Another new Brexit thread

[blueinsa]

Almost every single prominent remain advocating MP lost their seat at the 2019 election, replaced with pro-brexit MP's, yet apparently, that's still not conclusive enough evidence that the majority of the British public wanted brexit, over three years after the initial result.

The James O'Brien/New European reading bubble is quite the analgesic to remainers it seems.

You're doing it wrong.

Add up all the votes, divide by 2, multiply by 4 and then ignore the ones you don't like and eh presto......your side won.

 

[Metal Biker]

You're doing it wrong.

Add up all the votes, divide by 2, multiply by 4 and then ignore the ones you don't like and eh presto......your side won.

I did what you said... and leave still comes out the winner. ;)

 

[bluethrunthru]

Bring it on - assembling cars is boring anyway. I look forward to the days when reps cycle the M1 from Leeds to Hemel Hempstead to close a deal - people who live in Warrington walking into Manchester or Liverpool to work - and we can go back to seasonal eating - lots of turnip and potato in the winter and lots of lettuce and cucumber in summer. I expect Brexit will make us the healthiest 3rd World Country

 

[blueinsa]

Bring it on - assembling cars is boring anyway. I look forward to the days when reps cycle the M1 from Leeds to Hemel Hempstead to close a deal - people who live in Warrington walking into Manchester or Liverpool to work - and we can go back to seasonal eating - lots of turnip and potato in the winter and lots of lettuce and cucumber in summer. I expect Brexit will make us the healthiest 3rd World Country

Could be worse.

We could live in a country where the common man/woman dont have a vote or say or where if they do and the result doesn't suit, it gets ignored by a self elected elite.

 

[BobKowalski]

If that chlorinated chicken thing is allowed to happen it will be the beginning of the end for our food standards.

We won't know what we will be eating in restaurants, country of origin probably won't be labelled in supermarkets so we won't be able to pick and choose. What next...are they going to take the nutritional information off of food packaging as well?

We are going to adopt a US First Trade Policy as opposed to a UK First one. We’re already starting to cave and we’ve barely started :)

 

[MCFC1993]

Chlorinated chicken is clean and safe to eat. US food standards practice is that every piece of chicken is washed before hand, in chlorine to eliminate salmonella. The chlorine is then washed off. This is for free range chickens or battery chickens. The issue isn't with food standards but with how the animals are treated before slaughter as the chlorine "washes away" any evidence of suspected malpractice.

You're arguing the wrong argument when you're associating nutrition information and chlorinated chicken.

No, I fully understand why they do it and that's a whole different argument about how they're willing to treat animals before they die. My thought was on the longer term affects around sanctioning something like this.

I also don't think its a guarantee that there aren't any health risks, there is a reason certain countries have a chlorine limit on their food. What next hormone treat beef, which can have affects on the human body. We should be going near any of this.

One of my worries is that if they are so quick to drop their food standards for one of the first trade deals then what is going to be next. We have really good food standards at the moment and in fact we were one of the main countries pushing for those standards, I just don't want us this huge step backwards.

 

[Metal Biker]

No, I fully understand why they do it and that's a whole different argument about how they're willing to treat animals before they die. My thought was on the longer term affects around sanctioning something like this.

I also don't think its a guarantee that there aren't any health risks, there is a reason certain countries have a chlorine limit on their food. What next hormone treat beef, which can have affects on the human body. We should be going near any of this.

My main worry is that if they are so quick to drop their food standards for one of the first trade deals then what is going to be next. We have really good food standards at the moment and in fact we were one of the main countries pushing for those standards, I just don't want us this huge step backwards.

There is absolutely nothing to suggest that that is what's going to happen apart from anti-American rhetoric from usual suspects.

You will still have the notion of choice. Information has to be provided by law. Any concerns, you can inquire. Disagree and you can refuse the product. Its making a mountain out of a molehill. I do not believe for one second that food standards are going to drop, especially when you consider this is the same US that wants to do a deal with the EU.

Why is it not a concern when the EU wants a deal with the US, but becomes one when the UK does?

