‘No downside' for fishing industry in EU deal, insists Environment Secretary
The wide-ranging deal will allow farmers to get swifter, easier access to trade on the continent as a result of an agreement on animal and plant product standards.
But the Government has also received swift condemnation for agreeing to grant European fishing trawlers a further 12 years of access to British waters.
Speaking to the Environment Committee on Tuesday, Mr Reed described the deal as a 'huge boost for the UK agri-food and food and drink sectors'.
But he was quickly forced to defend the agreement as MPs quizzed him about the concerns and anger from fishing sector leaders, who have described it as a 'horror show' and a 'betrayal'.
Mr Reed said: 'I think this is a reasonably good deal for the UK fishing sector.
'Compared to what some of the speculation was, and indeed some of the pressures on our negotiating team, the EU was interested in more quota, more access to (UK) territorial waters.
'They were looking for a deal on fishing in perpetuity, and they were trying to achieve that by making what I felt was a spurious link between fishing and an SPS (sanitary and phytosanitary) deal.'
The Environment secretary said the UK's negotiating team 'held strong', resulting in an agreement that has seen 'no loss at all' in terms of quota and access to territorial waters.
He argued that instead the sector will benefit as exporting British produce across the border becomes 'much easier, simpler, much less costly'.
He added: 'There is no downside to this for fishers. There's a big upside in what they can export.'
However, the Environment Secretary was challenged about making 'no progress' on major asks from the UK fishing sector.
These included exclusive access to certain waters, regulatory autonomy relating to the management of fisheries and improving collaboration over the equitable and sustainable management of non-quota species.
Continuing to defend the deal, Mr Reed said: 'This was a negotiation so we of course pushed for more, but it's a negotiation.
'I have to say I would've liked if we got more for them. We did push hard,' he said, adding that he engaged with industry bodies, ensuring their position was fed through during talks.
Mr Reed went on to argue the UK retained regulatory autonomy with no return to the EU's common fishing policy as well its position on sand eels.
'This is a good deal standing on its own for fish but if you look at the wider impact on the economy, it's a huge boost,' he said.
The Environment Secretary also denied claims fisheries were 'traded off' for other areas in the negotiations after Environment Committee chairman Alistair Carmichael suggested the Government had invited that compromise by allowing them to be part of these negotiations.
'I do want to really emphasise this point, because you said fishing was 'traded out' in this deal,' Mr Reed said.
'It wasn't. They've lost absolutely nothing and they've gained things, particularly (market) access that they did not have before,' he said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
28 minutes ago
- The Independent
What is Your Party? Confusion reigns over name of Jeremy Corbyn and Zarah Sultana's new party
Jeremy Corbyn and Zarah Sultana have confirmed the formation of an as yet unnamed political party to take on Sir Keir Starmer and Labour from the left. The populist outfit, which has been temporarily dubbed Your Party, was announced by the former Labour leader and Ms Sultana on Thursday. Mr Corbyn said it was 'time for a new kind of political party – one that belongs to you' and he called for the 'mass redistribution of wealth and power'. The group, which will bring together MPs currently sitting as independents, will'build a democratic movement that can take on the rich and powerful – and win', he said. It came weeks after the party's initial launch, through Ms Sultana's social media pages, descended into chaos, with Mr Corbyn apparently unaware she was planning to announce their co-leadership. Then, she promised to offer an alternative to 'managed decline and broken promises'. But now the party is forming, what exactly will that look like in practice? Here, The Independent runs through everything we know so far about the new left-wing offering in Westminster. What is their mission? And do they have any policies? Unveiling more details on Thursday, Mr Corbyn said his party would tax the rich and invest in council houses. He also said it would support Palestine and be 'made up of people of all faiths and none'. He said millions of people were 'horrified by the government's complicity in crimes against humanity'. 'Now, more than ever, we must defend the right to protest against genocide,' he wrote. 'We believe in the radical idea that all human life has equal value. That is why we will keep demanding an end to all arms sales to Israel, and for the only path to peace: a free and independent Palestine'. With growing contempt for Labour under Sir Keir after he suspended four MPs for rebelling against his planned benefit cuts, Mr Corbyn and Ms Sultana are attempting to unite the left in opposition to the party. Further details of how the party will work, who will lead it, what its policies will be and, crucially, what it will be called will be decided by members at an inaugural conference, expected this autumn. Who is involved? Ms Sultana initially said she will be leading the party with former Labour leader Mr Corbyn. While the ex-Labour leader initially declined to comment, sparking rumours he had not fully committed to join, he later issued a statement