Was listening to Any Questions on the car radio today - so didn't hear all
of it.

One interesting bit was a panel member getting very passionate about how
the EU was ruining UK farming and small businesses, and farmers knew far
more about farming than European bureaucrats. Who were stifling their
businesses with rules and regulations. Ie, the usual sort of thing.

And he was asked to give an example. Just what I always do when I here
such things.

And what was it? He'd seen a Spanish farmer spraying a crop of
cauliflowers with something - presumably an insecticide - and then lifting
them for sale two days later. When the regs say spraying must finish at
least a week before lifting.

Of course no one picked up on this. The implication being he wanted to see
any regulations about the use of insecticides removed. And left purely to
the farmer. To put him on equal footing with a Spanish farmer who was
breaking the law.

Then, in any answers - heard a bit of it after getting home - one guy was
saying the EU had decimated his market in southern Europe due to the Euro.
Now just how us coming out of the EU would make a southern europe country
in the Euro suddenly be able to afford UK goods, he didn't explain.

It's very odd that every industry claims to be hog tied by European
legislation - yet when asked, seem to have problems supplying just one
concrete and important one.

--
*Ever stop to think and forget to start again?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In message , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
Was listening to Any Questions on the car radio today - so didn't hear all
of it.

One interesting bit was a panel member getting very passionate about how
the EU was ruining UK farming and small businesses, and farmers knew far
more about farming than European bureaucrats. Who were stifling their
businesses with rules and regulations. Ie, the usual sort of thing.

And he was asked to give an example. Just what I always do when I here
such things.

And what was it? He'd seen a Spanish farmer spraying a crop of
cauliflowers with something - presumably an insecticide - and then lifting
them for sale two days later. When the regs say spraying must finish at
least a week before lifting.

Of course no one picked up on this. The implication being he wanted to see
any regulations about the use of insecticides removed. And left purely to
the farmer. To put him on equal footing with a Spanish farmer who was
breaking the law.

I was uncertain what point he was making. The whole episode seemed a bit
flimsy: as if he was reporting a commonly held belief.
Miscounting of Olive trees was an oft reported scam but never with any
reliable evidence.

The audience seemed to believe him.

Then, in any answers - heard a bit of it after getting home - one guy was
saying the EU had decimated his market in southern Europe due to the Euro.
Now just how us coming out of the EU would make a southern europe country
in the Euro suddenly be able to afford UK goods, he didn't explain.

It's very odd that every industry claims to be hog tied by European
legislation - yet when asked, seem to have problems supplying just one
concrete and important one.

Yes. Exactly my view. There is also a perception that our bureaucrats
are better at enforcing legislation than those elsewhere in Europe.
Greener grass syndrome...


--
Tim Lamb

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

And what was it? He'd seen a Spanish farmer spraying a crop of
cauliflowers with something - presumably an insecticide - and then
lifting them for sale two days later. When the regs say spraying must
finish at least a week before lifting.

Of course no one picked up on this. The implication being he wanted to
see any regulations about the use of insecticides removed. And left
purely to the farmer. To put him on equal footing with a Spanish farmer
who was breaking the law.

Why is that the implication. And in any case that would be the correct
solution. See, if legislation is not enforced, then it's pointless.
Who's going to enforce that in Spain, or France. No one, probably. Over
here it is enforced, and so our guys are at a disadvantage. Outside the
EU, we'd be able to have the same regulation and insist that imports
follow the same standard, with our own inspectors on site.

You really thing there are inspectors going round making sure every farmer
follows every regulation to the letter? And that leaving Europe - then
inspecting every single import to make sure it conforms to our standards
exactly is going to happen?

I think you may need to think this one through.

Oh - if it really is a problem - Spanish farmers selling poisonous food -
wouldn't Germans or French be equally as likely to be effected as Brits?

--
*I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Tim Lamb wrote:
Of course no one picked up on this. The implication being he wanted to see
any regulations about the use of insecticides removed. And left purely to
the farmer. To put him on equal footing with a Spanish farmer who was
breaking the law.

I was uncertain what point he was making. The whole episode seemed a bit
flimsy: as if he was reporting a commonly held belief.
Miscounting of Olive trees was an oft reported scam but never with any
reliable evidence.

The audience seemed to believe him.

Yes. Quite a cheer. Not quite sure what they were cheering.

The more I hear on this debate, the more 'ifs' seem to come out. One side
gives a figure unchallenged, another gives an entirely different one again
unchallenged.

Seems to be coming down to who you believe. Very difficult on both sides
since so many are proved liars.

