|
||||||||
Guardian: EU agrees to push UK into Hard Brexit |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#651 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 2,650
|
Quote:
Your problem is that what you did post is still there for all to see, instead of explaining that you pointed me to that standard which contained no such quote.
Sensible people would be able to infer from the written standard that such products were unable to be sold direct to the public - as confirmed by the last EU reference I posted. Quote:
It was only when you asked me how such produce could be bought or sold I pointed out that retail was not the only channel for sales.
Nonsense - selling to non -retail producers is NOT selling yo the direct public which was the point of that stupid regulation. The 'pie' producers could buy these over 'bendy' products , because they were not going to sell them direct to the public - they would cut the veg/fruit up and use that Quote:
You then tried to pretend that you'd earlier explained yourself but backed down when asked to commit to this.
Quote:
Of course I've repeatedly showed quotes a EVIDENCE of all of this, you've provided none, because there are none.
That's your biggest lie of all. You still confuse your opinions with facts - no matter how much you risibly bleat to the contrary. Quote:
The standard was requested by the industry for packing reasons.
Still irrelevant - the details of the regulations were ridiculous - as subsequently proven by the wide criticism , and it's repeal - which clearly endorses the fact that it was 'needless' .Quote:
You've not understood what the issue is here at all, that's why we prefer people like the EU who can comprehend these things making decisions instead of people like yourself in a referendum.
The EU are not people - and only an idiot would suggest that there is anything uniquely sensible about the EU, from the UK's perspective . Non- thinkers like yourself , don't care two hoots about democracy -and would much prefer to me members of the USSE. You are entitled to hold that opinion, but not entitled to continually lie about the 'need' for it. It is a totally unnecessary, and very expensive as well as being an undemocratic political union, which neither you, nor any other Europhile have been able to justify. The only benefit to be derived is from free trade - and that could easily be achieved by having a FTA - but of course , the Commissars would lose their fabulous fortunes wouldn't they? Fortunately there were more sensible people involved in the referendum than there are soviet style worshippers in the UK. Quote:
The biggest economic benefit comes from producing more efficient vacuums and not needing those seven power stations at all
.Rubbish - not all 'cleaning ' is done at the same time - so to claim that hypothetical 7 more power stations would be needed needed is just more EU worshipping nonsense. The UK's power capacity is over 40 terrabytes, whereas, your ridiculous theoreticlal example of a 23.5 million dwellings instantaneously requiring 2HP would be within that capacity by 14% - so your requirement for another 7 power stations is nonsense. - and as usual from yourself, unsupported by credible evidence. That isn't to say that the UK power generation capacity is not at a critical level - but that is partly down to the EU's ridiculous, and impractical policy of saving the plant!! Apparently, last winter came very close to causing power cuts - and we will have seemingly reduced our generation capacity since then - so even without your ridiculous 'power needed' surge, it is certainly possible that there will be insufficient capacity to cope. EU impractical Ultra PC requirements, coupled with weak UK governments can be rightly blamed for that . ] |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#652 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London SW6
Posts: 37,481
|
Quote:
Any chance you could post a link re - 7 new power stations required if we do not use more efficient vacuum cleaners?
https://ec.europa.eu/energy/en/topic...acuum-cleaners http://ec.europa.eu/archives/rebutta...ners-ever.html |
|
|
|
|
|
#653 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London SW6
Posts: 37,481
|
Quote:
Don't hold your breath for that from this one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#654 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Lancashire
Posts: 8,259
|
Quote:
Blimey, sorry for being out all day - makes me hope you support the team I saw us spanking today.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#655 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London SW6
Posts: 37,481
|
Quote:
And your problem is your absolutely pathetic understanding of the written word. Your ridiculous responses make that exceedingly clear. Why don't you show confirmation of your lying claim that I stated it was in the standard?
