Get ready for Brexit the website

If you have something so weird, strange or off-topic to post and think it doesn't belong in any other forum; you're probably right. Please put all your gormless, half-baked, inane, glaikit ideas in here. This might also be a place where we throw threads that appear elsewhere that don't belong ANYWHERE end up, instead of having to flush them. FORUM RULES STILL APPLY.
User avatar
CaptainNemo
Expatriate
Posts: 128
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2019 8:51 pm
Reputation: 20
Location: In t' naughty lass
Kiribati

Re: Get ready for Brexit the website

Post by CaptainNemo » Wed Oct 02, 2019 10:47 pm

Happy for you, hic...
I'm not like other boys...
User avatar
Phnom Poon
Expatriate
Posts: 511
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2019 5:44 pm
Reputation: 150
Kiribati

Re: Get ready for Brexit the website

Post by Phnom Poon » Wed Oct 02, 2019 11:07 pm

CaptainNemo wrote:
Wed Oct 02, 2019 10:47 pm
Happy for you, hic...
oh dear, picking up fag-ends?

.

monstra mihi bona!
User avatar
CaptainNemo
Expatriate
Posts: 128
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2019 8:51 pm
Reputation: 20
Location: In t' naughty lass
Kiribati

Re: Get ready for Brexit the website

Post by CaptainNemo » Thu Oct 03, 2019 8:46 am

You still here?!
I'm not like other boys...
pczz
Expatriate
Posts: 2106
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2015 1:00 pm
Reputation: 371
Location: phnom penh
Great Britain