--
*I used to have an open mind but my brains kept falling out *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

And what was it? He'd seen a Spanish farmer spraying a crop of
cauliflowers with something - presumably an insecticide - and then lifting
them for sale two days later. When the regs say spraying must finish at
least a week before lifting.

Of course no one picked up on this. The implication being he wanted to see
any regulations about the use of insecticides removed. And left purely to
the farmer. To put him on equal footing with a Spanish farmer who was
breaking the law.

Why is that the implication. And in any case that would be the correct
solution. See, if legislation is not enforced, then it's pointless.
Who's going to enforce that in Spain, or France. No one, probably. Over
here it is enforced, and so our guys are at a disadvantage. Outside the
EU, we'd be able to have the same regulation and insist that imports
follow the same standard, with our own inspectors on site.

Great - leave the EU and be allowed to eat poisonous cauliflowers.

--
Chris Green
·

On 12/03/2016 14:51, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Was listening to Any Questions on the car radio today - so didn't hear all
of it.

One interesting bit was a panel member getting very passionate about how
the EU was ruining UK farming and small businesses, and farmers knew far
more about farming than European bureaucrats. Who were stifling their
businesses with rules and regulations. Ie, the usual sort of thing.

And he was asked to give an example. Just what I always do when I here
such things.

And what was it? He'd seen a Spanish farmer spraying a crop of
cauliflowers with something - presumably an insecticide - and then lifting
them for sale two days later. When the regs say spraying must finish at
least a week before lifting.

Of course no one picked up on this.

They did actually. This bloke had been going on about how his life was
being made more difficult by hundreds of unnecessary EU regulations.
Anna Subrey challenged him to give an example of an EU regulation which
was adversely affecting him. When he quoted the bit about the Spanish
farmer harvesting the crop too soon after spraying, she did point out
that that was simply a case of a regulation not being properly enforced,
not of a bad regulation.

Sadly, he wasn't the brightest. I'm sure he could have thought of EU
regulations which *do* adversely affect him. I think the point he was
making - albeit not very well - is that UK farmers are disadvantaged by
the fact that *they* obey the regulations whereas farmers in other
countries simply ignore any regulations they don't like. Probably true,
but not really an argument for Brexit per se.

I wish that the BBC had picked someone a bit brighter - but that may not
have suited their agenda!
--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

In article ,
wrote:
Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

And what was it? He'd seen a Spanish farmer spraying a crop of
cauliflowers with something - presumably an insecticide - and then
lifting them for sale two days later. When the regs say spraying must
finish at least a week before lifting.

Of course no one picked up on this. The implication being he wanted
to see any regulations about the use of insecticides removed. And
left purely to the farmer. To put him on equal footing with a Spanish
farmer who was breaking the law.

Why is that the implication. And in any case that would be the correct
solution. See, if legislation is not enforced, then it's pointless.
Who's going to enforce that in Spain, or France. No one, probably.
Over here it is enforced, and so our guys are at a disadvantage.
Outside the EU, we'd be able to have the same regulation and insist
that imports follow the same standard, with our own inspectors on site.

Great - leave the EU and be allowed to eat poisonous cauliflowers.

Yes. It was an absolutely crass example to give. You'd have thought he'd
have anticipated such a question and had lots of decent examples to hand.
If, as he said, they are stopping farmers earning a decent living.

--
*Why do the two "sanction"s (noun and verb) mean opposites?*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

wrote in message news

Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

And what was it? He'd seen a Spanish farmer spraying a crop of
cauliflowers with something - presumably an insecticide - and then
lifting
them for sale two days later. When the regs say spraying must finish at
least a week before lifting.

Of course no one picked up on this. The implication being he wanted to
see
any regulations about the use of insecticides removed. And left purely
to
the farmer. To put him on equal footing with a Spanish farmer who was
breaking the law.

Why is that the implication. And in any case that would be the correct
solution. See, if legislation is not enforced, then it's pointless.
Who's going to enforce that in Spain, or France. No one, probably. Over
here it is enforced, and so our guys are at a disadvantage. Outside the
EU, we'd be able to have the same regulation and insist that imports
follow the same standard, with our own inspectors on site.

Great - leave the EU and be allowed to eat poisonous cauliflowers.

No one's stopping you from eating poisonous *foreign* cauliflowers right
now. You're not comprehending clearly.

On 12/03/16 16:12, wrote:
Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

And what was it? He'd seen a Spanish farmer spraying a crop of
cauliflowers with something - presumably an insecticide - and then lifting
them for sale two days later. When the regs say spraying must finish at
least a week before lifting.