Here's EVIDENCE of where you posted the quote: Quote:
Already forgotten the classic -European Commission Regulation No. 1677/88, "Class I" and "Extra class" cucumbers are allowed a bend of 10mm per 10cm of length. "Class II" cucumbers can bend twice as much. Any cucumbers that are curvier may not be bought or sold.
Quote:
A 'clue' was already provided -
European Commission Regulation No. 1677/88, Quote:
Sensible people would be able to infer from the written standard that such products were unable to be sold direct to the public - as confirmed by the last EU reference I posted. "Any cucumbers that are curvier may not be bought or sold." To infer "direct to the public" would not be sensible, it would be stupid, because that's not what was said or implied by the sentence "Any cucumbers that are curvier may not be bought or sold."Nonsense - selling to non -retail producers is NOT selling yo the direct public which was the point of that stupid regulation. The 'pie' producers could buy these over 'bendy' products , because they were not going to sell them direct to the public - they would cut the veg/fruit up and use that There's a full stop at the end of the sentence, "Any cucumbers that are curvier may not be bought or sold [full stop]". Quote:
That's your biggest lie of all. You still confuse your opinions with facts - no matter how much you risibly bleat to the contrary.
Yeah, right, see above.Quote:
Still irrelevant - the details of the regulations were ridiculous - as subsequently proven by the wide criticism , and it's repeal - which clearly endorses the fact that it was 'needless' .
Only to you with your fake foreign propaganda additions to it.Quote:
The EU are not people - and only an idiot would suggest that there is anything uniquely sensible about the EU, from the UK's perspective . Non- thinkers like yourself , don't care two hoots about democracy -and would much prefer to me members of the USSE. You are entitled to hold that opinion, but not entitled to continually lie about the 'need' for it. It is a totally unnecessary, and very expensive as well as being an undemocratic political union, which neither you, nor any other Europhile have been able to justify. All that bluster just to cover up the fact that you didn't know the vacuum regs had efficiency requirements as well as power.The only benefit to be derived is from free trade - and that could easily be achieved by having a FTA - but of course , the Commissars would lose their fabulous fortunes wouldn't they? Fortunately there were more sensible people involved in the referendum than there are soviet style worshippers in the UK. Quote:
Rubbish - not all 'cleaning ' is done at the same time - so to claim that hypothetical 7 more power stations would be needed needed is just more EU worshipping nonsense. Or we could just use less electricity to do the same thing. And the power station thing, corrected now, was for the whole of the EU, not just the UK.
The UK's power capacity is over 40 terrabytes, whereas, your ridiculous theoreticlal example of a 23.5 million dwellings instantaneously requiring 2HP would be within that capacity by 14% - so your requirement for another 7 power stations is nonsense. - and as usual from yourself, unsupported by credible evidence. That isn't to say that the UK power generation capacity is not at a critical level - but that is partly down to the EU's ridiculous, and impractical policy of saving the plant!! Apparently, last winter came very close to causing power cuts - and we will have seemingly reduced our generation capacity since then - so even without your ridiculous 'power needed' surge, it is certainly possible that there will be insufficient capacity to cope. EU impractical Ultra PC requirements, coupled with weak UK governments can be rightly blamed for that . |
|
|
|
|
|
#656 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Lancashire
Posts: 8,259
|
Quote:
Looks like I got the figure wrong, it's four power stations or the emissions from 8 existing ones, I might have got the seven figure from the saving if the EU had been allowed to do the same for kettles and irons:
https://ec.europa.eu/energy/en/topic...acuum-cleaners http://ec.europa.eu/archives/rebutta...ners-ever.html https://www.rt.com/uk/342657-kettle-toaster-eu-ban/ |
|
|
|
|
|
#657 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London SW6
Posts: 37,481
|
Quote:
What team do you support, and, who did you beat today??
|
|
|
|
|
|
#658 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Lancashire
Posts: 8,259
|
Quote:
A bit too much information. Let's just say that I might be too easy to pick out on a worse season at a more distant away end terrace.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#659 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London SW6
Posts: 37,481
|
Quote:
This article suggests Mr Juncker would like to go ahead with a ban on certain electrical appliances.
