Lydia Talks To... James White, Commercial Fisherman

Lydia: Good evening, everyone, and welcome to my first edition of "Lydia Talks to" where I'll be talking to inshore fisherman, James White. I'm really looking forward to talking to James. And..  In fact, he's joined right now. That's  very timely.

 Hi, James.

 James: Hello there Lydia

 Lydia: Hi, how are you?

 James: Very well, thanks.

 Lydia: Good. Thank you so much for joining us. I've been really looking forward to this discussion for quite some time, actually. I've wanted to talk to you for a number of years.

 So I'm really delighted that you came on to talk to us

 James: No that's fine, looking forward to it.

 Lydia: So I was just about to give an intro to say that those people who follow me will know that I've talked about Brexit for a long time as someone who worked for the UK in the EU. And of course, fishing was a big issue in the build up to the EU referendum and then not so much over the withdrawal period elements, but certainly in the past year where we've been negotiating the Trade and Cooperation agreement and of course now since the 1st of January.

So it's been a big issue, but not one I think many people have a direct link to or  may not know people in the industry personally. So it's it's quite far removed from their everyday lives. So I'm hoping that you're going to help us out with that a little bit and talk to us.

Can we start with you just introducing yourself and telling us who you are and what you do?

James: Yeah, I'm James White and got a commercial fishing boat in Felixstowe Ferry just down the road from you guys. We're sort of inshore fishermen. So day  boat stuff really, in and out mainly in 12 hours sort of the pinnacle of conservation and all these things. you know, obviously along the Suffolk coast, and the Essex or the Thames estuaries rather depleted and we're sort of becoming a rarity

Lydia: yeah. In terms of the inshore boats and certainly this evening.. One reason I want to talk to you is that while you obviously operate in your particular space, you have a fairly good knowledge of what's going on more generally and politically as well. one thing I will just add in for those people who are joining us who don't know me already: my 'fishing background', as it were, is that when I was working for the UK in the EU, I was working on the area of negotiations that included fishing.

So I very much saw fishing as a topic alongside other topics that were discussed between the UK government and the EU negotiations. So I saw a very different space for you and very far removed from the reality. So since we've introduced ourselves, let's start with where we are now.

So we obviously left the EU officially on 31st January 2020, but we've only just left the transition period on the 1st of January. And since then there have been a lot of headlines about the fishing industry, particularly on live exports of shellfish, particularly from Scotland, and a lot of upset by Scottish fishermen, particularly.

And some Devon and Scottish fishermen went to protest Downing Street yesterday. And I was a bit disappointed that they didn't catch across the street because that would have been a great shot. Actually, I think they missed an opportunity there..  do you feel that the headlines grabbing our attention right now, do you think that they're an accurate reflection of what the issues are for the fishing industry at the moment?

James:  I think they're an accurate reflection of the exporters of the shellfish. You know, obviously, there have been problems. I think it's rather a travesty that you have like a set of people here that have a product to sell and a set of buyers on the continent. And really, it's politics and administration getting in the way of that.

Because if you look at, you know, one minute before midnight on the 31st and one minute after, actually in the real world, not a lot has changed. The lorries are the same, the product's the same, the buyers are the same, the sellers are the same. So what we're talking about is bureaucracy.

I haven't been privileged to actually sight the paperwork or be involved in it. But what I'm hearing is it's the intricacies of the paperwork that's the problem.

Lydia: So we'll come back I'll come back to that a little bit later on the actual intricacies of that, because I think that's definitely a point that we should we should cover. I mean, do you think that what's happening at the moment, do you think it's temporary? Or do you think that this is something that's fundamentally wrong in the deal that's been agreed?

James: Well, I think the actual situation is fundamentally wrong, but I do only  think this will be short term. And the reason I do believe that is because it's affecting both sides. I know we only hear about our side of the water if you like, and these exporters are very angry, that their trade just subsided so quickly. But also, those buyers on the continent want the product so it must affect over there. So I think economics would win the day in the end.

Lydia: OK, so are you with Boris Johnson? I think Gove commented as well to say that, what's happening now is is temporary. And he sees that the deal that's been struck will be.. There'll be lots of opportunities created by the deal. And also they've said that they're going to give £ 100million to the fishing industry. Do you agree with that? That it's temporary. And actually, there are more opportunities in the deal than than hindrances, shall we say?