Of course no one picked up on this. The implication being he wanted to see
any regulations about the use of insecticides removed. And left purely to
the farmer. To put him on equal footing with a Spanish farmer who was
breaking the law.

Why is that the implication. And in any case that would be the correct
solution. See, if legislation is not enforced, then it's pointless.
Who's going to enforce that in Spain, or France. No one, probably. Over
here it is enforced, and so our guys are at a disadvantage. Outside the
EU, we'd be able to have the same regulation and insist that imports
follow the same standard, with our own inspectors on site.

Great - leave the EU and be allowed to eat poisonous cauliflowers.

No, leave the EU and NOT be forced to import poisonous cauliflowers.


--
Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have
guns, why should we let them have ideas?

Josef Stalin

To be honest. The most compelling reason for staying is the ability to
gently steer eu away from more follies of inclusion of nations who have a
significant different standard of living to the rest. If I dig a hole it
fills with water, and its obvious that water has to come from somewhere.
Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
Remember, if you don't like where I post
or what I say, you don't have to
read my posts! :-)
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
Was listening to Any Questions on the car radio today - so didn't hear all
of it.

One interesting bit was a panel member getting very passionate about how
the EU was ruining UK farming and small businesses, and farmers knew far
more about farming than European bureaucrats. Who were stifling their
businesses with rules and regulations. Ie, the usual sort of thing.

And he was asked to give an example. Just what I always do when I here
such things.

And what was it? He'd seen a Spanish farmer spraying a crop of
cauliflowers with something - presumably an insecticide - and then lifting
them for sale two days later. When the regs say spraying must finish at
least a week before lifting.

Of course no one picked up on this. The implication being he wanted to see
any regulations about the use of insecticides removed. And left purely to
the farmer. To put him on equal footing with a Spanish farmer who was
breaking the law.

Then, in any answers - heard a bit of it after getting home - one guy was
saying the EU had decimated his market in southern Europe due to the Euro.
Now just how us coming out of the EU would make a southern europe country
in the Euro suddenly be able to afford UK goods, he didn't explain.

It's very odd that every industry claims to be hog tied by European
legislation - yet when asked, seem to have problems supplying just one
concrete and important one.

--
*Ever stop to think and forget to start again?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 12/03/2016 16:12, wrote:


Great - leave the EU and be allowed to eat poisonous cauliflowers.

Why will it make any difference? Seems like they're *already* sending us
poisonous cauliflowers because they're harvesting too soon after
spraying. I don't know what checks (if any) we make on what comes in -
but we may well tighten up on that after we've left.
--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

On Saturday, 12 March 2016 17:44:27 UTC, Brian-Gaff wrote:
To be honest. The most compelling reason for staying is the ability to
gently steer eu away from more follies of inclusion of nations who have a
significant different standard of living to the rest. If I dig a hole it
fills with water, and its obvious that water has to come from somewhere.
Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
Remember, if you don't like where I post
or what I say, you don't have to
read my posts! :-)
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
Was listening to Any Questions on the car radio today - so didn't hear all
of it.

One interesting bit was a panel member getting very passionate about how
the EU was ruining UK farming and small businesses, and farmers knew far
more about farming than European bureaucrats. Who were stifling their
businesses with rules and regulations. Ie, the usual sort of thing.

And he was asked to give an example. Just what I always do when I here
such things.

And what was it? He'd seen a Spanish farmer spraying a crop of
cauliflowers with something - presumably an insecticide - and then lifting
them for sale two days later. When the regs say spraying must finish at
least a week before lifting.

Of course no one picked up on this. The implication being he wanted to see
any regulations about the use of insecticides removed. And left purely to
the farmer. To put him on equal footing with a Spanish farmer who was
breaking the law.

Then, in any answers - heard a bit of it after getting home - one guy was
saying the EU had decimated his market in southern Europe due to the Euro.
Now just how us coming out of the EU would make a southern europe country
in the Euro suddenly be able to afford UK goods, he didn't explain.

It's very odd that every industry claims to be hog tied by European
legislation - yet when asked, seem to have problems supplying just one
concrete and important one.

--
*Ever stop to think and forget to start again?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

With one vote in 28 we have no influence on where the EUSSR is going.

On Saturday, 12 March 2016 14:55:20 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Was listening to Any Questions on the car radio today - so didn't hear all
of it.

One interesting bit was a panel member getting very passionate about how
the EU was ruining UK farming and small businesses, and farmers knew far
more about farming than European bureaucrats. Who were stifling their
businesses with rules and regulations. Ie, the usual sort of thing.

And he was asked to give an example. Just what I always do when I here
such things.