https://www.rt.com/uk/342657-kettle-toaster-eu-ban/ Now, where does the EU import much of its energy from and where was that inflammatory article from? |
|
|
|
|
|
#660 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London SW6
Posts: 37,481
|
Quote:
Ahh Ok, I have never set foot in a football stadium in my life, except when I had to work in one
|
|
|
|
|
|
#661 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Wammy's House
Posts: 4,783
|
William Keegan hits the back of the net e Brexit:
https://www.theguardian.com/business...t-us-fast-show The last thing that the Europeans we are supposed to be “negotiating with” are prepared to do is let Britain off lightly: they are rightly terrified about a domino effect. It is “Brexit or nothing”. Yet in the fantasy land of current British politics, Brexiters and others are kidding themselves into believing that the others do not mean what they say. All this stuff about “soft Brexits” and “medium Brexits” is pie in the sky. I can hear Paul Whitehouse, in a revival of The Fast Show, asking: “How do you like your Brexit, madam? Rare or medium – or perhaps well done?” The fact is that at present, by being members of the EU but not of the seriously troubled eurozone, Britain has the best of both worlds. Too many people are caving in to the view that, in a non-binding referendum, “the people have spoken”. |
|
|
|
|
#662 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 2,650
|
Quote:
Sure:
Here's EVIDENCE of where you posted the quote: And when I asked for a credible link for that you directed me to: Quote:
"Any cucumbers that are curvier may not be bought or sold." To infer "direct to the public" would not be sensible, it would be stupid, because that's not what was said or implied by the sentence "Any cucumbers that are curvier may not be bought or sold."
One didn't have to 'infer' anything - As usual, there was a host of regulation pertinent to fruit and veg, and you have seen one at least which actually spelled out clearly the retail involvement - but one won't be able to find a definition of 'abnormal curvature' anywhere in the regs......now how daft is that???Quote:
There's a full stop at the end of the sentence, of which retailers clearly had to be aware of to prevent them 'breaking the rules' "Any cucumbers that are curvier may not be bought or sold [full stop]".
Nonsense - retailers have to be totally aware of what they can and cannot do - even wrt stupid regulations --- ignorance is no defence etc..Quote:
Yeah, right, see above. Of course it's 'foreign' ....it is an International Council. - but, maybe you just don't understand the meaning of the word 'propaganda'.Only to you with your fake foreign propaganda additions to it. Quote:
All that bluster just to cover up the fact that you didn't know the vacuum regs had efficiency requirements as well as power.
Crap - the issue we were debating was associated with that stupid comment of yours about IF multi - million housewives wanted to switche on their vacuum cleaners, having all bought new ones which were 2HP more powerful, we would require another 7 power stations.Well maybe you would really like to change your ingrained habits - and actually provide credible evidence of another one of your wild claims. Quote:
Or we could just use less electricity to do the same thing. And the power station thing, corrected now, was for the whole of the EU, not just the UK.
