By Emma SABY,
latest update: 28/10/2020
Brexit - you are not done hearing about it yet. It has been almost a year since Brexit referendum was held. On January 31, 2020, after 4 years of negotiations, the UK left the European Union. Leaving such a Union isn’t that easy and the UK still has a long way to go. One year later, the process is still up in the air and the question is - where are we now?
Negotiations on exit terms between the EU and the UK have been ongoing since January 2020. At the moment,
both parties are stuck to their guns and are far from reaching an agreement.
Before mid-November, issues must be settled if the scary “no-deal” must
be avoided. The biggest issues that are blocking
negotiations are fishing and access to waters. The access to the UK’s waters is
important for the EU and reaching a free-trade agreement seems to be the best
solution. However, Boris Johnson, the UK’s prime minister is far from giving up
on that point.
Why does it take
time?
Last Thursday, negotiations in
Brussels ended with the idea that discussions must continue. If the process takes times it’s
because the EU is the biggest trade partner of the UK. The withdrawal agreement made years ago will have a dramatic impact on the economy of both parties.
Just imagine the consequences if you stop trading with the EU which represents more than
40% of your exports, equivalent to 17% of
your GDP or £10,680 billion. Losing such amounts of money will generate an economic crisis that will
take Great Britain years to recover. To avoid this
scenario, both sides need time to find a compromise in order to protect their economies.
Why is fishing an issue?
Fishing, particularly in the UK’s waters are
important because those waters are fishing resources. For years, Europeans used to fish in the North Sea because it is full of shellfish, salmons,
lobsters and other fishes. Before Brexit, there were no barriers for fishing,
no tariffs, everything was easier. Every
European Union member had access to each other’s waters and was able to
fish everywhere. But, by the end of the year, those rules provided by the Common
Fisheries Policy (CFP) will be removed if no
agreement has been found.
The problem is that most of
French, Dutch
or German fishermen had established their businesses there
years ago. Going
fishing in the North Sea is a habit. As a matter of fact, a quarter of France’s
national fishing comes from these waters. If
fishermen are not allowed to work anymore, they will be forced to shut down their businesses or in the
case of restoration of taxes and tariffs in this sector, increase their
costs of production. Fish will be less accessible and more expensive for
European customers.
However, the UK will regain
shares in the sector and will also be able to protect from over-fishing.
As shown below, the UK’s waters zone is also the biggest in Europe. Having under control such a zone will confer to the country a considerable economic advantage over the EU.
Not everyone likes this idea. Recently Spain and France mentioned a potential alliance to blockade EU ports to prevent UK fishing imports if the UK disagrees with Brussels’ views.
What will be the consequences of a “no-deal”?
If they fail to reach an agreement, the consequences will be harsh. Boris Johnson’s threat is real, “no-deal” is a real option. In this case, it will mean losing market shares, important economic issues and, above all a potential economic war between the EU and the UK.
Finding a deal before mid-November seems to be compromised. Each side seems to be sticking to its
positions. The situation seems to be the same as it was at the beginning.
Fishing is just an issue among others but it is a great example of the state of
the relationship between the EU and the UK: messy. This situation communicates
clearly to what extent power could sometimes appear as more important than
cooperation.
“But what’s important is not
to make people think or believe that is possible to have your cake and eat it”. Emmanuel Macron, 21 January 2018 at BBC to Andrew
Marr.
As a result, the free-trade
agreement must be the fairest solution for both. No loss of market
share and no potential crisis and economic war.
Hello Emma,
ReplyDeleteThe theme of your article was very wisely chosen since we don’t hear much about this aspect of Brexit. However, I think it would be interesting to consider both standpoints. We know that globalisation has made worldwide economies dependent on trade and open to foreign businesses. Don’t you think, if you were British, you would regard this as an erosion of national sovereignty and would rather prioritise the access of British fishing grounds for British boats ? Especially since halieutic resources are increasingly disappearing with climate change.
In addition, I was wondering if British regulation was different from other European countries’, and maybe made it more beneficial to go fishing there. That would explain why French companies exploit those resources whereas France has the largest Exclusive Economic Zone in the world - thanks to its overseas territories - and could probably be self-sufficient.
Anyway, thank you for sharing information about such a topical issue,
Ludivine D.
Hello Ludivine,
DeleteFirst, thank you for your comment ! I'm pleased that you've liked the article.
To answer your question, even if the British government decided to prioritise the access to waters to British people, the risks could be even worse. As I said in my article, a trade war may start if the British government decides to do so.
Regarding regulation, I'm not sure it could be more benefical to go fishing in other country as the main reason the UK was that interesting was mainly because of the quality of its fish. Regulation doesn't differ from the UK.
Hope I answered your questions !