Newspapers say so; on which page in the draft WA does it say so?dmereifield wrote:fisheries access will be a condition
Regardless what will eventually be agreed (as a coastal state, after leaving - in whichever way - we would still be part of the negotiations for access/ quotas... and the latter will need policing. Even if - hypothetically - zero access were to be agreed.
Some might ( ) still remember the winning slogan for the "No" side in the Norway referendum about the EU (then not named like that, yet):
"We fight to the last fish"
So as they are also a party, we could easily see an agreement emerging to cover the important areas of future tri-partite sharing of
A. the stocks (which are currently not codified... this is a bit like the question left out from the WA wording: will UK payment be based on the rebated history, or pre-rebate share... pretty sure that observable facts will win out... and even for fishing quotas the starting point is going to be the AGREED history) and
B. access arrangements.
The EU/Norway agreement in 1979 pioneered zonal attachment as the basis for establishing the resources (sustainability first,) in each exclusive economic zone and therefore the basis of national quota shares (and sharing then, as any % out of zero... will come out as zero).
- enough of counting fish?
- even though: keeping the three RB1s in reserve (was it £ 11 mln allocated, before the costs of actually taking them out for use, i.e. manning & running costs) was based on that potential need... to count the fish in more locations and with more visibility... arising!