James: Well, I think the exports issue is this is temporary. But as the whole of the deal for fishing, I will say that it was a poor one. I think the deal was poor. I never expected [the UK would gain rights over the] the 200 mile [extended economic zone] whole heartedly or regaining quotas. But I think one thing the most inshore fishermen are disappointed about is we didn't capture the 0 to 12 exclusively, 0 to 12 mile [exclusivity to fish 12 mile inshore limit- every country has one under international law]

Lydia: OK, we'll come we'll come back to that specific point.  I think, at this stage I'm just going to bring people up to speed with with the deal because we will get a little bit technical. But overall, I think the big element, the sort of the elephant in the room is, of course, we've left the Single Market and therefore, you know, the frictionless trade that we enjoyed as members of the single market, that easy transfer of goods

we left that. We left that club. And therefore, you know, coming from the EU perspective, the rights to that club disappeared along with our membership-  the rights of that market disappeared with our membership, sorry.  Specifically on fishing, one of the big things being that UK fishing boats, would get a greater share of the fish in the UK waters. That's one of the big promises. But I believe that it's a lot smaller than anyone anticipated.

It's 25 percent and I think fishermen wanted more than that. Is that correct? Yes.

James: Yeah, 25 percent. It's actually really if you break it down into different species, it's a lot less than that.

Lydia: Yeah. We will come onto species, that's for sure. And also the element of that, that transition, as well as getting the share, there will also be.. the shift will happen over the next five years, which is shorter than the EU wanted, a bit longer than the UK wanted. And they kind of met in the middle. And after 2026 there will be annual negotiations on how much the catch is shared out between the UK and the EU.

And the big kicker being that in 2026, technically the UK can take back control of its waters and kick out other boats. But if it does that, then tariffs and other taxes will be applied as a punishment potentially. And so yeah, that's the kind of the nutshell. You talked about a couple of things in there about, about quotas. I mean, do you want to tell me what quotas are? What do they what do they mean to you?

Well, to put it in, like, you know, a short space of time that can't we can't go into history and things, but I won't do that. But basically the fish that each individual fisherman is entitled to, but obviously some bigger companies, if you like, over the counter. They've got fishermen like myself. We basically get dished out the scraps of what is left after those people, you know, like I think all the big companies.

James: Yeah, we're in like what they call the non- sector. So the government with what is left, the government, then issue that on monthly or yearly allocations to fishermen like myself. The only problem with that is your issue is in the area of sea, the tonnage. So if I was allowed, just say hypothetically, one tonne a month of Dover Sole, it doesn't matter if I don't catch my one tonne, if the area uses it's quota, the fishery is shut.

So all of my life, or all of my fishing area, you could be fishing one day and overnight the fishery could be shut on you.

Lydia: That's huge. And then presumably that has to be thrown back, but it's already dead. Is that correct?

James: Yeah. I mean, you know, we're going to go on to these things. I can only speak of our area. You know, a lot of the problems for us at the moment are not necessarily quotas as such or they call them technical regulations, which is what you're talking about, like E.U. imposed a lot of Tech on. So, for instance, if I'm using a certain size net to catch Dover Sole, if I catch other fish like cod, I have to discard them. Dead or alive.

Lydia: that's certainly one of the criticisms of the Common Fisheries Policy, which is the the policy under which fishing is managed in the EU, that the quotas actually, while intended to preserve species actually did nothing for species. It is almost contradictory in some ways.

James: Yeah. And, you know, the real trouble for me was with the EU is fishing is very dynamic. I mean, you can move up the coast just 20 miles and people's habits and the fish they're seeing change. So it's very difficult to manage centrally those regional differences. So, you know, it's sort of a one size fits all approach, which is something when you're working with nature, legislation needs to be more fluid than that. So we actually, rather than being behind nature, it can keep up with it, right?

Lydia: Yeah, that's a really good point. And again, one of the central criticisms of the Common Fisheries Policy CFP is that it is so centralised and everyone has to do the same thing and it isn't reactive to to what's happening. And equally, another criticism being that, you know, it was it was formed as a political policy rather than doing anything else that was actually about either fishing as an industry or fish as an animal in the sea that is part of nature.

James: Yeah, yeah. And what I saw over the years is like, the gulf between actually real life, what we do out in the North Sea, decisions that are made not just in the European government, any government, you know, are just getting so far away from reality, it makes it impossible to work. And somehow we got to close that gap. And I think one of the things Fishermen saw Brexit as was an opportunity to minimise the gap.

Lydia: Between the reality and the management from governments and further up.

