
‘We were promised we'd get our fishing grounds back – Starmer's Brexit deal is giving everything away'
It's quiet on the North Quay in Grimsby. There aren't many fishermen left, and those who remain don't have much hope for the future.
'We've all got grey hair down here, and we've only got a few more years [at it],' says Darren Kenyon, who's been fishing since he was 13. Now he's 58 and no longer believes that anyone will listen when he talks about the plight of those in the local industry, which once formed the backbone of the town.
Grimsby used to be the world's premier fishing port, famous for its cod and haddock, but by 2018 there were just 20 trawlers left. Now there are only a handful.
Some date the start of the industry's demise to the cod wars of the 1970s, while others blame the European Union (EU) common fisheries policy, which introduced strict catch quotas to preserve stock.
Either way, Euroscepticism was common among fishermen and Brexit enjoyed a high level of support in the industry. In Grimsby, some 70 per cent of voters backed it in the 2016 referendum.
Taking back control of our waters and liberation from EU regulations were meant to be among its chief selling points. But since Britain left the bloc, many fishermen have felt betrayed. New paperwork has created obstacles to selling to EU countries, which make up Britain's biggest export market.
And now comes what they see as another blow, in the form of Sir Keir Starmer's new Brexit 'reset' deal. Under the terms agreed by the Prime Minister, EU fishing boats will continue to have access to UK waters until 2038. This access had been due to expire in June next year.
The quid pro quo for the extension, says the Government, is that importing and exporting food and drink will be made easier as paperwork and checks will be reduced. Some checks on animal and plant products will be entirely scrapped.
None of which seems to impress the fishermen in Grimsby, who don't sell to the continent anyway.
'We've ended up with hardly anything'
'It's just the same old story,' says Kenyon, who lands crabs, lobsters and whelks from his four boats and also owns a fish processing factory on the quayside. 'It's another good hiding for us, I'm afraid. The job's knackered now.'
The promise of Brexit, as he sees it, has been broken. 'We were promised we were going to get our fishing grounds back,' he says. 'We've ended up with hardly anything. This deal is giving everything away.'
The situation in Grimsby reflects the wider mood in fishing communities across the UK, as they try to come to terms with the catastrophic consequences of Starmer's new deal.
Kenyon is standing on the dock, surrounded by the paraphernalia of his trade: the lobster pots and crab pots, coils of rope and rolls of netting. But he's one of the few still at it. Jim Walker, who's been fishing for 40 years, is another, but he works from a little estuary 20 miles down the coast 'because we can't afford to come in this dock'.
He too is scathing about Starmer's deal, which was described by the Conservatives and Reform as a 'surrender' to the EU.
'They've just given the French, the Dutch, the Belgians free reign,' he says.
Under the current rules, EU fishing boats are meant to remain outside a six-mile zone off Britain's coast. But they don't, claims Walker, who lands shellfish and sells them to Kenyon.
'The industry is going to die pretty quick'
Shellfish from Kenyon's 17-year-old factory on the Quayside is sold all over Britain. He took over the business from his father and had wanted to pass it on to his children but is no longer sure that will happen.
'The last 15 years [have seen a] big crunch, we've got a lack of crews – a lot have left to work for the wind farms because it's good money – and we're all of a certain age,' he says. 'I think the job is done and the industry is going to die pretty quick.'
Red tape, he says, has stunted his ability to do his job. Besides which he feels certain that he and the other British fishermen are more heavily policed than their foreign counterparts fishing nearby.
Under the new deal – also branded 'disastrous' by the Scottish Fishermen's Federation – it seems likely such resentments will continue to simmer.
Would things have improved under the plan to deny EU vessels access after June 2026?
'I think it would have made a difference for the whole of England,' says Kenyon. In 10 to 20 years' time there could have been 'a sea full of fish, we don't let anybody in, we fish it for ourselves.''
But in Grimsby, he admits, 'we haven't got the vessels because we haven't had the help.'
Most of those that sit on the shimmering water in the dock today are not fishing trawlers but boats working in the renewable energy industry. Offshore wind was meant to breathe life back into Grimsby (its home to one of the world's largest offshore wind farms) but there's little evidence of that in the streets of run-down or boarded up shop buildings.
There's a sense of sadness about this among the fishermen, who are keenly aware of what has been lost here.
'It's another food source being smashed'
'We're an island,' says Kenyon. 'We should be farming ourselves and fishing ourselves.'
But as he sees it, the new deal is another nail in the coffin of an already ailing industry.
