Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

Spanish Eyes

What's the point of a border if food produce of dubious traceability can enter the EU legally, well when the deal is signed that is.

Am I missing something?

lawred2

Maybe the expectation will be that to ship the beef here it will have to comply with EU regulations. So it might end up being only a subset of exporters from mercosur even bother trying to do so.

Lackadaisical

It depends on the details of the deal. I’ll have to have a read through whatever documents are available before I make uninformed comments.

fash

[Deleted User] wrote: »

This kind of makes a great target for Brexiteers, they see the Irish farmers being overruled by Germany (and others) who will benefit more from this deal than the farmers.

Considering the 48%, NI, Scotland and the average Brit who is going to be sold out at the first instant possible, you would wonder if they appreciate the irony at least.

An Ciarraioch

Olly Robbins quits:

https://twitter.com/ShippersUnbound/status/1145055712885846018

Johnson will instead get JRM, Barclay and Cox to craft his Brexit plan:

http://twitter.com/ShippersUnbound/status/1145077083930091521

ThePanjandrum

Akrasia wrote: »

Also the fact that a UK Court found that the leave campaign acted so illegally that if the result was actually binding, they would have been forced to call a re-run of the vote. The only reason they didn't force a re-run was because the result wasn't actually binding.

https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/james-obrien/brexit-referendum-corruptly-won-but-result-stands/

Jessica Simor, the rabid Remainer who had lost the case and James O'Brien are not reliable commentators in such cases, their whole outlook is biased by their bitterness.


Most of the claims made against the Brexit campaigners are tossed out by the courts, even the claim of Russian involvement which is so crucial to the Remainers argument has been dismissed by arch-Remainer Nick Clegg who has access to the records.


There is a difference between allegation and evidence.

Leroy42

20silkcut wrote: »

Leroy42 wrote: »

So is the proposed deal based on allowing below EU standard beef to be imported?

It’s allowing 100,000 tonnes of beef to be imported from countries with very questionable traceability standards and highly questionable food safety standards. And extremely questionable environmental standards.

So yes it is far far below EU standards.

But does it state that they have to meet no standards? Within those countries there are of course some very serious, and wealthy, companies/ producers. To offer them the chance to get access to 400m+ consumers would easily make them want to take up higher standards.

Of course not everyone will want/afford to but that makes policing the standards even easier.

J Mysterio

Dont recall seeing this at the time, but brilliant speech.

Recorded at the Pierhead on the 21st February 2018, Dáithí O’Ceallaigh (former Irish Ambassador in London) shares his sobering assessment of Brexit, from an Irish Perspective. This event was hosted by the Wales Governance Centre at Cardiff University.

Peregrinus

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

Jessica Simor, the rabid Remainer who had lost the case and James O'Brien are not reliable commentators in such cases, their whole outlook is biased by their bitterness.


Most of the claims made against the Brexit campaigners are tossed out by the courts, even the claim of Russian involvement which is so crucial to the Remainers argument has been dismissed by arch-Remainer Nick Clegg who has access to the records.

I think you mean ". . . the paid spokesman of Facebook Nick Clegg who has access to Facebook's records and so can confirm the extraordinary sums that Facebook received from the Leave campaign for advertising, but who doesn't have access to the Leave campaign's accounts and so has no idea where the Leave campaign got those sums, but arch-Brexiters like to try and create the impression that he does in a desperate attempt to try and create the impression that the Leave campaign has nothing to hide."

20silkcut

Leroy42 wrote: »

But does it state that they have to meet no standards? Within those countries there are of course some very serious, and wealthy, companies/ producers. To offer them the chance to get access to 400m+ consumers would easily make them want to take up higher standards.

Of course not everyone will want/afford to but that makes policing the standards even easier.

Beef traceability took many years to reach the point where it is today in the EU.
It was not a case of the EU just decided one day they were going to have a beef traceability system.
It took decades of changes in farmer behavior, veterinary standard,administrative organization, departmental implementation and it is ongoing constantly being tweaked and improved and as I said earlier it is rigorously backed up by the legal system in this country and any breaches of it are taken very seriously and farmers and people involved in the system face very serious penalties up to and including imprisonment. And there are cases currently before the courts involving cattle movement and identification.
This deal makes a nonsense of the entire system.
Brazil is currently at a point we were at probably in the 1960’s maybe further back. They are not going to change overnight and certainly not for 100,000 tonnes.
Clearly the Eu have decided that selling cars is more important than food safety and the health of its citizens.
Will they take mercosur countries to task and jeopardize this trade deal at some future point if standards in these countries are not improving??

