Last February, the BBC and others were proclaiming the ban on discarding at sea fish that had been caught but either could not be landed legally, or were of inferior quality to that which sells at the desired price, as a great victory.
Roger Harrabin, the ‘environmental lobby propagandist’ who draws a substantial income from the BBC, in addition to substantial cash from various sideline work for the very eco groups whose every report and argument he then reports about without challenge or question, went so far as to say that it was “something of a victory for citizen power, following organised lobbying of MEPs by ordinary people, as well as by high-profile celebrity chefs and environmentalists”.
The reality, as Richard argued some months ago, would be very different. While everyone was singing the hymns of EU praise back then, North was about the only voice taking time to explain that:
Even then, some discarding at seas is going to be allowed. And, while the reforms are to prevent discarding at sea – what this means is that non-quota fish will be landed, and disposed of on-shore. This is marginally better than dumping at sea, but only marginally so. It will have very little effect on the overall health of the fishery.
In effect, therefore, the much-vaunted “reforms” are a big bag of nothing – a cynical PR exercise of very little consequence.
Fast forward back to today and what do we find? The Guardian with a ‘scoop’ story that reports on the findings of a study by the University of East Anglia and the Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture. Guess what one of the lead authors, Professor Alastair Grant, has to say?
The discards ban is not the great victory that the public seem to think.
Well, colour me shocked! Richard expands on this in a valuable post today over at EU Referendum. But rather than focus on that – you can read it for yourselves – I’m minded to ask a question.
Is there a single damned thing that comes out of Roger Harrabin’s mouth, or from his keyboard, that we can rely upon to be accurate?
People in this country are saddled with paying the salary of this activist lackey through the BBC licence fee, for nothing but biased reportage, naked propaganda and inaccurate scare stories hammed up to reinforce the spiteful agenda of his coterie of envirochums. But the BBC love it because it is their agenda too. Forget impartial reporting. Forget balance. Forget question and challenge of assertions made. The BBC is a publicly funded propagandist, abused by its employees to push their worldview on a public they treat with scorn and contempt.
Let’s see if Harrabin corrects his previous claims of victory and present the reality, or if he will leave falsehood to stand as the BBC’s published record of these matters.