James: Yeah, I do, because we've got so many layers of management. I mean, just for instance, like myself for any little boats, we got what they call an Inshore Fisheries Conservation Authority, which manages up to six miles. You've got the Marine Management Organisation (MMO), which licence

Lydia: [laughing] yeah what do they do? (bit of an In-joke for those working on the coast0

James: Not a lot really. Am I going to come onto these, but then you've got DEFRA and on top of that, we had Europe, so we got different layers to it. So you can imagine, like in our everyday lives, when we have a problem to get through these layers, it's just impossible.

Lydia: So just to sort of encapsulate that a little bit, you know, you said that you were disappointed with the deal and that you talked about some of the frustrations with the with the EU. I mean, take me back to 2016 and kind of what was in your mind and if you can, some sort of flavor of what everyone else was saying? hat was the aim in leaving the EU for you as a fisherman?

James: Well, I can only talk about locally, about my area

Lydia: yeah I'm not going to ask you to speak for the entire fishing industry. That would be a little unfair of me, I think.

James: No, but obviously you're seeing different perspectives. The Scottish take a different view on things. But for us here, we were so on our knees, if you like, we needed something to grab hold of. And I never really believed, like in my heart, that leaving the European Union would be the answer to all our problems. But what I did think was that it gave us accountability again. Government were very good at hiding behind the EU curtain when there was a problem.

" This isn't us, it's them over there." The deal was irrelevant in that part of it for me, because now we're out like the lorries, you see, they're outside Westminster, not Brussels, it's now Boris Johnson's problem.

So I think this was a big thing for fishermen- accountability.

Lydia: That actually when you said, you know, this this isn't working for us, this isn't happening, that to say to the government, "look this isn't happening for us'. That's there's no there's nowhere further to go.

 it was definitely something that.. I think from a Remainer point of view.. as you know, I'm very much campaigned to remain.  On balance I think that staying in the EU was a better option.

However, I think on the Common Fisheries Policy in particular, it was quite hard for Remainers to defend the Common Fisheries Policy because we knew that fishermen hated it, especially in the UK. And, you know, as a priority..  I mean this is my own opinion, it seems quite low down the agenda in terms of of priority. From that perspective, I think that's always my element of... I understand how much frustration there was.

It was one of the areas where we just didn't really make any progress as a country in terms of having our desires met. We managed in so many areas in the EU to establish UK priorities, but actually in fishing and also to an extent in agriculture, we didn't do that in my opinion.

James: I can absolutely understand your point of view where you say it was low down in the priorities, but if you flip that the other way, it wasn't low down for Europe. It was at the top of their list. So this tells you something and also that we had a lot of spin about 0.2 0.5 percent of GDP and all the rest of it. But I think you need to put that to one side and actually look at what the fishing industry is, we're a primary food producer and you only have to look at the Covid situation

...For me it's highlighted that as a country we're not that self-sufficient anymore. And some say we were sacrificed to the financial sector and things, but I didn't see the financial sector doing very well in Covid but there was a lot of people wanting to eat fish to fish.

Lydia: actually that's a really good point on the because it's often put together when we talk about the fishing industry compared to the financial services, I can quote here that in 2019, the fishing industry in the UK accounted for 0.02 percent of GDP and that the UK fishing industry was worth under half a billion compared to the financial services sector, which has £216 billion contribution. So we're talking about, you know, minnows and whales here, but also the financial services industry did not get a lot out of the deal either.

The services industry didn't didn't prosper as a result of the deal. So, I mean, in some ways, I feel that while I've always wanted to Remain in the EU I generally feel that the people that voted for Brexit, quite often didn't get the things they were promised. And I think it's probably true in fishing too. I don't know if you'd agree.

James: Oh, yeah, absolutely. You know, we you know, we struggled inside the European Union. But just come quickly, back to your point about the worth of fishing: what they're talking about is the money coming into Great Britain, not out of our water. For the EU boats accessing our water  its a multi billion pound industry. You know, one of the big issues, like for us inshore boats, you know, obviously I'm highlighting a problem in the EU, is pulse fishing, for instance, which is the electrocution of fish on the bottom.

And just for like people who aren't familiar with fishing this is sort of one of my big bugbears. I can't see how you can have a thirty metre ship out there all week, electrocuting the sea bed, but have a man in a boat the size of a motorcar, has less rights than this ship electrocuting. I can't see how you can govern that badly legitimately. Thats my point, I just can't see how it happens.

Lydia: Yeah. Yeah. I think, you know, we're talking about big interests here. And one of the sort of other points that we'll come back to is fishing for the EU.... Something that I said in the past is that fishing for the EU is a big political issue, but it's not a big financial issue. But actually the countries for which you have a very large fishing industry, but relatively small home market are not in the EU, Norway and Iceland are probably the key ones there.

