

Like our fish, meaningful reform is dead in the water 05/01/2016

Follow @LeaveHQ







Being it the new year,



Implemented on 1 January, the demersal discard ban is the second such measure to be introduced by EU member states in a bid to end the wasteful practice of discarding non-quota catch at sea. A pelagic landing obligation was introduced a year ago for those fishermen targeting mid-water species such as blue whiting, herring and mackerel.



To support industry and to help fishermen adapt, the ban is being gradually introduced along with a number of flexibilities such as more freedom to bank and borrow quota. In addition, funding for new fishing gear has been made available. A complete "ban" on the discarding of all quota species will be in place by 2019.



The thing is that this always was a



And this is largely the basis of most of our objections to the EU. This issue festered for two decades until it became an emergency, and when the EU could be moved to do something, on the back of Being it the new year, new rules regarding the disposal of over quota fish catches have come into force. European fishermen targeting certain demersal species such as haddock, sole and plaice must now land their entire catch following the introduction of the next phase of the wider EU landing obligation, or “discard ban,” whether or not it fits their allocated quota.Implemented on 1 January, the demersal discard ban is the second such measure to be introduced by EU member states in a bid to end the wasteful practice of discarding non-quota catch at sea. A pelagic landing obligation was introduced a year ago for those fishermen targeting mid-water species such as blue whiting, herring and mackerel.To support industry and to help fishermen adapt, the ban is being gradually introduced along with a number of flexibilities such as more freedom to bank and borrow quota. In addition, funding for new fishing gear has been made available. A complete "ban" on the discarding of all quota species will be in place by 2019.The thing is that this always was a cosmetic propaganda move , doing nothing to address the fundamental defects of the CFP. It was introduced to enable the European Commission to claim that the policy had been "reformed", without achieving anything of substance.And this is largely the basis of most of our objections to the EU. This issue festered for two decades until it became an emergency, and when the EU could be moved to do something, on the back of celebrity hackery in 2010, we get a typical EU fudge - which itself took four whole years. Even if we could say this "reform" was adequate, we cannot wait for decades of horse trading to resolve critical issues affecting key industries and biodiversity.

Not only is the EU incapable of substantive reform, it works on the basis that a fudge will do. And why would the not think that? The EU is able to survive because its propaganda is unchecked – the media does not have the wit to tell us what is really happening, or interpret what they see. Since most of the media fell for the scam, it has served its purpose. Discards have been "banned" and that is the end of the matter so far as the media can trouble themselves.

What this all suggests is that whatever wider reform we can expect will be well dressed tinkering around the edges which doesn't fundamentally change our relationship with the EU - and the last people we can rely on to tell us either way are the British media. Like the fish, reform goes from dead in the water to brushed under the carpet.

We might wonder then why our own Green Party and Friends of the Earth would have us remain in the EU. Beats the hell out of us.