 

[MCFC1993]

There is absolutely nothing to suggest that that is what's going to happen apart from anti-American rhetoric from usual suspects.

You will still have the notion of choice. Information has to be provided by law. Any concerns, you can inquire. Disagree and you can refuse the product. Its making a mountain out of a molehill. I do not believe for one second that food standards are going to drop, especially when you consider this is the same US that wants to do a deal with the EU.

Why is it not a concern when the EU wants a deal with the US, but becomes one when the UK does?

Honestly, probably because the UK isn't coming into these trade negotiations from a position of power.

You tend to get a better deal when you aren't desperate for a deal. Not saying we're desperate but we haven't got huge option at the moment.

 

[mcfc1632]

And there are some that keep believing the lies that they have been told (and the lies to the queen as well) from the very start.... from the £350 million a week to the NHS (God we could've done with that over the last three months ) on the side of the bus .... to the easy trade agreements that will be struck around the world, 'taking back control of our borders, 'sovereignty' , `and we will protect workers rights' to 'an 'oven ready deal' when really it was all about disaster capitalism and protecting the rich from having to disclose where they kept their wealth.

day after day after day we have suffered a diatribe about the possibility of the Eu failing , possibly becoming a federal state, possibly setting up an army, possibly forcing the euro on everyone, wasn't it @mcfc1632, @Mëtal Bikër @blueinsa @Ancient Citizen no doubt it would've ended up with possibly cubed tomatoes and possibly straight bananas. (we held vetoes on all of that anyway)

The Conservative Government have lied from the start (as they always do).... all the way through and are still lying now .... and now what everyone else had forecast is starting to come home to roost. (pun intended)

Genuine question....

Were you frothing at the mouth as you typed that?

You do know that most of those you mention are not Tory supporters don't you FFS - calm the fuck down

 

[BobKowalski]

There is absolutely nothing to suggest that that is what's going to happen apart from anti-American rhetoric from usual suspects.

You will still have the notion of choice. Information has to be provided by law. Any concerns, you can inquire. Disagree and you can refuse the product. Its making a mountain out of a molehill. I do not believe for one second that food standards are going to drop, especially when you consider this is the same US that wants to do a deal with the EU.

Why is it not a concern when the EU wants a deal with the US, but becomes one when the UK does?

The evidence is that to do a deal with the US you have to take it up the arse. There is no point being the biggest economy on the planet (just) and not fucking smaller countries up the arse.

There was plenty of angst and protests over the EU doing a deal with the US, food standards and health were part of that concern and is one of the reasons TTIP stalled.

 

[BobKowalski]

Honestly, probably because the UK isn't coming into these trade negotiations from a position of power.

You tend to get a better deal when you aren't desperate for a deal. Not saying we're desperate but we haven't got huge option at the moment.

The UK is going into US talks lubed up and trousers around our ankles.

 

[Metal Biker]

Genuine question....

Were you frothing at the mouth as you typed that?

You do know that most of those you mention are not Tory supporters don't FFS - calm the fuck down

He still hasn't answered if he thinks we're all racists or not, when he stated that the "racism" element to his post was "implied".

 

[Metal Biker]

The evidence is that to do a deal with the US you have to take it up the arse. There is no point being the biggest economy on the planet (just) and not fucking smaller countries up the arse.

There was plenty of angst and protests over the EU doing a deal with the US, food standards and health were part of that concern and is one of the reasons TTIP stalled.

Either by the EU or the US.

Pick your poison. You make it sound more like the US wants to make love to us, so that can't be a bad thing, can it.

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

There is absolutely nothing to suggest that that is what's going to happen apart from anti-American rhetoric from usual suspects.

You will still have the notion of choice. Information has to be provided by law. Any concerns, you can inquire. Disagree and you can refuse the product. Its making a mountain out of a molehill. I do not believe for one second that food standards are going to drop, especially when you consider this is the same US that wants to do a deal with the EU.

Why is it not a concern when the EU wants a deal with the US, but becomes one when the UK does?

