You are reading a single comment by and its replies. Click here to read the full conversation.
  • By vetoing the deal, does that mean they cannot fish in UK water as opposite to be given a tiny pittance of UK water under a deal? (Which tbh is pretty shit as we barely have enough fishing industry to compensate).

    Then again, it mean fish and mammals will thrive either way, weirdly a positive outcome.

  • By vetoing the deal, does that mean they cannot fish in UK water as opposite to be given a tiny pittance of UK water under a deal?

    That's my understanding. WTO rules mean the UK gets back its territorial fishing rights. Unfortunately that's not really an industry that's going to make up for everything else lost.

    If I was still teaching political science I'd use this in a game theory lesson and get my Nash equilibrium on.

  • WTO does not government fishing rights.

    It's... complicated btw international fishing rights.

    The idea the UK can just "take it back" after selling access seems unlikely to me though.

About

Avatar for   started