Rob Evans, who runs Taymore Ltd, a Grimsby-based shellfish company with one trawler, brands the agreement 'terrible'. He says: 'First [Starmer's] done the farmers, now he's done fishing. My biggest concern is it's another food source being smashed.'
He's perplexed by Starmer agreeing to an extension of as long as 12 years 'because that's three future governments possibly.'
If EU access to British waters had ended next year as originally planned, there would have been more fish available, which would have helped the local industry, he believes. As it is, there are European vessels that steam up from France 'and take tonnes and tonnes of whiting'.
He adds: 'I can't see any fishermen in the country thinking it's a great idea to have more boats turning up and taking fish that, if left alone, will breed.'
Fishing is a small but politically sensitive part of the British economy, estimated to make up just 0.03 per cent of GDP. In Grimsby, though, it still forms an important part of the local identity. Seafood processing provides 6,000 jobs in the town, even if the numbers of men going out to sea has dwindled to near zero.
The Government has announced a £360 million investment fund in coastal communities and the fishing industry. But it isn't enough to reassure the fishermen in Grimsby, who feel they have been sold out by successive governments.
'The Government doesn't care about the fishing industry,' says Walker.
Behind him, some of the buildings are no longer in use, or have been demolished.
'It was unreal,' sighs Kenyon. 'You could get anything here, you didn't have to go out of the dock. It was like its own little mini-town, I loved it. The dock was alive. There were thousands of people working night and day… Nobody seems to want it any more.'

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Telegraph
29 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Palestine Action to challenge terror ban in courts
Palestine Action is seeking a legal challenge against the Government's bid to proscribe it under anti-terror laws. An urgent hearing was held in the High Court on Monday related to an application for judicial review on behalf of Huda Ammori, one of the founders of the group. A further hearing will be held on Friday to decide whether the Government can temporarily be blocked from banning the group, pending a hearing to decide whether Palestine Action can bring the legal challenge. A decision on whether the group will be given the green light to bring the legal challenge will be given at a further hearing expected to be held in the week of July 21. Supporting statements have also been submitted by Amnesty International, Liberty and European Legal Support Centre over concerns of unlawful misuse of anti-terror measures to criminalise dissent, a spokesman said. It comes as Yvette Cooper, the Home Secretary, is expected to publish a written statement to lay the order to make membership and support for the direct action group illegal. If approved, it would become a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison. Commenting on the hearing, Ms Ammori said: 'I have been left with no choice but to request this urgent hearing and to seek either an injunction or other form of interim relief because of the Home Secretary's decision to try to steamroll this through Parliament immediately.' She added: '[There hasn't been] proper opportunity for MPs and Peers to debate and scrutinise the proposal, or for legal and human rights experts and civil society organisations to make representations, or for those of us who would be denied fundamental rights as a result and criminalised as 'terrorists' overnight, including the many thousands of people who support Palestine Action.' The Government's move comes after two planes were vandalised at RAF Brize Norton on June 20 in an action claimed by Palestine Action. Five people have since been arrested on suspicion of a terror offence in relation to the incident. Unveiling the intention to ban the group following the incident on June 23, Ms Cooper said it was the latest in a 'long history of unacceptable criminal damage committed by Palestine Action'.