And what was it? He'd seen a Spanish farmer spraying a crop of
cauliflowers with something - presumably an insecticide - and then lifting
them for sale two days later. When the regs say spraying must finish at
least a week before lifting.

Of course no one picked up on this. The implication being he wanted to see
any regulations about the use of insecticides removed. And left purely to
the farmer. To put him on equal footing with a Spanish farmer who was
breaking the law.

Then, in any answers - heard a bit of it after getting home - one guy was
saying the EU had decimated his market in southern Europe due to the Euro.
Now just how us coming out of the EU would make a southern europe country
in the Euro suddenly be able to afford UK goods, he didn't explain.

It's very odd that every industry claims to be hog tied by European
legislation - yet when asked, seem to have problems supplying just one
concrete and important one.

--
*Ever stop to think and forget to start again?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

If you want reasons to leave try here.
https://hat4uk.wordpress.com/100-reasons-for-eu-brexit/

In article ,
Roger Mills wrote:
They did actually. This bloke had been going on about how his life was
being made more difficult by hundreds of unnecessary EU regulations.
Anna Subrey challenged him to give an example of an EU regulation which
was adversely affecting him. When he quoted the bit about the Spanish
farmer harvesting the crop too soon after spraying, she did point out
that that was simply a case of a regulation not being properly enforced,
not of a bad regulation.

But didn't ask him to expand on what he thought the answer was.

Sadly, he wasn't the brightest. I'm sure he could have thought of EU
regulations which *do* adversely affect him.

I'd have thought he'd have a big selection on the tip of his tongue if
they are so much of a problem. Anyone could have guessed they'd have been
asked. I've done it on here - and not had any decent answers.

I think the point he was
making - albeit not very well - is that UK farmers are disadvantaged by
the fact that *they* obey the regulations whereas farmers in other
countries simply ignore any regulations they don't like. Probably true,
but not really an argument for Brexit per se.

No. If UK farmers continue to observe the law while 'EU' ones apparently
don't, how is us leaving the EU going to improve that? Same with fishing
quotas. Unless we go back to a free for all and very quickly exhaust all
fish stocks.

I wish that the BBC had picked someone a bit brighter - but that may not
have suited their agenda!

They can't have picked the audience given by the cheers he got.

--
*Learn from your parents' mistakes - use birth control.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Great - leave the EU and be allowed to eat poisonous cauliflowers.

No, leave the EU and NOT be forced to import poisonous cauliflowers.

We are *forced* to import such things? Turnip by name and nature.

--
*Errors have been made. Others will be blamed.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 12/03/16 17:44, Brian-Gaff wrote:
To be honest. The most compelling reason for staying is the ability to
gently steer eu away from more follies of inclusion of nations who have a
significant different standard of living to the rest.

Sadly that has been what we have been trying to do with absolutely no
effect for the last 40 years.

Its time to cry quits and tell em to go **** 'emselves.

The EU has bribed and connived and corrupted its way into getting little
countries to sign up to satisfy its appetite for neo-colonial
territorial aggrandisement.

I don't want to have anything to do with that sort of last century ********


--
Truth welcomes investigation because truth knows investigation will lead
to converts. It is deception that uses all the other techniques.

"harry" wrote in message
...
..

With one vote in 28 we have no influence on where the EUSSR is going.

That's on the Council of Ministers.

But the same applies equally well to very other country as well.

In the European Parliament which has the power to reject
any measure proposed by the Commission the UK has 73 members
out a total of 751 which reflects the fact that the UK has 9.7%
of the population.

Numbers for the other countries are shown below.

As with all politics, to have any influence you have to
make alliances. Usually everyone hates the Chermans,
so if the UK gangs up with the French, the Italians
or the Poles, then the UK has a good chance of being
on the winning side.

However only an idiot would expect the others to roll
over, without a bit of the old quid pro quo.

That's how politics works at every level.



Germany 96 (12.8%)
France 74 (9.9%)
Italy 73 (9.7%)
United Kingdom 73 (9.7%)
Spain 54 (7.2%)
Poland 51 (6.8%)
Romania 32 (4.3%)
Netherlands 26 (3.5%)
Belgium 21 (2.8%)
Czech Republic 21 (2.8%)
Greece 21 (2.8%)
Hungary 21 (2.8%)
Portugal 21 (2.8%)
Sweden 20 (2.7%)
Austria 18 (2.4%)
Bulgaria 17 (2.3%)
Denmark 13 (1.7%)
Finland 13 (1.7%)
Slovakia 13 (1.7%)
Croatia 11 (1.5%)
Ireland 11 (1.5%)
Lithuania 11 (1.5%)
Latvia 8 (1.1%)
Slovenia 8 (1.1%)
Cyprus 6 (0.8%)
Estonia 6 (0.8%)
Luxembourg 6 (0.8%)
Malta 6 (0.8%)


michael adams

....