Re: Get ready for Brexit the website

Post by pczz » Fri Oct 04, 2019 2:19 am

"ECHR rulings misused by criminals to claim human rights they don't afford their victims, and the appalling precedents they've set, are worth citing.
Yes the UK created it, but not the warped version of it we have now. The UK also helped set up EFTA, which is a better organisation than the EU.'
Doesnt alter the fact the the EHCR is not an Eu organisation. The "warpoed"version you claim now exists was amended by the 49 member states. Furthermore EHCR rulings are routinely ignored by countries in the convention on the grounds of national secuirty. Its rulings only work if the state ruled against chooses to accept the verdict.
Every time you buy a new computer (or similar device) there’s yet another IEC cable (“kettle flex”) in the box. If you are replacing a PC you plug the old computer’s power cable into the new PC and throw the new cable into a heap of unused ones. It’s an EU law which makes it illegal to ship any such device without a power cable even if the power cable is detachable and could be sold separately or more sensibly, supplied free only if requested. The environmental cost of making and scrapping unused power cables must be enormous.
It is also a UK law that requires all new aplliances to have a certified and tested cable. The reasoning is that there is no way of knowing if the kettle lead in your old device has the same ratings as currently reuired and is not worn out. For exmpleif a landlord install a new kettle with a new lead it does not require testing, but subsequently it should be subjected to a PAT test every 2 yeasr. SUprisinlgy when i was running a 250 computer netwrork failure rate was around 25%
They’ve mandated a power reduction in vacuum cleaners. They think this saves electricity. What it does do, is cause one to spend twice as long on the same cleaning. And possibly, use more electricity in the process.
Ditto, proposed only, kettles, which is guaranteed by the simple laws of physics to waste electricity not save it.
Where is the evidence from testing? possibility does not usuually enter into electrical safety items. the last i read on this topic was Dyson (the great brexiteer who is moving production to Singapore) claiming it would cut down on cheap, energy inefficient models from China, but the method of measuring was no approprate for his cleaner
Proposed only, a ban on the availability of Glyphosate weedkiller to gardeners. Not a ban on its use in agriculture. There’s no evidence it’s not safe, and it’s remarkably non-toxic to animals. Just a ban on its use by people who have not attended a training course. How on earth is one supposed to deal with Ground Elder or Bindweed if the only remaining permitted weedkiller is banned? They’e also banned Bordeaux mixture. Copper is not seriously poisonous. The fungicides that are now available are quite probably more dangerous in the food chain, but are far more profitable to big agrichemical businesses.
Not sure a proposed ban counts as an existing law, but the uk banned glyphosphate in useful coincentrations yeasr ago whe products like roundup and pathclear stopped working. Farmers were allowed stronger concentrations and i "borrowed" some. Its been 10 years since i had a lawn, so uk restrictions hav ebeen inplace for years, even before the alleged proposed EU rule, which would just bring them into line with us.
The tampon tax. The UK government wants to reduce VAT on tampons and other female sanitary products to zero. It’s a tax that should never have existed. But the EU won’t let us reduce it below 5%. PS I’m a man!
and as a man u are wrong. "The Prime Minister secured agreement with his European counterparts at the March European Council to welcome the intention of the Commission to enable increased flexibility for member states with respect to zero and reduced rates of VAT.The UK is using this opportunity to provide for the reduction of VAT on women’s sanitary products to the zero-rate." this is from 2016 govt website https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... y-products. Resolved 3 years ago in march prior to the referencum
VAT on Electricity, gas and heating oil. Ditto, although I’m not so sure that the UK government actually wants to remove this tax.
VAT on books. OK, they are still zero-rated in the UK because they were zero-rated when we joined the EU. But how can a supposedly civilized institution support a mandatory tax on books?
This is from the governentn website. "Unless otherwise specified legal references will be from the VAT Act 1994 (VATA 1994).Under the Act supplies of fuel and power are subject to the standard rate of VAT unless they are eligible for the reduced rate under Schedule 7A or being exported outside the EU under Section 30 (6)." website https://www.gov.uk/guidance/vat-on-fuel ... 9#overview. Again, the vat is immposed by uk law, not Eu law
VAT on all foodstuffs. Ditto.
same website covers food vat. NOT CHARGED on what you buy except for through catering outlets and specified exemption like ice cream 9presumably on health grounds] pretty sure its the same in Europe. Cetainly whwre I was food was vat free, so i hav eno idea where you got the idea food is subject to VAT? Boris Johnson perhaps?
HS2. Yes, it’s a UK government folly that they want to build it, but it’s an EU diktat that says it must be an ultra-high-speed line. It would be far more useful and far cheaper were it just an ordinary 100mph express line to add capacity to the UK rail network, with more stations and local services. Or spend the money on making the existing lines and stations take double-decker trains. Look at Switzerland. Their railways are as near perfect as any I’ve experienced. The one thing they don’t do, is 220mph trains.
Unfortunatley part of the funding for HS2 is from the EU, and that funing is only available for high speed infrastructure. Same rules apply to Spain, France and Germany. The anser is simple, dont ask the EU for a high speed rail grant and build it yourself with your own money
Corruption. the EU budget has not been signed off by its auditors for twenty yeas. Also EU top brass salaries and expenses. Private jets hired for 200 mile journeys within Europe, and lots of suchlike. It’s not exactly corruption, because it’s within the rules! They are trying to keep it secret. We are paying for this, as one of the net-contributor countries.
I am not going to dispute this. After all, Boris wants a Private plane and seems to be able to spend a lot of money keeping his american girlfriend handy. Corruption is everwhere in every countryin the world. Do you seriously think UK officials are going to fly esijet and stay on campsites when they trot round the world doing trade deasl. Why dont they all use skype
Ban on recycled jam-jars. We used to keep jars we bought in the shops filled with jam or marmalade, wash them, sterilize them in the oven, fill them with home-made jam, and give the surplus to church fetes and suchlike. It’s now illegal for a church fete to sell jam that’s not been poured into a brand-new jam-jar.
The EU patent office. I’d need a couple of pages to explain, so Google if you need more. Corrupt and incompetent and working to the detriment of 99% of businesses (and to the benefit of large non-EU businesses).
Sorry, wrong again "Rather than checking the original regulations for themselves, the Church of England then wrote to all parishes telling them that their parishioners must no longer sell or donate preserves in recycled jars. They claimed that they had contacted the Food Standards Advisory Service who had confirmed that this was the case. This seems rather unlikely since this is NOT the information given by the FSA. The FSA document concerned is the “Guidance Notes for Food Business Operators on Food Safety, Traceability, Withdrawal and Product Recall”. The FSA says that local authorities determine what constitutes a food business and that the occasional selling of preserves made from what you grew in the garden in order to raise money for charity, school fetes and local events, is not considered to be a food business. The EU Commission has confirmed this." website is http://www.jametc.com/jars.html