confirming that 'discussions are ongoing' about the party's formation. Thursday's formal launch letter was signed by both Mr Corbyn and Ms Sultana, and discussions about the party's formation are believed to have involved independent MPs sitting in parliament as well as campaigners and local coucillors across the country. One of those expected to join is Leanne Mohamad, a British-Palestinian activist who almost unseated Wes Streeting in last summer's general election and is planning to run against him again. Another potential member is Andrew Feinstein, who stood against Sir Keir in his Holborn and St Pancras seat, coming second with 7,312 votes. How much support do they have? It is too early to tell what kind of backing Ms Sultana's party would have in practice. In three weeks, she had gained more than 70,000 sign-ups to her page. More broadly, polling conducted by More in Common last month – well before the MP unveiled her party – asked the public how they would vote if a left-leaning party led by Mr Corbyn emerged. The hypothetical scenario saw 10 per cent of voters say they would back the party, taking three points from Labour, four points from the Greens, one point from the Lib Dems and one point from the SNP. Labour was left with 20 per cent support, neck and neck with the Tories, while Reform UK was on 27 per cent. What is happening with the name? The pair sparked mass confusion online with the formation of the party, directing supporters to a website under the title Your Party. Reform chairman Zia Yusuf said that from a branding perspective it was 'one of the worst party names ever'. And, responding to a news outlet on X, formerly Twitter, Ms Sultana sought to clarify, writing: 'It's not called your party!' 'From the launch to the party, conference, structures & yes - even the name! - we're building it together,' she added, confirming that members will decide the name. Labour MPs also piled in on the chaos, with Mike Reader saying: 'I strongly recommend Votey McVote Face.'
The Independent
28 minutes ago
- The Independent
Children of Briton jailed in India for seven years without trial protest Modi's UK visit
As prime minister Sir Keir Starmer toasted what he called a 'historic day' for British- Indian relations at Chequers, just yards from Downing Street two young Britons stood with posters taped to their jackets and baggage. Alois Christian Michel and his sister Alienor were not protesting a government policy or trade deal. They were pleading for the freedom of their father Christian Michel. Michel, a British national, has spent over six years incarcerated in India's notorious Tihar Jail without trial. Despite bail orders from both the Delhi High Court and India's Supreme Court, he remains imprisoned after failing to meet the conditions set – leaving him trapped in a legal and political limbo with no end in sight. Michel's son, who gave an exclusive interview to The Independent during the protest with his sister, says they have lost patience with successive UK governments. 'The UK government has miserably failed to address human rights violations across Commonwealth countries, particularly in India,' says Alois, 27. 'A British national such as my father has now been illegally detained by Indian authorities for seven years, yet neither the previous government nor the present one has taken any concrete action against this inhumane conduct.' Their protest took place at the same time as Sir Keir and Indian prime minister Narendra Modi were meeting to approve a sweeping trade agreement worth £6bn in investment that is expected to boost Britain's GDP by nearly £5bn. Referring to British officials, Alois says: 'They say they'll 'raise interest' in the case. After seven years, is that all? It's ridiculous.' Michel, a businessman and consultant, was extradited from Dubai to India in 2018 over allegations he acted as a middleman in a 2010 defence deal involving Italian firm AgustaWestland. Indian investigators allege bribes were paid to secure a £322m contract to supply helicopters – charges he denies. India's legal system is notoriously slow and overburdened, which is why it has a law stipulating that a suspect must be released from prison once they have served half of what would have been the maximum sentence if they were convicted. In Michel's case that was seven years, meaning he should have been released midway through 2021. His lawyers argue he should be freed unconditionally – instead, the courts have granted him bail while investigators continue to probe his case. It means that Michel remains in prison because he cannot meet the stringent conditions imposed. He has no address in India, no family members in the country, and no one willing to act as a guarantor – factors that have rendered the bail order effectively meaningless. At a hearing in April, Michel revealed to the court that the only person willing to vouch for him was Jo Johnson, former MP and brother to ex-prime minister Boris Johnson. Back in London, his children remain cut off from their father, their only contact being brief, choked phone calls. 'The last time I spoke to him was last weekend. Less than 10 seconds,' Alois tells The Independent. 'That's all we get. I haven't seen him in nearly seven and a half years.' He was just 20 when his father was extradited. 'I was in the middle of my studies. Everything just stopped,' he recalls. 'Emotionally, financially, it's been really tough. And for my sister… she was just a teenager when our father was taken away.' The siblings have never visited their father in India. The reason, Alois says, is fear. 