And so just to kind of pull us back... Because I keep going like, oh, this is interesting. Let's do that. Let's talk about that....  And going back to 2016 and what we kind of aiming for with Brexit. And he was saying, you know, it wasn't so much for you about something specific as something about taking away a layer of management that one of the questions is that - we talked about single market that was the regaining of that worth it, given that we were going to lose access to the single market?

Probably. I mean, we probably didn't know that in 2016, but it was always a possibility that we would lose that frictionless trade.

Was there another way that we could have done this and not left the EU is the question,

James: reference like no the Norwegians, for instance, they're free of the EU but manage their own fisheries, but still have that, you know, that that ability to export and trade and things, then possibly. Yes. But the thing is really in the deal tha twas struck we sacrificed fishing for easier trade opportunities and look what we've got so we can always forecast these things.

But in reality, what actually comes to fruition is anybody's guess with politics. And this is why I say you have to be adaptable to change and you can't pin all your hopes on what these people speak.

Lydia: Yeah, I mean, do you feel just to go back to 2016 that people had higher expectations than you think would ever be delivered. I mean is some of the disappointment now the feeling that the fisherfolk have basically been sold out, or is there a feeling of inevitability about this, that actually you knew this was going to happen

James: yeah, I think when you talk about expectations, I think, you know, it's a funny word, but I don't... Personally I didn't expect a lot.

But you do hope for more because whatever way you look at it, Brexit produced opportunities that our government haven't taken as far as fishing is concerned

Lydia: What kind of opportunities James, do you mean?

James: Well, the 0 to 12 [mile limit] you could have got exclusive access for, you could have regained more quota. And I'm not saying.. I'm not one of these people that says 'there's a 200 [mile] line stop every European boat coming over it'. But what I do believe in is this side of the two hundred [mile limit], as it's reciprocal, the other side should be in our control, and we then license and offer quota to those EU boats to fish. So we're in control of our patch of water.

So we look after our British fishermen first, as the Europeans would do on their side. It doesn't mean you can't have a sort of a friendship relationship, a working one. So that control is a funny word. So I'm not saying it's like 'there's the 200 [mile limit] we're this side, you're that side' it means you're controlling in your area of sea, and looking after your own,  as they would do the other side.

Lydia: But can I ask the benefit of looking after your patch of sea, by the time that we know that fish obviously don't recognise those borders. I mean, that's kind of one of my questions. As soon as Cod, for example, goes over a line, you know, they don't know that. So what's the benefit of managing your area of sea?

James: Well, I understand what you're saying. Fish pass these, but there is no boundary. It's an imaginary line we're talking about. But the thing is, when these fish are in our side, we would have the the bigger right to catch them when nature provided them to us. At the moment, when nature provides them this side of the Meridian Line, we've got EU vessels in there with a bigger share of the pot that we have. So just to put in easy terms, if the fish swim past me, if I haven't got the right to catch them, it's no good whether they swim back to the other side or they stay here. So it's opportunity what we're talking about: fishing opportunity.

Lydia: To go back to the opportunities thing which is something that Boris Johnson has talked about saying, you know, all these lovely opportunities that you're going to get. I mean, what other opportunities do you think that there are? I mean, in terms of managing your own sea you've mentioned I mean and you've also talked about the fisheries being a primary food producer.  Currently we export most of all fish to the EU and I think this is one of the things that those who wanted too remain struggle with "saying, well, we had a pretty good deal in terms of getting the stuff we're producing and we're sending it to a market.

That market is now much more difficult, to send it to that market."  what's what's answer there? What's the opportunity?

James: The new opportunities?

Lydia: Yes.

James: With this deal, not many. I'll be honest with you And I also do you know, I've always believed this, that even if we did take back control, it would take a different outlook from our civil service and our management bands than the EU had. And I don't actually think that's there.

But I always do come back to the accountability part. So at least I can sit in the room with the minister who's making the decisions.

So when all this goes a funny shape, it is their responsibility and they can't have sloped shoulders and pass it over to our friends in the EU.

Lydia: Which is something we know happened consistently across all UK EU policy, that if it was something the UK didn't want to do it would blame on Brussels, you know, we saw in Brussels all the time. It was one of my big bugbears during the referendum when people were like," oh, that's an EU problem". Like, no, that's national policy. There were so many things that we could have done while remaining in the EU. I think on the CFP, that was one of the sort of the big issues that we really found intractable to change.