Enzokk

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

Jessica Simor, the rabid Remainer who had lost the case and James O'Brien are not reliable commentators in such cases, their whole outlook is biased by their bitterness.


Most of the claims made against the Brexit campaigners are tossed out by the courts, even the claim of Russian involvement which is so crucial to the Remainers argument has been dismissed by arch-Remainer Nick Clegg who has access to the records.


There is a difference between allegation and evidence.

As the clip explains the courts have either ruled that the cases wasn't in time or that the referendum isn't binding so they have no authority to rule on the case. But politicians are treating it as binding, even though the courts keep telling them it is not and should not be treated as such.

Here is a few links to show that.

Brexit: Vote Leave broke electoral law, says Electoral Commission

The referendum was not legally binding, merely "advisory," according to a Supreme Court judgement in December 2016, so it can't be ordered to be re-run by a court - any decision to have a fresh referendum would have to be made by the government and Parliament would have to pass a referendum act.

The culture secretary said the EU referendum was binding – it wasn’t

The culture secretary, Karen Bradley, was doing the rounds of breakfast television this morning. She spoke to BBC Breakfast and ITV’s Good Morning Britain about her new plans for online safety.

But the discussion inevitably veered towards Brexit, after Theresa May’s interview yesterday in which she apparently refused to say if she’d vote to leave the EU in the event of a new referendum.

Ms Bradley told BBC Breakfast:

“We are delivering on the will of the British people from the binding referendum we had in June 2016 and we are leaving the European Union.”

Later, she used similar language on Good Morning Britain: “What I’m saying is that the British people in a binding referendum last year voted to leave the European Union”.

As for the legality of Vote Leave, well seeing as they dropped their case against the electoral commission and paid the highest possible fine that could be levied against them, we can say for a fact that they broke electoral laws. As for criminal, well we will have to wait and see if anything happens with that.

Media statement: Vote Leave

Vote Leave has today (Friday 29 March 2019) dropped its ​appeal and related proceedings against the Electoral Commission.

An Electoral Commission spokesperson said:

"Vote Leave has today (Friday 29 March 2019) withdrawn its appeal and related proceedings against the Electoral Commission’s finding of multiple offences under electoral law, committed during the 2016 EU referendum campaign.

"Vote Leave was the designated lead campaigner for the leave outcome at the referendum. We found that it broke the electoral rules set out by Parliament to ensure fairness, confidence and legitimacy at an electoral event. Serious offences such as these undermine public confidence in our system and it is vital, therefore, that they are properly investigated and sanctioned.

"Vote Leave has now paid its £61,000 fine in full."

Enzokk

20silkcut wrote: »

Beef traceability took many years to reach the point where it is today in the EU.
It was not a case of the EU just decided one day they were going to have a beef traceability system.
It took decades of changes in farmer behavior, veterinary standard,administrative organization, departmental implementation and it is ongoing constantly being tweaked and improved and as I said earlier it is rigorously backed up by the legal system in this country and any breaches of it are taken very seriously and farmers and people involved in the system face very serious penalties up to and including imprisonment. And there are cases currently before the courts involving cattle movement and identification.
This deal makes a nonsense of the entire system.
Brazil is currently at a point we were at probably in the 1960’s maybe further back. They are not going to change overnight and certainly not for 100,000 tonnes.
Clearly the Eu have decided that selling cars is more important than the standard of beef.
Will they take mercosur countries to task and jeopardize this trade deal at some future point if standards in these countries are not improving??

I have a question, beef that is sold in the EU at the moment from outside the EU, does that have to conform to EU standards?

Valhallapt

If the Irish govt. was to hint that there would be animal checks brought in at the border immediately after a hard Brexit. Say one inspection post north of Dundalk, which would be woefully under capacity. Would this not put the fear of God into Farmers in NI, who are a big part of the DUP grass roots.

Could the increased threat of a hard border put pressure on the DUP to relax their principles?

I know some of the DUP dream of a hard border, but if that were to come to pass they’d lose massive support perhaps pushing SF to the biggest party in next election, perhaps that thought is less palitable than the backstop

Stop moaning ffs

Tony Connollys latest piece gets into the border in detail. It seems nobody knows what to plan for as nobody knows what will come in October so if the leave 31st hard planning happens nobvember 1st.

https://www.rte.ie/news/analysis-and-comment/2019/0628/1059105-brexit-deal-border/

20silkcut

Enzokk wrote: »

I have a question, beef that is sold in the EU at the moment from outside the EU, does that have to conform to EU standards?