The forthcoming death of most of the Ash trees in the UK. I don’t know if our politicians could have spotted the danger in time and banned imports of trees that carried the Ash die-back fungus to the UK, but before the EU the presumption was against the import of any living plants unless explicitly permitted. Now, it’s too late. The trees are dying. [Edit] now the disease that is wiping out olive groves in the EU has also been imported and is destroying lavender bushes.
from https://www.woodlandtrust.org.uk/trees- ... -diseases/ "The spores of this fungus can travel in the wind so it is possible that it arrived in the UK naturally however it was also inadvertently imported on ash saplings. The UK was importing thousands of ash plants from infected parts of Europe until a ban came into place in 2012. This undoubtedly sped up the spread of the disease within the UK because the disease was able to spread from areas of new planting via wind to mature trees.' what this does not explain is why the governement doid not indpect these trees, knowing they were coming from infected areas
The common fisheries policy. It mandated that if fish of the wrong species were caught accidentally, the dead fish had to be thrown overboard, and the fishermen carried on killing more fish, until they reached the “right” quotas of the “right” species.
This is common in fisheries protection around the world to stop fishermen acciedentally fishing in water with deliberatley to cath more valuable protected fish. Nothin unusual about it and it will continue after brexit to safegard stocke of the accidentally caught fish accidentally caught using the wrong net at the wrong depth.
Dieselgate. It’s all VW’s fault, they say. Oh, and Daimler. And Renault. And … Nothing to do with us. We just make the laws. I don’t believe them. At best they’re proved incompetent. At worst, in a smoke-filled room somewhere, they connived in a deception for the benefit of EU car-makers. And the funny thing is, that Japanese and
Korean makers seem to have managed to actually comply with the “impossible” regulations, which I’m sure were made as a non-tariff barrier to non-EU car imports.
As i understand it there was nothing wrong with the test. The computer software in the EMU was prgrammed to recognise a test sequence and alter engine setting to minimise the effect, circumventing the rules. i really do not see how the hacking by the manufacturers can be blamed on the government or the EU, but bear in min EU emissions tests are far stricter that ours, but only done every 2 years like the mot. Many cars that pass the pthetic uk MOT would not pas a european one. i thik it was first picked up in Clifornia who are even stricter than us and it affected us build vehicles and also Jeep, Jeep is no an EU company, but was using the same techniques on Americna cars sold in California. It omly affected dieselcars and they are no that popular in the states where petrolis cheaper so I dont see any gret benefit for exports
Real cheese. Several cheeses formerly made with unpasteurized milk have been rendered unprofitable by impossibly tough regulation. The big commercial cheesemakers making bland imitations out of pasteurized milk are presumably behind the regulations. [Clarification, I did not say ALL cheeses made with unpasteurized milk. Parmesan is so made. But the regulations did drive many small cheese makers out of business.
To best of my knowledge large cheese producers use pasteruirsed milk for consistency. Small cheese producers can manage without. Anyregs about pasteried content are probably related to size of operation, like jam jars. Iwas certainly eating locla unoasteruised cow and goat mils chees with rinds on in europe a month ago. UK banned rinds many years agao, but you could still get them in europe
, added since this answer was written] The EU has now officially introduced one law or regulation for the rich, and another for people who are not “high net worth” individuals as defined by the EU. I can no longer invest my money in USA-listed ETFs, supposedly for my protection. But I cannot opt out of being protected because I am not wealthy enough! (Also ETFs are collective investment vehicles that spread risk compared to buying individual shares). I regard this as a quite appalling precedent. What next will be denied to all people who are not millionaires?
ETF are exchange traded funds and are the euivalent of the old unit trusts we used to have in the uk. You can invest your money in US ETF if you want through various online brokers and even some banks. what you cannot do id invest though an intermediary. ETF in the state are considered very dodgy at the moment
Oh, and Merkel deciding to ignore the Dublin Treaty, and abandon all rule of law in terms of immigration, and allow all those economic migrants, human traffickers, and sex offenders from not just Syria, but many other places, whilst the real vulnerable victims languished on the borders of Turkey and Jordan.
Is this the same as the British govenment refusing to process children on their won trapped in greek refugee camps living in tents in winter? These chlldren have relatives in the Uk but he Uk is refusing to process them or is that the same as the British government refusing to register or monitor immigrants? Every other Eu country requires even EU citizens to register, show proof of cash, have criminal records checks done and prove medila insurance. i know, i just did it. I have to notiy immigration if imove house, and my landlord also has to notify them. The plain fact is that, prior to the EU we had Enoch Powell complaining about too many asian. Now we have nigel frage complaining about too many europeans. immigratio does not change much. England wants cheap labour. Since the referendum less eu have come and the govet has therefore allowed more asins to plug the gaps. net figure is the same, and as always 505 of all immigrants are from outside the EU. The immigration mess is because the home office has been sitting on its hands and no doing police checks and no applying eu rules to remove unemployed migrants
...and where were the EU whilst Yugoslavia was doing concentration camps?
In the same place we were. looking and doing nothing
It's important that people who have been lied to by the Remain establishment are open to challenging their assumptions about Leavers, it's the best way to reunite the country after the appalling divisiveness created by the elite puppetmasters of the Remain machine - do you really trust the likes of Juncker, Blair and Mandelsson?
I trust him a lot more that i trust Johnson, Farage and Corbyn. It is important that those who have been lied to by the leeve eton and tory elitists are open to challenging the views of the people conned by them. there is no healing. Simple fact, most remainers and millions of families are going to get hammered by brexit. Families will be broken up and jobs lost. brexit itself bring no benefits whatsoever
There's a bonfire of laws promulgated mainly under New Labour that needs lighting too:
https://www.thomsonreuters.com/en/press ... rexit.html
I am no fan of any particular party but council Tax, universal credit, the Harsh Environment, insurnce tax, vat raised to 20% all need to go on the bonfire. they were not labour.
User avatar
CaptainNemo
Expatriate
Posts: 128
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2019 8:51 pm
Reputation: 20
Location: In t' naughty lass
Kiribati