The only government in history to insist on a non-level playing field, for the other side. As the NFU put it:
“Despite manifesto commitments and frequent warm words from the government, it is disappointing that they did not take the opportunity to legislate that they will not allow the imports of food that would be illegal for our farmers to produce here. We have seen clearly in the past few days the strength of feeling among farmers, MPs and politicians on this issue and as the Bill now moves to the House of Lords we will continue our work to ensure British farming standards are not undercut by future trade deals.”


A majority of MPs voted against an amendment, new clause 2, requiring new international treaties on the import of agricultural and food products to comply with World Trade Organisation safety rules and the UK’s own standards. It was put forward by the chair of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee, Conservative MP Neil Parish, and was defeated after receiving the support of Twenty Two Conservative MPs.
The proposed amendment would have protected our environment and animal welfare standards in future trade deals. As Parish wrote an article for the Conservative Home website, “there is no point having world-leading standards in the UK if we do not expect trade partners to reciprocate.” This stance was supported by the British Veterinary Association, along with 26 signatories of a letter, including representatives of the National Farmers’ Union, RSPCA, Wildlife Trust, Friends of the Earth, Green Peace, Soil Association and WWF, sent to all MPs.

This letter proposed that “The Bill should ensure that agri-food imports are produced to at least equivalent environmental, animal welfare, and food safety standards as those required of producers in the UK… We have heard concerns that such an approach would prevent the UK achieving the maximum benefit from its decision to leave the EU. We believe the opposite is true.”

We now come to the crux of the issue. The government appears to have decided against incorporating these standards into law because, as former international trade secretary Liam Fox pointed out during his speech in parliament on the 13th:

“the US would walk were the proposals to become law in the United Kingdom, and it would be swiftly followed by others—the Australians, the New Zealanders and those involved in the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership would be unlikely to take kindly to it.”

So, we insist on red lines with the EU, but insist on none with the rest of the world, which is odd.

 

[Metal Biker]

The only government in history to insist on a non-level playing field, for the other side. As the NFU put it:
“Despite manifesto commitments and frequent warm words from the government, it is disappointing that they did not take the opportunity to legislate that they will not allow the imports of food that would be illegal for our farmers to produce here. We have seen clearly in the past few days the strength of feeling among farmers, MPs and politicians on this issue and as the Bill now moves to the House of Lords we will continue our work to ensure British farming standards are not undercut by future trade deals.”


A majority of MPs voted against an amendment, new clause 2, requiring new international treaties on the import of agricultural and food products to comply with World Trade Organisation safety rules and the UK’s own standards. It was put forward by the chair of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee, Conservative MP Neil Parish, and was defeated after receiving the support of Twenty Two Conservative MPs.
The proposed amendment would have protected our environment and animal welfare standards in future trade deals. As Parish wrote an article for the Conservative Home website, “there is no point having world-leading standards in the UK if we do not expect trade partners to reciprocate.” This stance was supported by the British Veterinary Association, along with 26 signatories of a letter, including representatives of the National Farmers’ Union, RSPCA, Wildlife Trust, Friends of the Earth, Green Peace, Soil Association and WWF, sent to all MPs.

This letter proposed that “The Bill should ensure that agri-food imports are produced to at least equivalent environmental, animal welfare, and food safety standards as those required of producers in the UK… We have heard concerns that such an approach would prevent the UK achieving the maximum benefit from its decision to leave the EU. We believe the opposite is true.”

We now come to the crux of the issue. The government appears to have decided against incorporating these standards into law because, as former international trade secretary Liam Fox pointed out during his speech in parliament on the 13th:

“the US would walk were the proposals to become law in the United Kingdom, and it would be swiftly followed by others—the Australians, the New Zealanders and those involved in the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership would be unlikely to take kindly to it.”

So, we insist on red lines with the EU, but insist on none with the rest of the world, which is odd.

No-one else is making demands of our sovereignty, that's why.

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

No-one else is making demands of our sovereignty, that's why.