And the same with the Common Agricultural Policy. I mean, it has been argued, and I put this to you previously that leaving the EU on the basis of the CFP or indeed the Common Agricultural Policy seems a bit like burning your house down in order to fix a leaky tap. And I mean, what would you say to that, that assertion? That actually this was... I mean, I don't know whether you voted to leave the EU on other matters as well,

we're talking principally about fishing. But, you know, was it worth it? Is the question

James: as a metaphoric example, if you like... I hear what you're saying about the dripping tap and burning in the house down. But in my mind, I think it's a little bit at one stage further. I mean, if the tap is dripping, we need to find out why is dripping, because if it's a worn washer that's been there for years and it's worn out,  we can replace that, that's fine.  If the taps dripping because it's been put in there through shoddy workmanship

we're going to be looking at the boiler and the electric and the foundations and all the rest of it.

Lydia: That's a horribly good point [laughs]

James: I understand that. But there's more substance to these things because from my point of view, and I absolutely respect your view, I can't believe the EU, it was only fishing that they got wrong. Because I think it's a characteristic in the way their governments and ours, to be honest, we're no better- it's the way governments are managing and my whole premise in this: If all these people are very similar, why do you want more of them?

Lydia: Yeah, that's that's also a horribly good point. And yeah, I think the 'layers of management' point really speaks to me. And that's one of the things I always enjoyed about the EU as a principle was the idea that we kind of came to decisions together. But the reality as someone who worked there, was that we're putting forward national interests and sometimes we would make political points with things like fishing, where actually it was a trade off for something else.

And I think that is what's happened in this deal as well, where, you know, fishing has been held as the point where, you know, "we're not going to back down fishing because we need to control our waters", et cetera, et cetera. And then all of a sudden, right at the end, they roll over on the fishing.

And this was something that we kind of anticipated ... " Is it fishing or is this that if we want to walk away, we'll say it was all about fishing?" So I just wonder if it's a bit of a pawn sometimes politically.

James: I think that whole 'we'll hold out for fishing' thing was a bit spoon fed, to be honest. I think it was done way before what we saw in the media, you know, the outlines of it.

Lydia: That's interesting.

James: It was sort of a persona, a show of strength and all the rest of it. But the outcome, you know, I expect it. So I believe it's the latter. We are a bit of a scapegoat, to be honest.

But the point I'm trying to make is I'm looking at this. I don't want to get off track too much. But looking at this as a whole, you know, I do actually think countries like us, and even countries on the continent, if they've gone the way of sacrificing industry, I'm talking about producers, primary food producers, engineers. I think we're going to suffer for in the future. I don't think there can be any other consequence.

So rather than look at the financial side of it, look at communities.. Growing up, for me, being part of that community gave me good standing for future and life. So these industries are an actual education. And I do actually think the people that were part of these years ago, being part of that spilled over into society in a healthy way. And I think we're lacking that. So I think the picture is bigger. Yeah.

Lydia: Yeah. I can absolutely, totally respect that that viewpoint. And, you know, as as we've said a few times, you know, we've ended up with a lot of managers and, you know, the whole sort of the element of looking at the monkeys in the trees, when they're looking down, they see lots of eyes. And when you're looking at you see lots of arseholes.  It's just you have to separate that, especially when the experience of a bureaucrat in Brussels is going to be whether it's a British one, a French one or a Belgian one, whoever, they probably haven't been on a fishing boat. 

James: No. The thing is, we as fishermen are quite simple folk. we're not really asking a lot. I mean, we all wanted to have Brexit in the negotiations was for every fisherman in Great Britain, no matter the size or creed, to just be able to make a living comfortably. One of the appeals of fishing, especially of my size boat, the the money was a byproduct of your life.

So when you actually got free of the harbour or wherever it was you were working from, you know, all this stuff actually we're talking about now was forgotten. But the trouble is, there's so much of it, red tape that sometimes even when you're out there, you can't escape it and it's not a good place to be. And if that red tape was having a positive effect on nature, the environment and fishermen's lives, it would be acceptable. But the very fact that it isn't, it's just it got to the point where we needed to grab hold of something for the possibility of change.

you're in a corner, basically. That's how it... you know, I could detach myself from that a bit. But that's how you felt, you know, and you felt claustrophobic. And basically, you know, I'd like to get rid of all them policy makers whether they are British or European,  we didn't have that opportunity, but we did have the opportunity to get part of the way

Lydia: [laughing]I like this idea of sort of fishing anarchy. Actually, you guys just run fishing boats and then just fed back to the rest of the world, that would all be great.