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
The EU has bribed and connived and corrupted its way into getting little
countries to sign up to satisfy its appetite for neo-colonial
territorial aggrandisement.

That will be why the likes of Turkey has been trying to get in for years?

You are actually worse than Wodney for telling lies.

--
*The more people I meet, the more I like my dog.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
michael adams wrote:
With one vote in 28 we have no influence on where the EUSSR is going.

That's on the Council of Ministers.

But the same applies equally well to very other country as well.

The only form of democracy the likes of harry wants is one where he gets
his own way. Exactly the same as others who go on about it.

--
*Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In message , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
No. If UK farmers continue to observe the law while 'EU' ones
apparently don't, how is us leaving the EU going to improve that? Same
with fishing quotas. Unless we go back to a free for all and very
quickly exhaust all fish stocks.

That's not what any of the local small fishermen ever said to me when
ranting about the huge French and Spanish trawlers just off our estuary.
--
Bill

On Saturday, 12 March 2016 18:19:19 UTC, michael adams wrote:
"harry" wrote in message
...
.

With one vote in 28 we have no influence on where the EUSSR is going.

That's on the Council of Ministers.

But the same applies equally well to very other country as well.

In the European Parliament which has the power to reject
any measure proposed by the Commission the UK has 73 members
out a total of 751 which reflects the fact that the UK has 9.7%
of the population.

Numbers for the other countries are shown below.

As with all politics, to have any influence you have to
make alliances. Usually everyone hates the Chermans,
so if the UK gangs up with the French, the Italians
or the Poles, then the UK has a good chance of being
on the winning side.

However only an idiot would expect the others to roll
over, without a bit of the old quid pro quo.

That's how politics works at every level.



Germany 96 (12.8%)
France 74 (9.9%)
Italy 73 (9.7%)
United Kingdom 73 (9.7%)
Spain 54 (7.2%)
Poland 51 (6.8%)
Romania 32 (4.3%)
Netherlands 26 (3.5%)
Belgium 21 (2.8%)
Czech Republic 21 (2.8%)
Greece 21 (2.8%)
Hungary 21 (2.8%)
Portugal 21 (2.8%)
Sweden 20 (2.7%)
Austria 18 (2.4%)
Bulgaria 17 (2.3%)
Denmark 13 (1.7%)
Finland 13 (1.7%)
Slovakia 13 (1.7%)
Croatia 11 (1.5%)
Ireland 11 (1.5%)
Lithuania 11 (1.5%)
Latvia 8 (1.1%)
Slovenia 8 (1.1%)
Cyprus 6 (0.8%)
Estonia 6 (0.8%)
Luxembourg 6 (0.8%)
Malta 6 (0.8%)


Many are brain dead ex-commie basket cases who think of nothing more then central control.


Chained to a corpse.

On Saturday, 12 March 2016 18:42:34 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
michael adams wrote:
With one vote in 28 we have no influence on where the EUSSR is going.

That's on the Council of Ministers.

But the same applies equally well to very other country as well.

The only form of democracy the likes of harry wants is one where he gets
his own way. Exactly the same as others who go on about it.

The exact reason we should leave and do exactly what we want.
The EUSSRocrats are brain dead to a (wo)man

On Saturday, 12 March 2016 18:42:34 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
The EU has bribed and connived and corrupted its way into getting little
countries to sign up to satisfy its appetite for neo-colonial
territorial aggrandisement.

That will be why the likes of Turkey has been trying to get in for years?

Turkey is the bribed bit.
They want our money.

And to Islamify the West.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
Was listening to Any Questions on the car radio today - so didn't hear all
of it.

One interesting bit was a panel member getting very passionate about how
the EU was ruining UK farming and small businesses, and farmers knew far
more about farming than European bureaucrats. Who were stifling their
businesses with rules and regulations. Ie, the usual sort of thing.

And he was asked to give an example. Just what I always do when I here
such things.

And what was it? He'd seen a Spanish farmer spraying a crop of
cauliflowers with something - presumably an insecticide - and then lifting
them for sale two days later. When the regs say spraying must finish at
least a week before lifting.

Of course no one picked up on this. The implication being he wanted to see
any regulations about the use of insecticides removed. And left purely to
the farmer. To put him on equal footing with a Spanish farmer who was
breaking the law.