Re: Get ready for Brexit the website

Post by CaptainNemo » Tue Oct 08, 2019 1:22 pm

The Leave v Remain internicine struggle is a proxy war for ethnocentrist v mock-liberal-elite control of society; not unlike similar struggles in other countries.
Often people hastily ascribe parity between each side with other or previous struggles, but each one is unique. Remainers might wish to paint Leavers as inward-looking and protectionist, but that doesn't stack up when you look at how inward-looking and protectionist the EU is; and many Leavers want to trade with the rest of the world, that is growing. UK trade with the rest of the world is growing much faster than with the EU; the EU is stagnant, and has numerous internal problems, with poor domestic demand
pczz wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 2:19 am
"ECHR rulings misused by criminals to claim human rights they don't afford their victims, and the appalling precedents they've set, are worth citing.
Yes the UK created it, but not the warped version of it we have now. The UK also helped set up EFTA, which is a better organisation than the EU.'
Doesnt alter the fact the the EHCR is not an Eu organisation. The "warpoed"version you claim now exists was amended by the 49 member states. Furthermore EHCR rulings are routinely ignored by countries in the convention on the grounds of national secuirty. Its rulings only work if the state ruled against chooses to accept the verdict.
(47 member states)
The warped version is the HRA 1998 brought in by the New Labour Party; so perhaps it's the local Quislings in the mock-liberal-elite establishment that are the problem.
The ECtHR is, as you say, not the EU; but they share the same goals, the same flag, building are cheek by jowl with the EU and there are plans to merge the two courts.
Image
...there is a mess of jurisdictional overlap, and every member of the EU was a signatory to the ECHR.
The UK and Poland have opt-outs (44. here),

The ECtHR is heavily criticised for being overtly political, judicial activism, lack of judicial restraint, interfering in the legislature of member states in an unaccountable and undemocratic way, and is inconsistent with rulings on it's own member states; and it prompts the question, what makes the ECtHR so special? Why is even necessary? Aren't international ones sufficient? Is the UK system lesser? The convenstions aren't "routinely ignored", but many members are seeking reform of the ECtHR and of their own laws to limit its judicial aggression.
Image
I believe the EU still hasn't ratified the ECHR
A quote from someone you perhaps won't approve of, seems apposite when it comes the eurolaw situation:
The danger lies in pushing the effort to extremes that risk substituting the tyranny of judges for that of governments; historically, the dictatorship of the virtuous has often led to inquisitions and even witch-hunts.
Britain needs to reach back into it's long legal history and reassert it's Bill of Rights.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_Rights_1689
If it suits Remainers to use the Scottish version of this law to use the judiciary to overturn the freely expressed will of the electorate.

pczz wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 2:19 am
Every time you buy a new computer (or similar device) there’s yet another IEC cable (“kettle flex”) in the box. If you are replacing a PC you plug the old computer’s power cable into the new PC and throw the new cable into a heap of unused ones. It’s an EU law which makes it illegal to ship any such device without a power cable even if the power cable is detachable and could be sold separately or more sensibly, supplied free only if requested. The environmental cost of making and scrapping unused power cables must be enormous.
It is also a UK law that requires all new aplliances to have a certified and tested cable. The reasoning is that there is no way of knowing if the kettle lead in your old device has the same ratings as currently reuired and is not worn out. For exmpleif a landlord install a new kettle with a new lead it does not require testing, but subsequently it should be subjected to a PAT test every 2 yeasr. SUprisinlgy when i was running a 250 computer netwrork failure rate was around 25%
There's no UK law that says that all new appliances have to have a certified and tested cable.
Portable appliance testing (PAT)

Where a landlord provides an electrical appliance as part of a tenancy, the law expects the appliance will be maintained in a safe condition that will not cause harm to the tenant. Failure to do so could lead to the landlord being sued for negligence. However, the law is silent on how landlords should ensure they do this. As such, unless specifically required as part of a licence condition, portable appliance testing is always best practice for landlords but it is not a legal requirement.
Only HMO properties have a requirement for PAT testing every 5 years.
If your property is a house in multiple occupation (HMO) then it is a legal requirement to have an electrical safety inspection performed at intervals of no more than 5 years. This check must be performed by a competent person.

For properties that are not HMOs, there is no legal requirement for regular electrical safety inspections at present. However, the government has announced plans to extend the requirement to include all rented properties at some point. Further details will be forthcoming, including guidance, once more details are provided.
https://www.rla.org.uk/landlord/guides/ ... ions.shtml

I've done the PAT certificate, never seen anywhere near that many failures; "PAT Testing" is well-known as money-for-old-rope. Well done if somone can scare landlords into paying for it - very entrepreneurial.

At work, "PAT Testing" is not exactly a legal requirement, more a HSE and insurance requirement:
"The law does require however that employers, including self-employed, ensure that all electrical equipment that they provide in their business is safe and properly maintained"
https://www.pat.org.uk/is-pat-testing-a ... quirement/
I associate PUWER with electrical tools, like angle grinders, which I've done certificates in.