Do you anticipate that they will actually cut red tape? Now that we have the opportunity? One of the big promises was to to cut bureaucracy, to cut red tape. And all we've seen so far, especially with exports, has been adding in red tape.

Do you anticipate that they are actually going to take out any layers?

James: No I think it will be the opposite. Because if remove the layers, you have to remove the personnel and that isn't good for these people. This is why these people talk about this so much. You know, if I never spoke about fishing for 100 years, I could go back tomorrow and it would still be.

Lydia: I would hope so certainly.

James: if they are talking about the red tape and things, that would all disappear.

Lydia: one of the things that I was thinking about, the whole opportunities aspect as well, I mean, we as I said before, we export most of the the fish we catch in the UK to the continent.

One of the things I did notice in the whole quotas element, when we're talking about  about quotas and species, the one of the species that they have not increased the quota for, for the UK is Cod. Now, I understand that we actually import Cod into the UK, but we export most of the other things. I mean, do you think that (because we all fish and chips, et cetera) do you anticipate we will end up eating more fish after Brexit?

James: What, as in the British?

Lydia: yes

James: Well, it is a possibility and it's up to our government to promote it more. You know, but the trouble is, we saw with the herring years ago, the whole East Coast was built on the herring fishery. And when they saw a decline in it, the rules so that stringent, you actually shut down the fishery. But what happened is you lost the infrastructure. This is the real danger that we've got.

So the briners went, the smokers went, all the people at the shore. And we actually lost the art of eating that fish. And I think that's what's happened. The only real big thing I think is a great advantage for the UK is we're a multicultural society now and a lot of people coming into the country are big fish eaters. I see it, that a lot of the foreign people and that, it's really still part of their staple diet. So I think there's a big opportunity with the Covid that really like pronounced, you know, fishermen first sale fish to the public. that gave me a little bit of an insight. I even thought it wasn't there. So I think that opportunity is there. It's just how you promote it. It's for the long term.

Lydia: Yeah. And I think I think that's sort of the element. And I think the same with industry generally that  the ambition to foster more industry and more home grown food, farming and so on... Is that so much of it has been lost,  the infrastructure has gone and so rebuilding it is going to be the work of a long time rather than a short time.

I mean, just casting back.. One of the things that sort of occurred to me is that I've always kind of assumed, not assumed, but we've always been told that most fisherfolk voted for Brexit. Did any vote to remain? I mean, was there a debate in the fishing industry as to whether this was this was something that you wanted?

James: Yeah, I mean, locally to me I don't know anyone who actually chose to vote remain. But I do think, like the Scots could see this problem with trade, the back and forth, of live product. And I'm sure, you know, categorically there were some of them that did want to remain so. And this is why Brexit, in my opinion, was such a split vote, because it all depends.. you're going to talk from your position in the world we're grains of sand in our own little world, but we're all going to see it from a different perspective.

So even as in something as close knit as the fishing community, a fisherman one hundred miles up the coast from me could definitely have voted remain for it, for reasons that don't affect me.

Lydia: yeah, I think one of the things I've always thought was that there are basically those that think the EU is a 'good thing' and those that see the EU as a 'bad thing'. It's quite hard to kind of push people either way once they are  on the one side or the other. And then a couple in the middle that just like we've never even thought of the EU, like, what does it mean to us?

I suppose from from my perspective is that,  those of us that worked in the EU, those of us at the government level, always thought of it as" well, actually, that the benefits all round for remaining in the EU  in some ways trumped some of the difficulties, it's a trade off for all of those things. And, you know, I sometimes wonder whether we forgot that so many people didn't relate to it in their real lives.

I was actually shocked how few people knew anything about the EU. And I think fishing was one of those areas where you really do. You really do know what the EU means to you, because it's your daily living.

James: Yeah, exactly. That's a good point, because I think a lot of people are affected in their everyday lives by the EU, good and bad both ways, but aren't aware of that. I mean, it just happened in my industry, it was there in your face every day. You know, if you got a different directive through or a different bit of legislation, had the EU stamp on the top of it. So we saw it first hand.

I do think, like I say, it's a two way street. A lot of people in society, these things did affect them in a positive and a negative light, but weren't aware of it.

Lydia: Yeah, yeah, and I think also the the lack of knowledge in government amongst MPs and amongst civil servants generally was really appalling. And I say that as someone that does actually quite know about the EU.

