Fishing rights just part of comprehensive deal
ICAN never understand why Tim Mickleburgh doesn’t identify himself as a Labour councillor. He often writes as if he were an outsider and not part of the borough’s decision-making process and when, as in his recent letters about fishing and the Government’s response to the Covid-19 pandemic it should be made clear to readers that he is Labour through and through.
Like me, Tim supported Brexit but he must know that the recent EU negotiations are in no way comparable with Iceland’s actions in the Cod Wars.
Fishing rights were just part of a comprehensive deal that despite what the Remain camp have always claimed, we have a deal that delivers tariff-free trade; an outstanding achievement.
I was disappointed that we didn’t manage to achieve a more generous initial fishing quota and a slightly shorter transition than the five-anda-half years that we settled on. That said we have to face reality; trade deals are made up of a series of concessions by both sides. Neither side achieves everything it wants and governments must look at the whole, whereas individuals and businesses inevitably mainly focus just on what affects them.
The transition period allows time for the UK fleet to increase its catching capacity.
It also needs to be recognised that the majority of what is caught in our waters is sold to EU countries so the deal will allow that trade to continue smoothly.
There is also a Government funding package to support and develop facilities in our coastal communities.
Along with my Grimsby colleague Lia Nici I have already held two meetings with the Fisheries Minister to discuss potential local projects. Turning to Tim’s letters about the pandemic. In my opinion, I believe he is out of step with majority local opinion and the Labour Party in Parliament and has aligned himself with the anti-lockdown campaigners.
Tim quotes the infection rate, and like many, implies that it is the only measure that determines which tier we are allocated but as the Grimsby Telegraph has reported, and as Tim will know from his council briefings, the infection rate is just one of five measures.
Sadly, restrictions are necessary. I have supported them based on both my discussions with ministers, the Government advisers and, crucially, the local Director of Public Health and the daily reports I receive from the Chief Executive of our Hospital Trust.
I recognise that many businesses are really struggling and that there are a small number who have not qualified for support from the extremely generous Government schemes and constituents can be assured that I will keep up the pressure to ensure we receive the maximum available.
My best wishes for the new year.
Martin Vickers,