Don’t want to divert this topic into discussing beef but

Yes beef imported to the EU is subjected to the same QC standards as EU beef.

But if anything is found or if someone suffers ill affects from consuming beef the EU beef can be traced right back to the individual farmer who produced it.

The imported beef can not.

Enzokk

20silkcut wrote: »

Don’t want to divert this topic into discussing beef but

Yes beef imported to the EU is subjected to the same QC standards as EU beef.

But if anything is found or if someone suffers ill affects from consuming beef the EU beef can be traced right back to the individual farmer who produced it.

The imported beef can not.

This is a divert, but I feel it ties into Brexit because of the supposed deal the UK can have with South American countries for cheap meat. With the EU deal you have to question either assumptions on the deal and a future deal for the UK.

I am trying to find out if you can trace imports as you would in the EU, but even if you cannot trace it to one farm you surely would be able to trace it to an importer and see where in the chain a problem came in, right? I mean if we there is already imports from South America for beef then there are already checks being made. The difference is this will now just be cheaper to sell in shops.

So the question then is, has there been a problem with beef imports from South America thus far in terms of quality?

Stop moaning ffs

Doesn’t most of the beef in McDonald’s in the states come from South America?
Thought I read that somehwere

20silkcut

Enzokk wrote: »

This is a divert, but I feel it ties into Brexit because of the supposed deal the UK can have with South American countries for cheap meat. With the EU deal you have to question either assumptions on the deal and a future deal for the UK.

I am trying to find out if you can trace imports as you would in the EU, but even if you cannot trace it to one farm you surely would be able to trace it to an importer and see where in the chain a problem came in, right? I mean if we there is already imports from South America for beef then there are already checks being made. The difference is this will now just be cheaper to sell in shops.

So the question then is, has there been a problem with beef imports from South America thus far in terms of quality?

Yes without getting into too much detail there are massive ongoing food safety concerns with Brazilian beef and the US and China have banned its import.

A quick google will tell ya all you need to know.

And yes it does tie into brexit.
This demonstrates that the EU is fully prepared to abandon its own standards in light of the brexit situation it is a very worrying development.
It is the throw under the bus moment.
We just did not predict it would be this bus.
And it may not be the last thing thrown under a bus.

Inquitus

The EU consumes 8m Tonnes of beef annually, the Mercosur quotas will be around 2.5% of that, not sure its statistically significant enough to get our knickers in a twist over, Brexit is a far bigger threat to that industry.

Shelga

Peregrinus wrote: »

I think you mean ". . . the paid spokesman of Facebook Nick Clegg who has access to Facebook's records and so can confirm the extraordinary sums that Facebook received from the Leave campaign for advertising, but who doesn't have access to the Leave campaign's accounts and so has no idea where the Leave campaign got those sums, but arch-Brexiters like to try and create the impression that he does in a desperate attempt to try and create the impression that the Leave campaign has nothing to hide."

Exactly! Nick Clegg lost any shred of credibility or integrity he ever had, when he took that role at Facebook. He is just a paid mouthpiece now who will do as he is told. Quite disappointing really, I used to like him when he was leader of the Lib Dems.

BobbyBobberson

Shelga wrote: »

Exactly! Nick Clegg lost any shred of credibility or integrity he ever had, when he took that role at Facebook. He is just a paid mouthpiece now who will do as he is told. Quite disappointing really, I used to like him when he was leader of the Lib Dems.

Gone before that I would say. Student fees being his biggest gaffe. Also allowing a cut in welfare for 5p charges on plastic bags.

The Olly Robbins hate is bizarre. The man must laugh when he hears people are delighted he is leaving. He had a ridiculously hard brief thanks to May's redlines and got as best a deal he could. Not like he had a competent and stable government backing him.

20silkcut

Inquitus wrote: »

The EU consumes 8m Tonnes of beef annually, the Mercosur quotas will be around 2.5% of that, not sure its statistically significant enough to get our knickers in a twist over, Brexit is a far bigger threat to that industry.

The curates egg comes to mind.

So only 2.5% of beef on our shelves is potentially dodgy.

Very re-assuring.

Inquitus

20silkcut wrote: »

The curates egg comes to mind.

So only 2.5% of beef on our shelves is potentially dodgy.

Very re-assuring.

It's not gonna make much headway here, all our stores clearly label irish beef with the bord bia stamp, no chance of me buying dodgy beef. Even McDees and BK only use Irish beef.

20silkcut

Inquitus wrote: »

It's not gonna make much headway here, all our stores clearly label irish beef with the bord bia stamp, no chance of me buying dodgy beef. Even McDees and BK only use Irish beef.