Then, in any answers - heard a bit of it after getting home - one guy was
saying the EU had decimated his market in southern Europe due to the Euro.
Now just how us coming out of the EU would make a southern europe country
in the Euro suddenly be able to afford UK goods, he didn't explain.

Because the explanation is obvious, if the pound slumps after
Britain leaves the EU, that would mean that a southern europe
country would find British goods would be cheaper. If they do
actually buy much in the way of British goods which is a very
dubious proposition indeed IMO.

It's very odd that every industry claims to be hog tied by European
legislation - yet when asked, seem to have problems supplying just one
concrete and important one.

The working hours mandate you wave around is one obvious example.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
..

The EU has bribed and connived and corrupted its way into getting little countries to
sign up to satisfy its appetite for neo-colonial territorial aggrandisement.

I don't want to have anything to do with that sort of last century ********

Right. So we apologise to all our former colonies, pay them billions in
reparations, and give up on the likes of tea, coffee, and bananas etc.

While living on turnips presumably.

What a really great idea !

The only surprise really is why no -one has ever thought of it before


michael adams

....

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
.. .
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

And what was it? He'd seen a Spanish farmer spraying a crop of
cauliflowers with something - presumably an insecticide - and then lifting
them for sale two days later. When the regs say spraying must finish at
least a week before lifting.

Of course no one picked up on this. The implication being he wanted to see
any regulations about the use of insecticides removed. And left purely to
the farmer. To put him on equal footing with a Spanish farmer who was
breaking the law.

Why is that the implication. And in any case that would be the correct
solution. See, if legislation is not enforced, then it's pointless.

That's not correct. Some do abide by the legislation even when
it isn't enforced.

Who's going to enforce that in Spain, or France. No one, probably. Over
here it is enforced, and so our guys are at a disadvantage. Outside the
EU, we'd be able to have the same regulation and insist that imports
follow the same standard, with our own inspectors on site.

No, because that wouldnt be affordable.

"harry" wrote in message
...

The exact reason we should leave and do exactly what we want.

The UK has never been able to do exactly what she wants.

In the past, to get even anywhere near to what she thought
she might might want, it was necessary to keep fleets of
manned battleships based at naval bases stretching from
Hong Kong, Singapore, Aden, Cape Town, Malta, Gibralter,
to Plymouth, Portsmouth, and Rosyth. All at a cost of billions.
And that's assuming that whatever we wanted, as with giving
Nasser a bloody nose didn't upset our "special relationship"
with our biggest ally.

You just keep watching those "Heartbeat" DVD's harry,
and all will be well with the world.


michael adams

....

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Tim Lamb wrote:
Of course no one picked up on this. The implication being he wanted to
see
any regulations about the use of insecticides removed. And left purely
to
the farmer. To put him on equal footing with a Spanish farmer who was
breaking the law.

I was uncertain what point he was making. The whole episode seemed a bit
flimsy: as if he was reporting a commonly held belief.
Miscounting of Olive trees was an oft reported scam but never with any
reliable evidence.

The audience seemed to believe him.

Yes. Quite a cheer. Not quite sure what they were cheering.

The more I hear on this debate, the more 'ifs' seem to come out. One side
gives a figure unchallenged, another gives an entirely different one again
unchallenged.

Seems to be coming down to who you believe. Very difficult on both sides
since so many are proved liars.

Just as true of staying in the EU.

On 12/03/16 19:17, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Brian-Gaff
wrote:

To be honest. The most compelling reason for staying is the ability to
gently steer eu away from more follies of inclusion of nations who
have a significant different standard of living to the rest. If I dig
a hole it fills with water, and its obvious that water has to come
from somewhere.

Ha ha ha "gently steer". Really Brian, what have you been smoking?
We're not allowed on the bridge of the super-tanker.

Cameron has been allowed to rearrange the deckchairs though...

--
You can get much farther with a kind word and a gun than you can with a
kind word alone.

Al Capone

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
.. .

We're not allowed on the bridge of the super-tanker.

"Mummy, mummy I'm being bullied by the big boys !

"Can I stay off school mummy ?"

"Can it be like the 1950's again Mummy. Ooo please! "

Mummy's dead. Dead ! Do you hear ?

Its time to grow up boy, and stand on your own two feet.


michael adams

....

Brian-Gaff wrote

To be honest. The most compelling reason for staying is the ability to
gently steer eu away from more follies of inclusion of nations who have a
significant different standard of living to the rest.

It isnt at all clear that Britain staying in the EU would have
any effect at all on say Turkey being allowed to join now.
Particularly when the EU needs to see Turkey stop hordes
of people leaving Turkey to get to Greece etc.