It is an "EU thing" in that there were existing regulations, and EC directives forced the promulgations of new ones simply to homogenise the law across the EU.
When providing new work equipment for use at work, you must ensure it conforms with the essential requirements of European Community law (for new machinery this means the Machinery Directive). You must check it:

is CE marked
comes with a Declaration of Conformity
is provided with instructions in English
is free from obvious defects – and that it remains so during its working life
http://www.hse.gov.uk/work-equipment-ma ... /puwer.htm
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/1989/654/oj

pczz wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 2:19 am
They’ve mandated a power reduction in vacuum cleaners. They think this saves electricity. What it does do, is cause one to spend twice as long on the same cleaning. And possibly, use more electricity in the process.
Ditto, proposed only, kettles, which is guaranteed by the simple laws of physics to waste electricity not save it.
Where is the evidence from testing? possibility does not usuually enter into electrical safety items. the last i read on this topic was Dyson (the great brexiteer who is moving production to Singapore) claiming it would cut down on cheap, energy inefficient models from China, but the method of measuring was no approprate for his cleaner
This directive has been annulled: https://www.which.co.uk/news/2017/08/eu ... d-to-know/
Thanks to Dyson: https://www.which.co.uk/news/2018/11/dy ... -annulled/
Interestingly the reason given was:
The European Commission (EC) said there wasn’t a reliable and reproducible test using partially loaded vacuums that could be used instead.
In its ruling, the European General Court said that using an empty vacuum cleaner to calculate energy performance did not comply with the essential elements of the energy label directive, which specifies reporting energy consumption during use. As this element of the testing could not be separated from the energy label as a whole, the General Court ruled that the whole label should be annulled.
For most traditional vacuum cleaners, the motor size will have an effect on performance; Dyson ones, not so much, because they use a different mechanism.

It's great news that Dyson is moving to Singapore, rebuilding business links between Britain and Asia, where markets are growing (unlike the EU), I believe he exported a lot of British products to Japan, which just goes to show how the EU is not the be-all and end-all of trade, and never was. I hope Britain engages fully with Hong Kong's situation, and doesn't turn a blind eye to PRC actions in the Champa Sea. I read that Cambodia as made an agreement with the UK to be the ASEAN POC nation.
It's a positive thing for the UK to break out of the EU "Colditz" trade prison-fortress, and return to doing business with the whole world, not just part of it.

pczz wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 2:19 am
Proposed only, a ban on the availability of Glyphosate weedkiller to gardeners. Not a ban on its use in agriculture. There’s no evidence it’s not safe, and it’s remarkably non-toxic to animals. Just a ban on its use by people who have not attended a training course. How on earth is one supposed to deal with Ground Elder or Bindweed if the only remaining permitted weedkiller is banned? They’e also banned Bordeaux mixture. Copper is not seriously poisonous. The fungicides that are now available are quite probably more dangerous in the food chain, but are far more profitable to big agrichemical businesses.
Not sure a proposed ban counts as an existing law, but the uk banned glyphosphate in useful coincentrations yeasr ago whe products like roundup and pathclear stopped working. Farmers were allowed stronger concentrations and i "borrowed" some. Its been 10 years since i had a lawn, so uk restrictions hav ebeen inplace for years, even before the alleged proposed EU rule, which would just bring them into line with us.
Dunno... I never used this stuff.

pczz wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 2:19 am
The tampon tax. The UK government wants to reduce VAT on tampons and other female sanitary products to zero. It’s a tax that should never have existed. But the EU won’t let us reduce it below 5%. PS I’m a man!
and as a man u are wrong. "The Prime Minister secured agreement with his European counterparts at the March European Council to welcome the intention of the Commission to enable increased flexibility for member states with respect to zero and reduced rates of VAT.The UK is using this opportunity to provide for the reduction of VAT on women’s sanitary products to the zero-rate." this is from 2016 govt website https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... y-products. Resolved 3 years ago in march prior to the referencum
source must be out of date then. ("referencum", are you using sticky keys :bad: )
pczz wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 2:19 am
VAT on Electricity, gas and heating oil. Ditto, although I’m not so sure that the UK government actually wants to remove this tax.
VAT on books. OK, they are still zero-rated in the UK because they were zero-rated when we joined the EU. But how can a supposedly civilized institution support a mandatory tax on books?
This is from the governentn website. "Unless otherwise specified legal references will be from the VAT Act 1994 (VATA 1994).Under the Act supplies of fuel and power are subject to the standard rate of VAT unless they are eligible for the reduced rate under Schedule 7A or being exported outside the EU under Section 30 (6)." website https://www.gov.uk/guidance/vat-on-fuel ... 9#overview. Again, the vat is immposed by uk law, not Eu law
Not sure about that...
When the EU was begotten from the EEC or EC in 1992, new VAT laws came into being, and they've since been added to by the Lisbon Treaty (TFEU Art. 113).
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content ... 31992L0077

EU VAT on ebooks and similar things:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/bus ... nsive.html
...it looks like they're harvesting income from the Europeseantry like a feudal lord. It looks like a system of tribute paid by subject nations to a Holy Roman Empire.
VAT and customs law