The Guardian
30 minutes ago
- The Guardian
One way or another, it's time to stick up for Keir Starmer and the art of the big, fat U-turn
Our lesson today is taken from St Paul's first letter to the Corinthians, chapter 14, verse eight: 'For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?' In the macho and combative world of Westminster politics, certainty is a highly valued commodity. If you are not decisive then you must be a ditherer. The logic, and the alliteration, are irresistible. Hence the prime minister's current difficulty over three (count 'em!) recent U-turns: over the winter fuel allowance, a national inquiry into grooming gangs and now on proposed cuts to personal independence payments (Pip). U-turns are good news for reporters and political commentators. They provide an opportunity to confirm how insightful they are, and wise after the event (admittedly some are wise before the event). They also mean that the adjective 'screeching' is likely to be used far too often, along with references to the smell of burning tyre rubber. Some words – unlike some policies – just stick. Older readers may remember that under the last Labour government it was compulsory for an extended time to refer to the transport secretary, Stephen Byers, as 'the beleaguered Stephen Byers'. Why are U-turns always regarded as being such a bad thing? Isn't it a good idea to change direction once you realise you are heading the wrong way? With the holiday season approaching, overheated children and spouses must brace themselves for that tense moment when the driver is told he has picked the wrong route, only for the man behind the wheel to declare grumpily: 'No, I've decided, we're sticking with the A591!' A no U-turns policy can make a Daddy Pig out of anyone. But what explains the enduring, emblematic power of the U-turn to make grown men and women in London SW1 tremble? Here we must point to the usual suspect, Margaret Thatcher. In October 1980, the Conservative party was heading to its annual conference in Brighton. The new Tory government was less than a year and a half old, but was already extremely unpopular and under intense political pressure. Unemployment and inflation were both high. Thatcher was seen as an inflexible and insensitive leader. Surely there would be an adjustment, and some acknowledgment of the severe economic pain the country was suffering? But, (in)famously, Mrs T said this in her conference speech: 'To those waiting with bated breath for that favourite media catchphrase, the U-turn, I have only one thing to say: you turn if you want to. The lady's not for turning!' It did not matter that Thatcher may not have fully appreciated the joke which her speechwriter Ronald Millar had provided for her (a pun on the 1948 play The Lady's Not For Burning by Christopher Fry). The line stuck. And the mythology around Thatcher began to grow: that she was resolute, unflinching, impervious to counter-arguments and determined never to change her mind. But hang on a minute. What happened only four months after she gave this speech, in February 1981? A government plan to close 23 coalmines was withdrawn in the face of opposition from the National Union of Mineworkers, then led by Joe Gormley. It was a complete and utter … U-turn. The headline on the BBC's website where the story is featured says: 'Thatcher gives in to miners'. People remember the moment when, three years later and with much higher coal stocks, Thatcher battled the miners again when the timing suited her better. This too fed into the 'no U-turns' myth. But it was not the whole story. Westminster orthodoxy and the real world are not always in perfect alignment. In SW1-land, you can never go into a general election committed to any kind of tax rise. But if the current government had said that, if elected, it was going to reverse the second of Jeremy Hunt's employee national insurance cuts how much happier (fiscally and politically) it might be today. The gap between what everybody in Westminster knows and what normal people think might also help explain why some free-wheeling populists like Nigel Farage get away with their bogus yet apparently 'authentic', so-called 'common sense'. No one wants to be led by a vacillating or broken 'shopping trolley' (the label Dominic Cummings applied to a chaotic Boris Johnson in No 10) that has no consistency or sense of direction. But it is OK to change your mind based on a fresh assessment of the evidence. In their award-winning 2006 book, Why Should Anyone Be Led By You?, Rob Goffee and the late Gareth Jones wrote about the power of leaders admitting to doubt and even, on occasion, weakness. 'By exposing a measure of vulnerability, they make themselves approachable and show themselves to be human,' they wrote. It is possible that the parliamentary Labour party might agree with that. Until it changes its mind. So, U-turn if you want to. Perhaps you should. It beats going full steam into the rocks. Stefan Stern is co-author of Myths of Management and the former director of the High Pay Centre. His latest book is Fair or Foul – the Lady Macbeth Guide to Ambition


The Independent
33 minutes ago
- The Independent
Pubs reveal how many extra pints they expect to pull during Euro 2025
Pubs across the UK are anticipating a significant economic uplift this summer, with the Uefa Women's Euros expected to drive millions of additional pint sales, according to a leading trade body. The British Beer and Pub Association (BBPA) projects that establishments could pull an extra 2.6 million pints during the tournament. This estimate is based on an anticipated surge in beer sales during matches compared to the annual daily average. The competition kicks off in Switzerland on 2 July, with England's Lionesses and Wales playing their opening fixtures just days later, on 5 July. Further boosting potential custom, pubs may also be granted extended opening hours should England or Wales advance to the final stages of the competition. The BBPA, whose members brew 90 per cent of British beer and own nearly half of UK pubs, said this could deliver a £13 million boost to the economy. Furthermore, pubs could be allowed to stay open beyond their usual closing time if either of the two countries reach the semi-finals or final of the Euros, which will take place towards the end of July. Emma McClarkin, chief executive of the BBPA, said: 'The pub has forever been regarded as a home away from home, especially for sports fans, so it's no surprise that fans will be flocking to the pub to cheer on our brilliant teams.' However, Ms McClarkin renewed calls for the Government to 'level the playing field and reduce beer duty', with England and Wales paying the fourth-highest tax rate compared with other nations competing in the tournament, she said. Alcohol duty is paid by manufacturers when they make their products, and the duty is generally then passed on to consumers through prices. Duty on draught pints was cut by 1.7 per cent earlier in the year – meaning a penny off a pint in the pub.