If I dig a hole it fills with water, and its obvious that water has to
come from somewhere.

I've never thought that that sort simplistic analogy
helps at all with complex questions like BRexit.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
Was listening to Any Questions on the car radio today - so didn't hear
all
of it.

One interesting bit was a panel member getting very passionate about how
the EU was ruining UK farming and small businesses, and farmers knew far
more about farming than European bureaucrats. Who were stifling their
businesses with rules and regulations. Ie, the usual sort of thing.

And he was asked to give an example. Just what I always do when I here
such things.

And what was it? He'd seen a Spanish farmer spraying a crop of
cauliflowers with something - presumably an insecticide - and then
lifting
them for sale two days later. When the regs say spraying must finish at
least a week before lifting.

Of course no one picked up on this. The implication being he wanted to
see
any regulations about the use of insecticides removed. And left purely to
the farmer. To put him on equal footing with a Spanish farmer who was
breaking the law.

Then, in any answers - heard a bit of it after getting home - one guy was
saying the EU had decimated his market in southern Europe due to the
Euro.
Now just how us coming out of the EU would make a southern europe country
in the Euro suddenly be able to afford UK goods, he didn't explain.

It's very odd that every industry claims to be hog tied by European
legislation - yet when asked, seem to have problems supplying just one
concrete and important one.

--
*Ever stop to think and forget to start again?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Roger Mills wrote:
They did actually. This bloke had been going on about how his life was
being made more difficult by hundreds of unnecessary EU regulations.
Anna Subrey challenged him to give an example of an EU regulation which
was adversely affecting him. When he quoted the bit about the Spanish
farmer harvesting the crop too soon after spraying, she did point out
that that was simply a case of a regulation not being properly enforced,
not of a bad regulation.

But didn't ask him to expand on what he thought the answer was.

Sadly, he wasn't the brightest. I'm sure he could have thought of EU
regulations which *do* adversely affect him.

I'd have thought he'd have a big selection on the tip of his tongue if
they are so much of a problem. Anyone could have guessed they'd have been
asked. I've done it on here -

Yes.

and not had any decent answers.

Another bare faced lie.

I think the point he was
making - albeit not very well - is that UK farmers are disadvantaged by
the fact that *they* obey the regulations whereas farmers in other
countries simply ignore any regulations they don't like. Probably true,
but not really an argument for Brexit per se.

No. If UK farmers continue to observe the law while 'EU' ones apparently
don't, how is us leaving the EU going to improve that?

It would mean that Britain would no longer have to
accept imports which flout the law that Britain chooses
to have with regard to the time between spraying and
harvest. Britain would be free to ban those imports. It
can't do that while ever it is still in the EU.

Same with fishing quotas.

Nope, nothing like it.

Unless we go back to a free for all and very quickly exhaust all fish
stocks.

It isn't that black and white. Outside the EU Britain would be
free to have whatever quotas it decides are appropriate and
would not have to accept what the EU decides is appropriate.

I wish that the BBC had picked someone a bit brighter
- but that may not have suited their agenda!

They can't have picked the audience given by the cheers he got.

Much harder to pick the audience.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Great - leave the EU and be allowed to eat poisonous cauliflowers.

No, leave the EU and NOT be forced to import poisonous cauliflowers.

We are *forced* to import such things?

Yes. While ever Britain is in the EU, it can't ban imports
from other EU countrys that don’t bother to enforce the
legislation on the time between spraying and harvest.

"Jonno" wrote in message
...
Roger Mills scribbled


On 12/03/2016 16:12, wrote:


Great - leave the EU and be allowed to eat poisonous cauliflowers.

Why will it make any difference? Seems like they're *already* sending us
poisonous cauliflowers because they're harvesting too soon after
spraying. I don't know what checks (if any) we make on what comes in -
but we may well tighten up on that after we've left.


WTF would a farmer spray expensive chemicals onto a crop he's going to
lift in 48 hours?

When that produces a product that has a better market value.

In article , harry
wrote:
On Saturday, 12 March 2016 18:19:19 UTC, michael adams wrote:
"harry" wrote in message
... .

With one vote in 28 we have no influence on where the EUSSR is going.

That's on the Council of Ministers.

But the same applies equally well to very other country as well.

In the European Parliament which has the power to reject any measure
proposed by the Commission the UK has 73 members out a total of 751
which reflects the fact that the UK has 9.7% of the population.

Numbers for the other countries are shown below.

As with all politics, to have any influence you have to make alliances.
Usually everyone hates the Chermans, so if the UK gangs up with the
French, the Italians or the Poles, then the UK has a good chance of
being on the winning side.