It WAS supposedly a EU regulation ------and the idea is fine - if the more efficient machines are available - but if not, those carpets will probably be dirtier, and cause more problems for asthmatics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#663 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 2,650
|
Quote:
William Keegan hits the back of the net e Brexit:
https://www.theguardian.com/business...t-us-fast-show The last thing that the Europeans we are supposed to be “negotiating with” are prepared to do is let Britain off lightly: they are rightly terrified about a domino effect. It is “Brexit or nothing”. Yet in the fantasy land of current British politics, Brexiters and others are kidding themselves into believing that the others do not mean what they say. All this stuff about “soft Brexits” and “medium Brexits” is pie in the sky. I can hear Paul Whitehouse, in a revival of The Fast Show, asking: “How do you like your Brexit, madam? Rare or medium – or perhaps well done?” The fact is that at present, by being members of the EU but not of the seriously troubled eurozone, Britain has the best of both worlds. Too many people are caving in to the view that, in a non-binding referendum, “the people have spoken”. And to claim that we have the best of both worlds is nonsense. Why the hell do we need another expensive Parliament, mostly not elected by ourselves, cede control of our borders , and have an Executive that consists of unelected persons. The benefit we currently derive, is via free trade - an FTA would be far better, and cheaper to administer - and, we would have the ability to make our own trade deals with non-EU countries, factoring what benefits the UK, not an EU 'average'. Now that is a win-win situation. |
|
|
|
|
|
#664 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London SW6
Posts: 37,481
|
Quote:
As I keep telling you - you are incapable of providing evidence for ANYTHING!! I have told you, that the paragraph was highlighted because it was a quote from an International Policy Council; when you asked where it came from, I referred you to the EU regulation no - expecting someone to read it to you, from which , it could be concluded, as the International Policy Council did - that it banned certain products from direct sale to the public
Quote:
Already forgotten the classic -European Commission Regulation No. 1677/88, "Class I" and "Extra class" cucumbers are allowed a bend of 10mm per 10cm of length. "Class II" cucumbers can bend twice as much. Any cucumbers that are curvier may not be bought or sold.
Quote:
A 'clue' was already provided -
European Commission Regulation No. 1677/88, Or any mention of retail. Quote:
- which you claimed wasn't correct. . So I then provided 'as clear as daylight ' evidence that you were, as usual, absolutely incorrect, by posting another EU regulation - Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007, which lays down specific rules with regards to the selling of fruit and vegetable.
A different regulation that has zero bearing,Quote:
One didn't have to 'infer' anything - As usual, there was a host of regulation pertinent to fruit and veg, and you have seen one at least which actually spelled out clearly the retail involvement - but one won't be able to find a definition of 'abnormal curvature' anywhere in the regs......now how daft is that???
More irrelevant diversion. We're talking about one regulation. Stick to it.Quote:
Nonsense - retailers have to be totally aware of what they can and cannot do - even wrt stupid regulations --- ignorance is no defence etc..
You've made a cut and paste error and added something that wasn't in my post.Quote:
Of course it's 'foreign' ....it is an International Council. - but, maybe you just don't understand the meaning of the word 'propaganda'.
Er, just because it says it's an "international policy council" doesn't mean it doesn't have the interests of one nation at heart and not this one. It exists to promote US interests, a mission you seem quite keen to help it in, against our best interests. Of course, you might just be a loyal US citizen helping your country.Quote:
Crap - the issue we were debating was associated with that stupid comment of yours about IF multi - million housewives wanted to switche on their vacuum cleaners, having all bought new ones which were 2HP more powerful, we would require another 7 power stations. <sigh> I've already admitted I got the seven wrong and have provided evidence for the claim of four power stations. You don't seem to be able to see anything I post.Well maybe you would really like to change your ingrained habits - and actually provide credible evidence of another one of your wild claims. Quote:
It WAS supposedly a EU regulation ------and the idea is fine - if the more efficient machines are available - but if not, those carpets will probably be dirtier, and cause more problems for asthmatics.