EU law necessarily governs VAT, although member states are given considerable discretion both by the legislator and the courts.
...
The doctrine of abuse of right derives from the EU legal order but the UK has played a major role in developing it and the UK Supreme Court may have somewhat domesticated it.
...
‘the principle of EU law preventing the abuse of the VAT system (see, for example, the cases of Halifax and Kittel) continues to be relevant, in accordance with that Act, for the purposes of the law relating to value added tax.’
...
EU law will shape UK VAT law for a long time to come.
https://www.taxjournal.com/articles/how ... e-18102018
pczz wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 2:19 am
VAT on all foodstuffs. Ditto.
same website covers food vat. NOT CHARGED on what you buy except for through catering outlets and specified exemption like ice cream 9presumably on health grounds] pretty sure its the same in Europe. Cetainly whwre I was food was vat free, so i hav eno idea where you got the idea food is subject to VAT? Boris Johnson perhaps?
Never met him; nor did I go to Eton.
The UK does appear to have a VAT exemption on food and children's medicines:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldn ... thing.html
It's not one of mine, but the point of contention seems to be more to do with UK VAT appearing to be set by a foreign power.

No VAT on "foodstuffs" in Malta and the UK
https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/s ... tes_en.pdf

How was Malta?
pczz wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 2:19 am
HS2. Yes, it’s a UK government folly that they want to build it, but it’s an EU diktat that says it must be an ultra-high-speed line. It would be far more useful and far cheaper were it just an ordinary 100mph express line to add capacity to the UK rail network, with more stations and local services. Or spend the money on making the existing lines and stations take double-decker trains. Look at Switzerland. Their railways are as near perfect as any I’ve experienced. The one thing they don’t do, is 220mph trains.
Unfortunatley part of the funding for HS2 is from the EU, and that funing is only available for high speed infrastructure. Same rules apply to Spain, France and Germany. The anser is simple, dont ask the EU for a high speed rail grant and build it yourself with your own money
It is our own money - that's kind of the point!
There is no such thing as funding from the EU - its largely UK money being passed through the Eurocracy and skimmed off by the parasites there (this is particularly true of science funding, btw, where most "EU science funding" is paid for by the UK, rebranding it and giving a false impression; consequently UK withdrawal will mean a big boost of funding for UK science, where most of the best universities in the EU were, anyway - filled with EU students receiving recycled/eurolaundered UK money).