'He's in Tihar prison. I would like to see him, but how much am I risking by going there? In a country that doesn't follow its own laws, they could arrest me too – use me as leverage with my father,' he says. 'It's too dangerous. And I won't have me put in a position where my father is forced to do anything because of my arrest in India.' They have justification to be concerned. Michel has alleged two separate attempts on his life in prison, claiming that a hired killer confessed to being paid to assassinate him. Despite his appeals, no meaningful investigation was launched, he claims. 'A professional killer tried to kill me twice,' Michel told The Independent during an earlier court appearance. 'He was paid money, and they never investigated who paid him or why.' Michel's legal team argues that the entire case is politically motivated, a claim that gained traction after the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention ruled in 2021 that his detention was arbitrary and called for his immediate release. 'The United Nations has said he should be released. Indian law states he should be released. And yet, here we are,' says Michel's son. 'All we're asking is for the Indian government to follow its own laws. And for the UK government to hold them to it.' 'We really just desperately want something to happen,' says Alois. 'Some people wait in hope. In our case, we wait in despair.' As his ordeal has stretched on, Michel's health has suffered. Earlier this year he was admitted to the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) hospital in Delhi for hip surgery, and he has walked with a cane when attending court appearances since. 'We have one fear now,' Alois says. 'That he never comes back.' The broader implications of Michel's detention extend far beyond a single family's suffering. His case has become a litmus test of the UK government's willingness to protect its citizens abroad – particularly when doing so risks complicating lucrative diplomatic engagements. 'The people of Great Britain gave a clear and resounding mandate to the Labour Party to reclaim the country from the grip of bureaucratic dominance and restore the nation's pride,' says Michel's son. 'But this government, too, is proving weak – submissive to bureaucracy, unwilling to defend its own citizens.' Trade, security cooperation and joint efforts against organised crime dominated the headlines around the Modi-Starmer summit. But despite the family's heartbreak, Michel's imprisonment was not raised publicly during Modi's UK visit. Neither leader allowed the media to ask any questions and their talks took place in the prime minister's country residence, away from any public displays of anger in London. 'We are just asking both governments to respect the UN ruling,' Alois says. 'Follow the law, and let him go.'
The Independent
28 minutes ago
- The Independent
From friends to foes: Why Corbyn's new ‘Your Party' could be a real problem for Starmer
Keir Starmer and Jeremy Corbyn have a shared love for Arsenal football club and have both captained the Labour 'red team' in politics against the Tory blues. But that is about as far as they go in terms of any bonds in one of the most turbulent relationships in recent British politics. While the relationship between the pair is beyond repair, Sir Keir's predecessor has today added to the prime minister's headache with the launch of his new 'kinder' party, which threatens to pinch supporters at a time when Labour's poll rating continues to drop. A recent poll put Labour in third equal place with a new Corbyn party, with both on 15 per cent and even the Tories ahead on 17 per cent, behind Reform on a massive 34 per cent. Just five years ago, after Labour's dismal defeat to Boris Johnson in the 2019 election, Sir Keir described him as a 'colleague' and, more importantly, a 'friend'. But once the leadership was in the bag – courtesy of the support and strategy of his now chief of staff Morgan McSweeney – Sir Keir suddenly had a very different view of his predecessor. From 2016 he had been loyal to Corbyn, denied there was an antisemitism problem under his leadership, and continued to serve in a shadow cabinet while other prominent Labour MPs refused. But within months of taking charge of Labour, he had suspended the former leader and attempted to distance himself from Corbyn's time in charge. When Corbyn was kicked out in 2023, Sir Keir insisted that contrary to his previous statement, the former Labour leader 'was never a friend'. As various U-turns have shown, Sir Keir has not worried about changing his mind and rewriting history when circumstances required it. Now though, the former friend is a real problem. On one side it will allow Sir Keir to emphasise that he is the sensible centrist leader in a political world dominated by extremes of Corbyn on the left and Farage on the right. But on the other side there will be fears that the issues around trying to cut disability benefits, failing to really take on Israel over Gaza and the infamous winter fuel cuts will encourage many to switch to this new party. Another ex-Labour leader Lord Kinnock has warned that Corbyn's new party will only help the Tories and Reform. The issue for the prime minister, though, may be that Corbyn remains a more charismatic figure on the left. Tory leader Kemi Badenoch suffers the same in comparison to Farage. The one effect of his former friend's new party may be that it forces the prime minister to be more of a man of the people – less Sir Keir and more just Keir. A quality his premiership has been lacking so far.