Well, if the more efficient machines weren't available there would be no vacuums in the shops.And the carpets probably won't be as big a problem for asthmatics as four power stations. |
|
|
|
|
|
#665 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 2,650
|
Quote:
No, the public wasn't mentioned. I'll repeat the EVIDENCE that you are worryingly psychologically incapable of acknowledging:
Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007, with effect from 1 July 2008, the provisions of Council Regulation (EC) No 1182/2007 (3), which lays down specific rules as regards the fruit and vegetable sector, without calling into question the underlying policy choices. These provisions state that fruit and vegetables which are intended to be sold fresh to the consumer, may only be marketed if they are sound, fair and of marketable quality and if the country of origin is indicated. In the interest of harmonisation of the implementation of this provision, it is appropriate to define these characteristics in providing for a general marketing standard for all fresh fruits and vegetables. No mention of retail, when asked for a credible link for the quote you said: Which didn't contain the quote. Or any mention of retail. A different regulation that has zero bearing, More irrelevant diversion. We're talking about one regulation. Stick to it. You've made a cut and paste error and added something that wasn't in my post. Er, just because it says it's an "international policy council" doesn't mean it doesn't have the interests of one nation at heart and not this one. It exists to promote US interests, a mission you seem quite keen to help it in, against our best interests. Of course, you might just be a loyal US citizen helping your country. <sigh> I've already admitted I got the seven wrong and have provided evidence for the claim of four power stations. You don't seem to be able to see anything I post. Well, if the more efficient machines weren't available there would be no vacuums in the shops. And the carpets probably won't be as big a problem for asthmatics as four power stations. Incidentally, to ease your difficulty in understanding reference to the public - I have highlighted, and repeated the the give away line in Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007, that you referenced - B]which are intended to be sold fresh to the consumer,[/b] The consumer IS the public - not the retailer, wholesaler etc.......and selling to the consumer is RETAIL |
|
|
|
|
|
#666 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 2,658
|
Are people still talking about cucumbers? Whats happening an epidemic of boris johnston syndrome?
Cumumbers are not an issue. They are not a relevant example of the EU being negative. The whole time we have been in the EU i have had access to as much cucumber as i want. This is just the sort of thing which has been inflated in peoples mind to make them think of the EU as some sort of bogieman. |
|
|
|
|
|
#667 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London SW6
Posts: 37,481
|
Quote:
Sadly, once again you prove that you are incapable of conducting an adult debate. You must live in a dream world - and despite your claim, you never provide credible evidence, ( which by definition is impossible where you are concerned), If you owned up to being wrong - it must have been on another forum
Quote:
Looks like I got the figure wrong, it's four power stations or the emissions from 8 existing ones, I might have got the seven figure from the saving if the EU had been allowed to do the same for kettles and irons:
https://ec.europa.eu/energy/en/topic...acuum-cleaners http://ec.europa.eu/archives/rebutta...ners-ever.html Quote:
- but even your 'claimed' 4 power stations, which hasn't been posted here to my knowledge, could always prove me wrong by you pointing out the post.....but even if you had, I doubt it would contain 'credible' evidence.
Your standards for "credible" are somewhat different from normal people. So you believe a foreign propaganda institute over the the text of the actual standard.Quote:
Incidentally, to ease your difficulty in understanding reference to the public - I have highlighted, and repeated the the give away line in Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007, that you referenced - B]which are intended to be sold fresh to the consumer,[/b] And that still doesn't justify your "Any cucumbers that are curvier may not be bought or sold [full stop]" because that neither mentions nor implies retail.The consumer IS the public - not the retailer, wholesaler etc.......and selling to the consumer is RETAIL Edit: And is a different regulation entirely anyway! Here's the EVIDENCE: Quote:
A 'clue' was already provided -
European Commission Regulation No. 1677/88, |
|
|
|
|
|
#668 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Wammy's House
Posts: 4,783
|
Even hard Brexit could be a problem as WTO membership isn't a shoe in (though I was under the impression the UK didn't need to apply) :
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7468766.html Brexit Britain’s drive for a new World Trade Organisation settlement could be blocked by countries with which the UK has territorial disputes such as Argentina or Spain, experts warned today. The UK will need unanimous agreement from all the WTO’s 160-odd members for its new “schedule” to set baselines for future trade deals. But specialists at the Institute of Export told The Independent some countries may use the opportunity to force the UK to compromise on other issues. |
|
|
|
|
#669 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 2,650
|
Quote:
Even hard Brexit could be a problem as WTO membership isn't a shoe in (though I was under the impression the UK didn't need to apply) :
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7468766.html Brexit Britain’s drive for a new World Trade Organisation settlement could be blocked by countries with which the UK has territorial disputes such as Argentina or Spain, experts warned today. The UK will need unanimous agreement from all the WTO’s 160-odd members for its new “schedule” to set baselines for future trade deals. But specialists at the Institute of Export told The Independent some countries may use the opportunity to force the UK to compromise on other issues. |
|
|
|
|
|
#670 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 2,650
|
Quote:
You really can't get anything right, can you? Here,again, is the EVIDENCE [that you still laughably say I never provide]:
Incidentally, you didn't address that post to me - and I don't always read the tripe that you post to other forum users - but, as I have said - you HAVEN'T provided evidence at all - you have only provided a EU report on vacuum efficiencies etc - which clearly relates the TWh to improved efficiencies - and is NOT related to HP - and it actually emphasises that it is NOT HP which relates to the efficiency of a cleaner - so I'll ask again, where is the evidence to support your 4/8 or undecided additional power stations to meet a mythical, and never to be experienced 'event'. Quote:
Your standards for "credible" are somewhat different from normal people. So you believe a foreign propaganda institute over the the text of the actual standard.