This has been so interesting. One of the things I want to kind of get back to is something that you said not in this interview, but in another. I think it was in 2017 when you were talking about change and how how you react to change and how change is part of your life. Can you go back to that thought for me?

James: Yeah, well I think it was with Nick Robinson [for Radio 4 Today ].

Lydia: I think it might be.

James:  what I was saying is that change is a funny thing for us as humans. You know, a lot of the time is quite fearful change. But as a fisherman or someone who goes to sea your faced with every day. So I could plan my day each day, but the truth is, when I got the harbour, there's so many different elements to interrupt that you have to embrace it.

So I was putting this into a thing of Brexit. That people that do fear the change and I can see it, you know, if if you're dependent on the EU and your life revolves around it, it could be quite daunting. But what I'm saying is, if you flip it up the other way, change can be quite exciting, and there's opportunities there that perhaps people can't see now. I think over time will present themselves. It just means that sometimes you have to take a different path.

You know, like I say, in the fishing, you could get a letter overnight to say, you know, 'you're banned from salt fishing'.  We can't sit in the house and sulk and, you know, sit down and moan and groan. We moan and groan, but we've got to get on with something and change something to adapt. So what I'm saying is it's a good skill to have to be adaptable. And that's why I wasn't fearful of voting to come out.

Lydia: I think you've also got a rather fun story..  well it wasn't fun for you at all at the time..  About change being, in fact, basically forced upon you in a rather interesting way while on your boat fishing. And which wasn't to do with the EU so much as the MMO, I believe it was. Do you want to share that little nugget with us.

James: Yeah, I can I mean, the MMO are the Marine Management Organisation, you know, oversee our fisheries. Initially it was about the EU, not the EU, but it was about a bit of EU legislation which was about the definition of a certain type of net, you know, which when this definition was presented to me and the industry through the MMO I questioned it because it was so ambiguous,  you could interpret it a hundred different ways, which is another problem we had.

So I asked for clarification and the MMO couldn't give me clarification, neither could Defra or anybody else in the country, to be honest. So I interpreted how it was written. But what happened was, trying to cut a long story really short, when I got boarded one day fishing and I just pulled nets so in my eyes the fish in the net, I was quite within my rights to keep. I asked the fishery officer just to clear the matter up.

The fish was still in the net. So I asked him, you know, "this is what I've done with my fishing today. Am I entitled legally to keep these or have I got to discard them?" Of which he couldn't tell me. So he rang the legal department.

This is like, going on for three hours on my boat

Lydia: and there's fish in your net, probably not feeling very well.

James: Yes So the fisheries officer, the legal team can't tell me if I'm actually legally entitled to retain these fish or not. So their answer was, you know, in the end they read the riot act and, you know, read me my rights and basically said, 'we'll let you retain the fish. But if we go away and we find there's been an offence in relation to this legislation, you could be prosecuted'. Well, for me, that was like the final straw, because I'm thinking if you can stand on my boat, and you can't tell me how am I supposed to know?

And subsequently, I tried to reason and talk it out, but they went to Magistrates Court and I actually pleaded not guilty and elected a Crown court trial in front of a judge and jury. And they dropped the case the day before the  Crown Court trial. But it was quite a stressful thing, really to go through.

But I was very.. my principle was I knew I was right. And actually,  it become more than just that singular case to me all, you know, this is how our whole industry is being managed, whether it's by Europe or our fisheries, we're so out of touch. I just had  to try and do something in my own mind to try and show someone like a judge or something what was happening.

And actually, the barrister that I had had an abuse of process against the MMO filed to the court. Obviously, they dropped it and they still maintain they're right to this day.

Lydia: So they're still saying that if they think in the future that you committed an offence, they could still, you know, bring that. Is that what they're saying?

James: I did a bit homework. I've done a few recordings of things they said and things like this. But what they said when they dropped the case was, you know, we still maintain we're right but  in the public interest we're  going to drop this case. So "be careful" in this sort of tone. And this is what I'm saying. They're not.. the MMO are no longer a management organisation. The name is a contradiction in terms.

 They're an enforcement body. And this is what needs to change. And I actually believe our fisheries at the MMO and DEFRA are not competent enough at the moment to manage our fisheries and I don't think they wanted Brexit. I think part of this was a deal for management because they've had 40 years of power with no responsibility.

Lydia: And so do you see it... Is the crux of it for you that at the end of the day that they've got no they've got nowhere to hide behind any other organizations, that they are the ones making the decisions?

