Re: Ha
That is a very different thing than we were discussing. In fact that is another way of saying our exports to the EU would need to meet EU standards even if domestically we choose not to.
Absolutely. That's what I'm saying. But the paperwork and chain of certification will be significantly more contrived than it is just now, because we'd have to prove that everything going to the EU (food, cars, hats, whatever) meets their regulations. It won't be taken as a given on the basis that they're our standards as well. And the EU need to make sure that we don't just import US <things> and put them straight into the EU market because of the lowered standards.
But why would we? Bendy bananas a criminal offence? Protectionism over foods which overall increases the price of food. If the EU doesnt want what we provide thats up to them, but why should we pay EU protectionist prices when food is not that expensive?
Bendy bananas were never a thing. Anyway, if you're happy with the deliberate lowering of food standards in Britain, that's your business. I'm not happy about that. For example, there are about 1.2 million cases of salmonella annually in the USA. In the EU, 91000. Why would I ever choose to lower my food standards to that? Why would I choose to feed my kids that instead of the EU-standard food? "Hey, kids - eat your chicken. It probably won't be fatal..." I'd be happy to pay the extra, thanks!
The experts he disregarded were the twits who cried doom and caught not just lying but with a full blaze in the pants area. I am not particularly for sticking up for Gove but applying his words out of context is not fair.
Hmm yeah. I saw that happen on live TV and burst out laughing in the gym, wondering how anybody would fall for that. He wasn't singling out any experts in particular, in my recollection. He just undermined all science and reason and gave the country justification to use what they "felt", and what was "common sense" to decide the future course of the nation instead of "what actually happens in real life and can be proven". Anyway, let's move on from him - he just makes me angry.
Ok. And if its a success will the cost of being in the EU be acknowledged?
Sure - I'd be happy to. Of course, I think the odds are stronger that Boris Johnson will be the last Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, but there you go.
Here's the thing. I've asked many people to tell me what the EU has done badly and how we'll be better off out of it, and nobody's objections have actually stood up to analysis. I've come down to three things by myself, but nobody else has managed to put anything in the pot:
1) The Brussels/Strasbourg nomadic shit just annoys me. Take a Euro coin and flip it.
2) The handling of Greece was pretty shoddy. They were desperate to get Greece in, and pulled an HP/Autonomy, not actually looking closely enough to see the cracks. Then when Greece arrived and said "we're broke!", they were harshly punitive.
3) The clean accounts vs the grey accounts - that's a bit shady, I don't really understand why it's done, but it seems to be a tiny fraction of the EU accounts that aren't on the "clean" sheet.
Care to add?