However only an idiot would expect the others to roll over, without a
bit of the old quid pro quo.

That's how politics works at every level.



Germany 96 (12.8%) France 74 (9.9%) Italy 73 (9.7%) United Kingdom
73 (9.7%) Spain 54 (7.2%) Poland 51 (6.8%) Romania 32 (4.3%)
Netherlands 26 (3.5%) Belgium 21 (2.8%) Czech Republic 21 (2.8%)
Greece 21 (2.8%) Hungary 21 (2.8%) Portugal 21 (2.8%) Sweden 20
(2.7%) Austria 18 (2.4%) Bulgaria 17 (2.3%) Denmark 13 (1.7%)
Finland 13 (1.7%) Slovakia 13 (1.7%) Croatia 11 (1.5%) Ireland 11
(1.5%) Lithuania 11 (1.5%) Latvia 8 (1.1%) Slovenia 8 (1.1%) Cyprus
6 (0.8%) Estonia 6 (0.8%) Luxembourg 6 (0.8%) Malta 6 (0.8%)


Many are brain dead ex-commie basket cases who think of nothing more then
central control.

Have you been to any of these countries in recent years?

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Was listening to Any Questions on the car radio today - so didn't hear all
of it.

Every time I hear an Outer talking is persudes me to vote In, but then
every time I head an Inner talking they persuade me to vote Out. Plaque
on both their houses.

jgh

In message , Tim Streater
writes
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

And what was it? He'd seen a Spanish farmer spraying a crop of
cauliflowers with something - presumably an insecticide - and then lifting
them for sale two days later. When the regs say spraying must finish at
least a week before lifting.

Of course no one picked up on this. The implication being he wanted to see
any regulations about the use of insecticides removed. And left purely to
the farmer. To put him on equal footing with a Spanish farmer who was
breaking the law.

Why is that the implication. And in any case that would be the correct
solution. See, if legislation is not enforced, then it's pointless.
Who's going to enforce that in Spain, or France. No one, probably. Over
here it is enforced, and so our guys are at a disadvantage. Outside the
EU, we'd be able to have the same regulation and insist that imports
follow the same standard, with our own inspectors on site.

Maybe.

This farm was in a *crops assurance* scheme for about 15 years. Likewise
for cattle.

There was a notified visit from the assurance man about one month before
harvest started. He would check that the stored chemicals matched what
was on the record sheet and that none were out of date or withdrawn.
Glance through the chemical application records and cross check with
advisor notes. Inspect the grain stores and check cleaning records for
grain handling tackle.

Cattle were never checked on farm.

Very simple to falsify record sheets and hide illegal chemicals.

I'm not suggesting anyone does this just that there are no real checks
either here or Spain etc.

The food industry has ample opportunity to sample imported produce if
they really suspected impropriety. Viz the horse meat scandal.

The big stick is the potential loss of CAP money if anyone is found
breaching the rules.


--
Tim Lamb

In message , Jonno
writes
Roger Mills scribbled


On 12/03/2016 16:12, wrote:


Great - leave the EU and be allowed to eat poisonous cauliflowers.

Why will it make any difference? Seems like they're *already* sending us
poisonous cauliflowers because they're harvesting too soon after
spraying. I don't know what checks (if any) we make on what comes in -
but we may well tighten up on that after we've left.


WTF would a farmer spray expensive chemicals onto a crop he's going to
lift in 48 hours?

Marketability? Maybe he intended to spray earlier but was held up by
weather or mechanical breakdown. Maybe a contractor got the wrong field.


--
Tim Lamb

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In ,
The Natural wrote:

The EU has bribed and connived and corrupted its way into getting little
countries to sign up to satisfy its appetite for neo-colonial
territorial aggrandisement.

That will be why the likes of Turkey has been trying to get in for years?

You are actually worse than Wodney for telling lies.



Turkey trying to get in is another nail in the coffin of the
EU. The next step is even more unwanted immigrants, lower wages and
higher house prices and taxes. Just what a Socialist dreams of? Time to
govern ourselves again I think.

On 12/03/2016 19:51, Rod Speed wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Great - leave the EU and be allowed to eat poisonous cauliflowers.

No, leave the EU and NOT be forced to import poisonous cauliflowers.

We are *forced* to import such things?

Yes. While ever Britain is in the EU, it can't ban imports
from other EU countrys that don’t bother to enforce the
legislation on the time between spraying and harvest.



Rubbish, the government can order them to be destroyed.
Who will import them to have them destroyed?