James: Yeah, I think this is part of that. I mean, I don't interact too much with the civil servants in the fishing industry, but I'm not actually sure that, deep down, they wanted a no deal Brexit scenario, because in fishing it would put huge responsibility on them and I don't think the knowledge is there to manage our fisheries.

I don't think so. But what we could have done is that thing where you talk about opportunity, where an opportunity I can see presents itself, now where we are 'in charge', inverted commas,  we are in more of a position of strength because fishermen do hold the answers they require. We do know about our industry and now there is just a glimmer of light that we can actually sit down with these people and be part of that management. Where we couldn't do that with the EU or if we could have done no one, present that opportunity to us.

Lydia: Yeah, now I can see that. I mean, certainly with this centralisation of the CFP on that, and they wouldn't have been the opportunity for any kind of bottom up conversation on that.

 James I could talk about this all night, actually.

 And there are lots of things I don't think we've covered and that maybe maybe there's another point that he wanted to make that I haven't asked you?

 James: Not really no, I'm more interested in .. I mean, I'm not here to convince anyone either way.

 I'm just using my experience things to get my side of it. And I fully respect your view and everyone elses. It's just, you know, through experience..  And these are life experiences, you know, real world situations I'm talking about,  this is how especially fishermen around felt. So I think I saw this bit of the life ring- like the boat was sinking, you know, give us something to grab hold of. So I don't think we ever thought it was going to be the cure to everything.

Lydia: actually that's a very relevant question, did you think that the UK would leave the EU? Do you think we would vote to leave as a country? I mean, I realised it was very marginal, but did you think that that would be an outcome? Did you ever expect that?

James: I think I did, but I still had reservations. I knew it would be close, but I didn't think there was a lot of how can I say it? Sort of the silent majority. I think people like me self, we're not the politics people, really. And I knew in society that there was.. Whatever their reasons for leaving or not are irrelevant. There was like this silent band that were outward looking, you know, out their front windows and that.

And I do think there's problems in our society. You can debate whose fault it is until the cows come home. But I do think there was sort of this band in society, in the population that silently I believed would vote out for this Life Ring, if you like, not just on fishing, on other things. So it was close, but I knew the possibility was there. Yes.

Lydia: Yeah. I mean, I think I, I agree that we as a country, as a country I anticipated that we would end up voting to leave.

And that was my opinion. Back in 2015 when Cameron was elected, that actually having worked in the EU for some years at that time, you know, the EU had already assumed that we were going to leave well before we even had a referendum on the table. And so when Cameron got in, I remember that happening and being in Brussels at the time and saying, that's it, we're out. And everyone's like, yeah, that's what we think.

And that was the kind of the view not only in Brussels from the other countries representatives, but with our own. And and unfortunately, from my perspective, we voted out

I mean, I think. Well, this is the point where we could go on and on and on all night and how silent that majority actually was, because I think some would argue that that majority wasn't that silent. But I think that certainly those that  cast their vote without ever giving an opinion publicly, we say, and that was very difficult to measure beforehand in some ways.

James: The figureheads of the silent majority.

But what I'm saying is that was people I think sitting in their homes that really didn't get involved in the debate but knew what they wanted or thought. So, really a lot of these people like Nigel Farage, for instance, he gained a lot of traction being the figurehead for these people, whether you agree with him or you didn't. I do think he appealed to a lot of these people.

Lydia: I have one final question, which I think we should close on since when we could, as I say, talk all night.. Jacob Rees-Mogg made a wonderful assertion this week, which was that ' fish are happier now that they know they're British.'

do you think the fish are happier James? Are they happier?

 James: I think the fish are quite consistent because they've got no concept of politics or EU or the Brexit negotiations at all. And I think as human beings, we could take that sort of view on the world and be a better place.

 Lydia: Be more like the fish is what you mean.

 James: Yeah.

Lydia: James, it's been so fantastic talking to you. And it's as I said, I've  wanted to talk to you for many years because of your very excellent way of explaining your position. And also, I think, being willing to respect both sides, which is maybe something that is often missing from this debate.

 If in the future more stuff emerges about fishing, I don't know when that will be, but can I invite you back to maybe speak to us again?

 It's been a real pleasure to speak to you.

James: Yeah.  That would be great.

Lydia: Fantastic. Well, I will close off on that and thank everyone for joining us. And thanks especially to James to giving up his time this evening. And I certainly there's a few bits and pieces there that I've taken away for future reference. So thank you so much, James, and I thank you.

James: All right. Thanks, goodnight.