Well it is up to you to credibly demonstrate that an International Council are a) propagandising and b) wrong...and I did send you an EU Reg which you laughably do not understand because you don't realise the 'consumers' are the public.Quote:
And that still doesn't justify your "Any cucumbers that are curvier may not be bought or sold [full stop]" because that neither mentions nor implies retail
. I did qualify that - and the public WERE prevented from purchasing such products, as verified by that other EU reg link - but even though you don't seem to understand the 'application' of minimum standards, that patently stupid regulation clearly confused many people with not defining 'abrnormal curvature'Quote:
Edit: And is a different regulation entirely anyway! Here's the EVIDENCE:
You've already been told that there are many regulations produced for the various sectors - many interrelated - but how strange that an 'EU regulation expert' such as yourself should so strongly disagree with those actually involved in growing the product'.Why didn't you tell them they were wrong!! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...egetables.html By Bruno Waterfield in Brussels 12:00AM GMT 12 Nov 2008 Curvy cucumbers, knobbly carrots, wonky aubergines and ugly artichokes will go on sale in shops again after unpopular European Union rules dictating the size and shape of fruit and vegetables are scrapped. A bunch of carrots. EU rules governing the sale of many vegetables are being scrapped Carrots of any shape will be allowed as EU rules are scrapped But the notorious regulation which dictates that "straight" bananas must be "free from malformation or abnormal curvature" will remain in place because "no objections from banana growers, buyers, traders or consumers have been received regarding this requirement". The rules are being dropped to cut red tape after growing protests from supermarkets, grocers, and farmers, including the Prince of Wales, who have been forced to throw away produce that does not measure up to exacting requirements drawn up by eurocrats decades ago. An estimated 20 per cent of the British harvest is thrown away to comply with the EU regulations, rules which have been calculated to add as much as 40 per cent to the price of some vegetables, such as carrots. "Nature does not always comply with a perfectly rounded apple and poker-straight carrot. People should be given the chance to buy odd-shaped fruit and veg as they taste just as good," said NFU Horticulture board chairman Richard Hirst. Commission officials, long mocked in the press for rules setting the appropriate curvature of cucumbers, are also concerned that at a time of high food prices and economic recession fruit and vegetables are being wasted "just because they are the wrong shape". Two weeks ago, Sainsbury's was forced to ditch a healthy Halloween eating campaign built around "zombie brains" cauliflowers, "witches fingers" carrots and "ogres toenails" cucumbers - all misshapen vegetables that are currently banned from sale under EU rules. Last June, Tim Down, a market trader in Bristol was prevented by food inspectors from selling kiwi fruits because they were 1mm smaller than EU rules allowed. He lost £1,000 in sales and was not even permitted to give away the 5,000 fruits because they breached kiwi regulations. The proposals would maintain specific marketing standards for: apples, citrus fruit, kiwi fruit, lettuces, peaches and nectarines, pears, strawberries, sweet peppers, table grapes and tomatoes. But they can be relaxed if national trading standards authorities give the all clear and the produce is clearly labelled Mr Down said: "In the EU, the fruit and veg looks much more natural. Even though it's a decision by the EU, we've implememented it more rigourously than in the EU. "When I was stopped from selling kiwis last year - I was incredibly annoyed because it had 100 per cent of the recommended vitamins, despite being a tiny bit smaller. "I am delighted with the decision. I feel vindicated, it's common sense at last in the face of EU bureacracy." The rule changes will be implemented from July 1 next year. One of the regulations to be scrapped