I actually support HS2, and I don't understand a lot of Leavers' hostility to it. My support is as an engineer seeing the boost to UK engineering that it would bring.
pczz wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 2:19 am
Corruption. the EU budget has not been signed off by its auditors for twenty yeas. Also EU top brass salaries and expenses. Private jets hired for 200 mile journeys within Europe, and lots of suchlike. It’s not exactly corruption, because it’s within the rules! They are trying to keep it secret. We are paying for this, as one of the net-contributor countries.
I am not going to dispute this. After all, Boris wants a Private plane and seems to be able to spend a lot of money keeping his american girlfriend handy. Corruption is everwhere in every countryin the world. Do you seriously think UK officials are going to fly esijet and stay on campsites when they trot round the world doing trade deasl. Why dont they all use skype
I don't get the dig at Boris, plenty of millionaire socialists like Blair and Brown like flying around in private jets at the public expense. Brown racked up quite an impressive set of expenses in his epic sulk at being hated out of office, along with the rest of the New Labour bores. Speaking of Trots, do you seriously expect Comrade Corbyn to be flying easyjet or will the workers be mobilised to create a "people's video conferencing software application"?!
pczz wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 2:19 am
Ban on recycled jam-jars. We used to keep jars we bought in the shops filled with jam or marmalade, wash them, sterilize them in the oven, fill them with home-made jam, and give the surplus to church fetes and suchlike. It’s now illegal for a church fete to sell jam that’s not been poured into a brand-new jam-jar.
The EU patent office. I’d need a couple of pages to explain, so Google if you need more. Corrupt and incompetent and working to the detriment of 99% of businesses (and to the benefit of large non-EU businesses).
Sorry, wrong again "Rather than checking the original regulations for themselves, the Church of England then wrote to all parishes telling them that their parishioners must no longer sell or donate preserves in recycled jars. They claimed that they had contacted the Food Standards Advisory Service who had confirmed that this was the case. This seems rather unlikely since this is NOT the information given by the FSA. The FSA document concerned is the “Guidance Notes for Food Business Operators on Food Safety, Traceability, Withdrawal and Product Recall”. The FSA says that local authorities determine what constitutes a food business and that the occasional selling of preserves made from what you grew in the garden in order to raise money for charity, school fetes and local events, is not considered to be a food business. The EU Commission has confirmed this." website is http://www.jametc.com/jars.html
https://blogs.ec.europa.eu/ECintheUK/in ... -eu-rules/
All I could find was a directive about single-use plastic containers
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2019/904/oj
What a pickle.
pczz wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 2:19 am
The forthcoming death of most of the Ash trees in the UK. I don’t know if our politicians could have spotted the danger in time and banned imports of trees that carried the Ash die-back fungus to the UK, but before the EU the presumption was against the import of any living plants unless explicitly permitted. Now, it’s too late. The trees are dying. [Edit] now the disease that is wiping out olive groves in the EU has also been imported and is destroying lavender bushes.
from https://www.woodlandtrust.org.uk/trees- ... -diseases/ "The spores of this fungus can travel in the wind so it is possible that it arrived in the UK naturally however it was also inadvertently imported on ash saplings. The UK was importing thousands of ash plants from infected parts of Europe until a ban came into place in 2012. This undoubtedly sped up the spread of the disease within the UK because the disease was able to spread from areas of new planting via wind to mature trees.' what this does not explain is why the governement doid not indpect these trees, knowing they were coming from infected areas
It also shows the age of the article.
It sounds like the Forestry Commission (and Agency part of DEFRA?) is supposed to do it, not just "the government".
https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/docum ... cph002.pdf
https://www.gov.uk/government/organisat ... nd-opening
Page 5-9 seem to answer your question:
https://www.parliament.uk/documents/com ... final3.pdf
The EU Plant Health directive seems to have obstructed matters until 2012, tying DEFRA's hands.
https://ec.europa.eu/food/plant/plant_h ... slation_en
pczz wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 2:19 am
The common fisheries policy. It mandated that if fish of the wrong species were caught accidentally, the dead fish had to be thrown overboard, and the fishermen carried on killing more fish, until they reached the “right” quotas of the “right” species.
This is common in fisheries protection around the world to stop fishermen acciedentally fishing in water with deliberatley to cath more valuable protected fish. Nothin unusual about it and it will continue after brexit to safegard stocke of the accidentally caught fish accidentally caught using the wrong net at the wrong depth.
"accidentally" bwahahahaha... I've been out at sea near Rockall, and you can see Spanish and French fishing boats on the radar. They go even further out than that, as they've fished out their own EEZs. The UK needs more (Australian/US-style) robust coastal enforcement, and that means a fleet of Coastguard patrol vessels capable of intercepting and repulsing trespassing and transgressing vessels. Obviously, that will require a budget, and an infrastructure to bring the MCA and UK Border Force together.
pczz wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 2:19 am
Dieselgate. It’s all VW’s fault, they say. Oh, and Daimler. And Renault. And … Nothing to do with us. We just make the laws. I don’t believe them. At best they’re proved incompetent. At worst, in a smoke-filled room somewhere, they connived in a deception for the benefit of EU car-makers. And the funny thing is, that Japanese and
Korean makers seem to have managed to actually comply with the “impossible” regulations, which I’m sure were made as a non-tariff barrier to non-EU car imports.
As i understand it there was nothing wrong with the test. The computer software in the EMU was prgrammed to recognise a test sequence and alter engine setting to minimise the effect, circumventing the rules. i really do not see how the hacking by the manufacturers can be blamed on the government or the EU, but bear in min EU emissions tests are far stricter that ours, but only done every 2 years like the mot. Many cars that pass the pthetic uk MOT would not pas a european one. i thik it was first picked up in Clifornia who are even stricter than us and it affected us build vehicles and also Jeep, Jeep is no an EU company, but was using the same techniques on Americna cars sold in California. It omly affected dieselcars and they are no that popular in the states where petrolis cheaper so I dont see any gret benefit for exports
Surely, "circumventing the rules" means that there's something wrong with the test?!
The writer's accusation seems to be more about alleged deliberate poor regulation and inspection by competent authorities either in Germany or in the EU bureacracy in order to protect EU car manufacturers from more competitive non-EU products. Certainly EU car manufacturers are bit vulnerable recently, and domestic demand is weak.