You can’t still be confused about the U.K. never having lost any sovereignty surely?
Not only that, but you seem to be accepting that collapsing the British farm industry is a price worth paying to do deals with countries a long way away from us? (Not N Ireland though, they’ll have to accept EU and U.K. standards for their food so their farmers will be ok).

 

[mcfc1632]

And there are some that keep believing the lies that they have been told (and the lies to the queen as well) from the very start.... from the £350 million a week to the NHS (God we could've done with that over the last three months ) on the side of the bus .... to the easy trade agreements that will be struck around the world, 'taking back control of our borders, 'sovereignty' , `and we will protect workers rights' to 'an 'oven ready deal' when really it was all about disaster capitalism and protecting the rich from having to disclose where they kept their wealth.

day after day after day we have suffered a diatribe about the possibility of the Eu failing , possibly becoming a federal state, possibly setting up an army, possibly forcing the euro on everyone, wasn't it @mcfc1632, @Mëtal Bikër @blueinsa @Ancient Citizen no doubt it would've ended up with possibly cubed tomatoes and possibly straight bananas. (we held vetoes on all of that anyway)

The Conservative Government have lied from the start (as they always do).... all the way through and are still lying now .... and now what everyone else had forecast is starting to come home to roost. (pun intended)

Read that rant again - but fuck you do spout some properly ignorant shit

I do sometimes think that you are some deliberate parody account - proper fucking mixed up you are

You say: we held vetoes on all of that anyway - have you been asleep for a few years??

 

[mcfc1632]

You're a waste of thought.

But you avoided the use of "racism", so well done you!

FFS - what a load of bollocks from that fella!!

He clearly has no shame about making himself look a total idiot

 

[mcfc1632]

We're no longer going to be contributing to the EU budget
We're free to engage and have relationships with other nations outside the EU in any manner we choose
We're no longer regarded as "EU citizens"
We're no longer connected to the EU Parliament
We're no longer influenced by the unelected EU Commission
We're no longer committed to an isolationist bloc that shuts out the entire world and only promotes its own members, whilst disregarding the needs and terms of the rest of the world
We're no longer endorsing or promoting the "EU PROJECT", nor are our taxes/funds, resources and facilities being used to support its creation.

Naturally to a federal EU supporter like yourself these are not "benefits". They are to those who are opposed to what the EU has become. It'd be like trying to "convince" a rag on the benefits of supporting City. You've already chosen your outlook so I really don't know why you keep asking.

Sorry @Mëtal Bikër I need to correct you there

You assume that he is a '.. federal EU supporter .."

I assume that he has not a clue what that means

 

[mcfc1632]

Sooooooo we're on our own then ? oh and

We're free to engage and have relationships with other nations outside the EU in any manner we choose.

• We were free to do that any way as long as it didn't cut across anything else that the Eu bloc were doing . But to be honest those other nations aren't queuing up to do business with us are they? Only 40 trade deals signed so far and none of them are better than we had whilst we were in the Eu. I ain't hearing anyone knocking on our door.

We're no longer regarded as "EU citizens"

• A perception ... I hold a passport that still has the UK logo and tells every one that I am a citizen of the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland but a member of the 'European Community' on it but also gives me the protection of being able to walk into the embassy of any EU country and ask them for assistance. Yet another right stripped from us.So were is the 'benefit' of relinquishing Eu membership?

We're no longer connected to the EU Parliament

• I would challenge wether we are even connected to our own. But as the Eu parliament only passed legislation that could be applied to each and every country (level playing field etc ) I was comfortable with that. In fact the Eu parliament has passed more laws that benefit the UK population than the Tories have (since 1956)

We're no longer committed to an isolationist bloc that shuts out the entire world and only promotes its own members, whilst disregarding the needs and terms of the rest of the world

• Correct .... we are now even further isolated as we are on our own.

We're no longer endorsing or promoting the "EU PROJECT", nor are our taxes/funds, resources and facilities being used to support its creation.

• Im a Socialist ... I really don't mind helping people of other countries to climb the ladder.

Speaking on behalf of the Ctrl, 'C' and 'V' keys on your keyboard - please give us a fucking rest and use some of the other keys