includes guidelines that set down the stringent EU requirements for leeks, aubergines and courgettes. "The white part of the leek must represent at least one-third of the total length or half the sheathed part," states the regulation. "The difference between the smallest and largest aubergines in the same package must not exceed 20mm for elongated aubergines [and] 25mm for globus aubergines." Neil Parish, a Conservative Euro-MP and chairman of the European Parliament's agriculture committee, said: "Food is food, no matter what it looks like. These crazy rules have to go immediately. To stop stores selling perfectly decent food during a food crisis is morally unjustifiable |
|
|
|
|
|
#671 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London SW6
Posts: 37,481
|
Quote:
Clearly your helpers are not being very helpful to you are they? But I had thought that even you had sufficient sense to understand a clear explanation- but obviously not!!
Quote:
Incidentally, you didn't address that post to me
I didn't address that post to anyone, it was in reply to someone else though.Quote:
- and I don't always read the tripe that you post to other forum users
Then you are admitting that you make accusations without the facts. well done.Quote:
- but, as I have said - you HAVEN'T provided evidence at all - you have only provided a EU report on vacuum efficiencies etc - which clearly relates the TWh to improved efficiencies - and is NOT related to HP - and it actually emphasises that it is NOT HP which relates to the efficiency of a cleaner - so I'll ask again, where is the evidence to support your 4/8 or undecided additional power stations to meet a mythical, and never to be experienced 'event'.
Er. have your read the link? Why are you talking about "HP"?"The new rules will save 19 terawatt-hour per year by 2020, which is the electricity produced by more than 4 power plants" Quote:
Well it is up to you to credibly demonstrate that an International Council are a) propagandising and b) wrong...and I did send you an EU Reg which you laughably do not understand because you don't realise the 'consumers' are the public.
You're doing your wrong quote thing again. The EU reg for cucumbers you pointed me to didn't have the text you quoted nor did it have the effect of that text. I'll remind you again, "Any cucumbers that are curvier may not be bought or sold [full stop]" does not make any differentiation between retail consumers or any other possible purchasers.Quote:
. I did qualify that - and the public WERE prevented from purchasing such products, as verified by that other EU reg link
"other" as in a completely different regulation for completely different products. Or what we call an irrelevant diversion.Quote:
- but even though you don't seem to understand the 'application' of minimum standards, that patently stupid regulation clearly confused many people with not defining 'abrnormal curvature'
Dissembling again.Quote:
You've already been told that there are many regulations produced for the various sectors - many interrelated
But these two aren't interrelated, it's just your dissembling again.Quote:
- but how strange that an 'EU regulation expert' such as yourself should so strongly disagree with those actually involved in growing the product'. Because they're not, just you and the American Gatestone institute; the Telegraph, unlike you originally or the Gatestone Institute, specifically added the qualification "in shops"
Why didn't you tell them they were wrong!! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...egetables.html |
|
|
|
|
|
#672 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London SW6
Posts: 37,481
|
Quote:
I believe your 'lmpression' is nearer the mark - as if no ensuing post - Btrexit trade deal can be agreed with the EU, then WTO rules will automatically apply......and WTO rules provide for non-discrimination in tariffs, and in addition, do not allow punitive measures to be taken by any WTO country.....which is the majority.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#673 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 2,650
|
Quote:
But tariffs where there were no tariffs before is itself quite punitive.