Ok grand I don’t want to get into a back and forth here in this issue.

But all I will say is you could be served dodgy beef in a restaurant etc etc. And not everyone will be as selective about their beef. Public health is being put at risk without the ability to trace problems and issues in the supply chain.

I think it’s important to just highlight the reality of the situation here and how brexit is going to pose such huge challenges to the integrity of the EU.
Obviously the EU is forseeing serious choppy waters ahead that it went ahead and signed this deal. That’s what worries me. It is very much out of character.
These are strange times.

Capt'n Midnight

Valhallapt wrote: »

Would this not put the fear of God into Farmers in NI, who are a big part of the DUP grass roots.

Could the increased threat of a hard border put pressure on the DUP to relax their principles?

The big issue for NI farmers is that the EU's Common Agricultural Policy is what provides most of their income, apart from pig farmers.

https://factcheckni.org/facts/europe/do-our-farmers-receive-62-of-income-from-eu/


Grove promised £3Bn UK wide to replace EU funds. But there were environmental strings attached. And since he backstabbed Boris it's unlikely he'll be in a position to deliver.

Shelga

Jeremy Hunt is heavily pushing his policy of reducing the corporate tax rate to 12.5% if he is elected as PM- 'just like Ireland'.

Also says that if the only way to leave the EU is with no deal 'then I will do that.'

The economy will tank in the case of a no deal exit, so he can reduce corporation tax as much as he wants- if businesses are making less money then that's significantly less tax for the exchequer anyway.

Marr asks him again about his terrifying comments at the hustings in Birmingham that he thinks destroying companies like that one in Kidderminster is worth it for ideological reasons, he says "I would do it with a heavy heart." Is he actually insane? How was this party ever considered the party of business?

Beechwoodspark

Shelga wrote: »

Jeremy Hunt is heavily pushing his policy of reducing the corporate tax rate to 12.5% if he is elected as PM- 'just like Ireland'.

Also says that if the only way to leave the EU is with no deal 'then I will do that.'

The economy will tank in the case of a no deal exit, so he can reduce corporation tax as much as he wants- if businesses are making less money then that's significantly less tax for the exchequer anyway.

Marr asks him again about his terrifying comments at the hustings in Birmingham that he thinks destroying companies like that one in Kidderminster is worth it for ideological reasons, he says "I would do it with a heavy heart." Is he actually insane? How was this party ever considered the party of business?

Don’t forget who his electorate is this time -

Largely elderly and out of touch Home Counties golf club set who want Brexit at any cost. “Get on with it” is the mantra.

Shelga

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Don’t forget who his electorate is this time -

Largely elderly and out of touch Home Counties golf club set who want Brexit at any cost. “Get on with it” is the mantra.

I get that, but are Conservative party members really so heartless and uncaring about their fellow citizens? Or do they really believe that the plucky British WW2 spirit will see them through and it really won't be as bad as all that? I hope they're delusional rather than spiteful.

And shouldn't Hunt be challenging this line of thought, either way? Oh yeah, that would require him to have a spine.

I was over in England meeting up with some old work colleagues on Friday. A few of them are fairly Brexity. They agree the whole thing is a mess, but still want to leave. We didn't spend too long chatting about it though as I just find it so unbelievably depressing at this point.

ancapailldorcha

Shelga wrote: »

Exactly! Nick Clegg lost any shred of credibility or integrity he ever had, when he took that role at Facebook. He is just a paid mouthpiece now who will do as he is told. Quite disappointing really, I used to like him when he was leader of the Lib Dems.

As BobbyBobberson has said, it was the tuition fees scandal that killed his career. Austerity surely didn't help either, mind.

I was a tad hopeful when he took the Facebook job. He's a big believer in privacy and vetoed May's attempts to bring in the snooper's charter during the coalition years. I don't know if he'll be able to, or even inclined to do much at Facebook though.

BobbyBobberson

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Don’t forget who his electorate is this time -

Largely elderly and out of touch Home Counties golf club set who want Brexit at any cost. “Get on with it” is the mantra.

Absolutely, I don't know does anyone follow Tim Montgomerie on Twitter (founder of conservative home) but he tweeted the other day from speaking at Owen Pattersons house and the crowd just made me LOL. Not representative of the UK should we say.

These 150,000 people voting for the next PM and the outcome of Brexit all have their money made and will be insulated from all of this. In fact should an almighty crash happen post Brexit then most will buy some cheap property I imagine. 1/6 of Boomers in the UK own a second home, they are all sorted.