by continually Remain biased Prof Bryce Stewart of York University that we can’t have international normality like our Nordic neighbours.
Alleging we somehow can’t have what is rightfully ours…. how? Under international law, all waters and resources within a nation’s EEZ are its sovereign right.
UNCLOS obliges nations to sustainably harvest their waters.
So the EU can’t try to continue catching 90% of Channel Cod, Haddock, Whiting and Herring when it will only have half the waters!
The EU will have to cut its cloth to reflect the loss of British waters from the common EU pot or be in breach of international laws obligation to fish sustainably.
UNCLOS also says states should cooperate on shared stocks.
Further obliging the EU to recognise this cut to its cloth and Britain’s rightful share under the international principle of Zonal Attachment.
The above is legal fact. It comes down to the will of the government to exert our rights as our Nordic neighbours do.
The real glaring error is Prof Bryce Stewarts contradiction of himself.
Where he cites the decline of Britain’s distant water fleet (one that fished in what became other nations waters when limits were extended to 200 miles or the mid-line in the 70s) as symptomatic of some sort of inevitable decline of British fishing that exonerates the EU.
Saying that Britain lost a fleet based on accessing Iceland and Norway’s waters contradicts his point that the UK can’t somehow take back control of our waters now…
International law is either one way or another. It can be applied to take back control for Norway but somehow can’t be similarly applied for Britain to do the same…
Prof Bryce Stewarts ramblings are symptomatic of Remain bias where somehow the UK should just roll over to the status quo in defiance of international normality.
It’s pathetic and a weak-kneed view that permeates academia and Whitehall.
For that reason, people so bias against exerting Britain’s rights and national interest shouldn’t be continually feted as oracles of wisdom when they’re typical of the cancerous weakness that undermines this country and its people’s interests.