WHY is it necessary in order to obtain economic benefit from trade, to have to pay a huge social cost with the annual payment of an extortionate membership-fee/subsidy as well as elements of sovereignty, in order to obtain economic benefit from trade? There aren't many countries in the world daft enough to do that!! - and to add a ludicrous additional tier of Parliament, in an attempt to disguise the undemocratic nature of the Union is totally unacceptable - which fortunately, the country has now woken up to. You aren't the only one unable to offer a credible reason for continuing membership of this soviet construct ....but that isn't a great surprise. You just blindly continue to ignore the obvious fact that outside of the EU, we would be free to negotiate, with a far larger community, trade deals more equitable for our own requirements - and, without having to pay a huge premium for that!! The benefits gained would far outweigh the so called benefits obtained from the current, unnecessary membership of a political union in order to derive mutual benefit from trade. |
|
|
|
|
|
#674 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London SW6
Posts: 37,481
|
Quote:
Indeed, and the potential for a large increase with millions more customers will be available post Brexit
Quote:
- with many countries already lining up to proceed with negotiations
To dump cheap goods on us.Quote:
- but, the EU tariff - free trade benefit is sadly greatly diminished by the EU Political Union , with it's undemocratic soviet styled unelected Commission, and the need to cede legislative authority to an unelected Executive, with its additional, and totally unnecessary extra tier of governance. It isn't. But having barrier free trade increases the economic benefit over and above just tariff free trade in goods.WHY is it necessary in order to obtain economic benefit from trade, to have to pay a huge social cost with the annual payment of an extortionate membership-fee/subsidy as well as elements of sovereignty, in order to obtain economic benefit from trade? Quote:
There aren't many countries in the world daft enough to do that!! - and to add a ludicrous additional tier of Parliament, in an attempt to disguise the undemocratic nature of the Union is totally unacceptable - which fortunately, the country has now woken up to. If anyone could give any example of an existing deal that is less equitable for our own requirements and the likely cost of negotiating an improvement I might be interested.You aren't the only one unable to offer a credible reason for continuing membership of this soviet construct ....but that isn't a great surprise. You just blindly continue to ignore the obvious fact that outside of the EU, we would be free to negotiate, with a far larger community, trade deals more equitable for our own requirements - and, without having to pay a huge premium for that!! Quote:
The benefits gained would far outweigh the so called benefits obtained from the current, unnecessary membership of a political union in order to derive mutual benefit from trade.
Yet you can never outline any specific good or service that will benefit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#675 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 2,650
|
Quote:
Not sure what you're getting at here. Who are these additional customers we can't trade with at the moment?
Quote:
To dump cheap goods on us.
Nope - they cannot do that unless the UK allows them to. Quote:
It isn't. But having barrier free trade increases the economic benefit over and above just tariff free trade in goods.
Don't disagree - but that is outweighed by the huge potential of beneficial GLOBAL agreements - without having the expensive trappings, and loss of control imposed by the political union EU Commissars - which have no place in endeavouring to achieve economic growth via trade.Quote:
If anyone could give any example of an existing deal that is less equitable for our own requirements and the likely cost of negotiating an improvement I might be interested.
They are fairly numerous - i.e - ALL FTA that have been arranged by countries outside of the EU....many of whom have access to the 'single market' without having to pay for the privilege.Quote:
Yet you can never outline any specific good or service that will benefit.
Neither you nor I are knowledgeable wrt trade products value or range - but it is clear that the UK 'car' export s to the EU could be severely hit .... but that is just a relatively small, even though significant, element of our trade - and you continue to ignore the two- way effect, I don't believe the Germans will . I cannot see them just sitting back and watching their lucrative trade with the UK to erode ..... plus of course, we would be able to open our car export market to far more countries , and if we wished to, make the car tariffs far more competitive.However - instead of passing the 'buck' onto others to list associated products that would benefit - why don't you list those products that you know an FT agreement outside of the EU will not improve the UK's export opportunities.....even if it didn't cover 'hidden barriers'......especially as the majority of our trade is conducted outside of the EU - AND, with the likelihood of GROWING, post Brexit. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 20:06.