Road vehicles amount to about £40Bn of goods exports in terms of value, and are quite significant.
https://www.smmt.co.uk/wp-content/uploa ... REPORT.pdf
Diesel is a quite a significant and growing proportion of that (page 12; page 18). Most UK exported vehicles are Japanese models, it would be good to have a FTA with Japan and build on that relationship - drive on the same side, drink tea, monarchy with ancient and distinct culture, and have an expansionistic, overbearing, undemocratic contintental neighbour.
About 25% of exports go to the USA and about half that again to China & Japan; and yes about 55% go to the EU. The proportion of imports from the EU is about 78%, with Japan and Korea about a tenth as much, but that will probably rise after Brexit, not least because they tend to make very efficient and better value vehicles.
pczz wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 2:19 am
Real cheese. Several cheeses formerly made with unpasteurized milk have been rendered unprofitable by impossibly tough regulation. The big commercial cheesemakers making bland imitations out of pasteurized milk are presumably behind the regulations. [Clarification, I did not say ALL cheeses made with unpasteurized milk. Parmesan is so made. But the regulations did drive many small cheese makers out of business.
To best of my knowledge large cheese producers use pasteruirsed milk for consistency. Small cheese producers can manage without. Anyregs about pasteried content are probably related to size of operation, like jam jars. Iwas certainly eating locla unoasteruised cow and goat mils chees with rinds on in europe a month ago. UK banned rinds many years agao, but you could still get them in europe
So the writer is moaning about regulations, but doesn't specify any. It seems strange that countries in the EU can continue with this and the UK can't.
Maybe he's talking about this? https://publications.europa.eu/en/publi ... anguage-en
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyl ... ations-fsa
pczz wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 2:19 am
, added since this answer was written] The EU has now officially introduced one law or regulation for the rich, and another for people who are not “high net worth” individuals as defined by the EU. I can no longer invest my money in USA-listed ETFs, supposedly for my protection. But I cannot opt out of being protected because I am not wealthy enough! (Also ETFs are collective investment vehicles that spread risk compared to buying individual shares). I regard this as a quite appalling precedent. What next will be denied to all people who are not millionaires?
ETF are exchange traded funds and are the euivalent of the old unit trusts we used to have in the uk. You can invest your money in US ETF if you want through various online brokers and even some banks. what you cannot do id invest though an intermediary. ETF in the state are considered very dodgy at the moment
Even so, the EU has no business mollycoddling people like this, it's almost Asiatic in it's paternalism.
pczz wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 2:19 am
Oh, and Merkel deciding to ignore the Dublin Treaty, and abandon all rule of law in terms of immigration, and allow all those economic migrants, human traffickers, and sex offenders from not just Syria, but many other places, whilst the real vulnerable victims languished on the borders of Turkey and Jordan.
Is this the same as the British govenment refusing to process children on their won trapped in greek refugee camps living in tents in winter? These chlldren have relatives in the Uk but he Uk is refusing to process them or is that the same as the British government refusing to register or monitor immigrants? Every other Eu country requires even EU citizens to register, show proof of cash, have criminal records checks done and prove medila insurance. i know, i just did it. I have to notiy immigration if imove house, and my landlord also has to notify them. The plain fact is that, prior to the EU we had Enoch Powell complaining about too many asian. Now we have nigel frage complaining about too many europeans. immigratio does not change much. England wants cheap labour. Since the referendum less eu have come and the govet has therefore allowed more asins to plug the gaps. net figure is the same, and as always 505 of all immigrants are from outside the EU. The immigration mess is because the home office has been sitting on its hands and no doing police checks and no applying eu rules to remove unemployed migrants
Those children are not the responsibility of the British government; and in fact, they shouldn't even be the responsibility of the Greek government. The rules are clear, refugees go to the first safe country, and the resources are put there, where they can have the most impact. This is not a bonanza for human traffickers or a free-for-all for wannabe economic migrants. The media using children to manipulate sentiment is irresponsible activism and abuse of power.
The plain facts are that Enoch Powell was born in India, spoke Indian languages, was a PhD at 21, and was not the pariah (and Indian word) the ridiculous rabid left want to smear him as. He didn't complain about "too many Asians" (although he was more qualified to do so than the idiots trying to push for mass immigration).
Nigel Farage is not the only person complaining about mass European immigration, at least 17.4 million other people are complaining about it too, amongst them, places like Jarrow, where the Labour party has ideological origins, parts of the country betrayed by the Labour party and the mock-liberal-elite they installed.
Immigration does change much, it changes the cost of land, put simply, because the land and infrastructure is finite, and the ability to change it (presuming that the locals even want to) is subject to a finite speed limit of how long it takes to implement changes. That increase in cost of land feeds into every cost, not just accommodation prices, which continued to rise with increased immigration far inexcess of wages; but also the prices of commercial and industrial land, and the prices of their products. It also contributes to downward pressure on wages as companies try to maintain profit and cashflow, and of course, they welcome cheap imported labour, that doesn't complain, and is happy to live in substandard accommodation and constribute to the undermining of workers rights accumulated over the last 200+ years.
Add to that Inflation exceeding growth, particularly in the developed parts of the EU, and you have incessant pressure on cost of living and quality of life; access to public services is finite, and as numbers of users increase, the user experience declines. This is not an emotive point, but mathematical one; it's impact is emotive to native people dislodged from their security in their own country. EU immgrant labour is not being supplanted by Asian labour; but there are certainly enough native workers available for retraining and opportunities for the market to adjust to show the real cost of products, which will be painful for those who've benefited from cheap immigrant labour. Their benefit has been someone elses loss as wealth gap has polarised people in the UK, and has something to do with the referendum result.
pczz wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 2:19 am
...and where were the EU whilst Yugoslavia was doing concentration camps?
In the same place we were. looking and doing nothing
I was at school; but even so, the "European project" was founded to prevent war and the sort of atrocities that happened in the 20th century.
Their lack of response was pathetic, as is any glib throwaway remark criticising the EU for it's ineffectiveness in the Balkans in the 90s.
pczz wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 2:19 am
It's important that people who have been lied to by the Remain establishment are open to challenging their assumptions about Leavers, it's the best way to reunite the country after the appalling divisiveness created by the elite puppetmasters of the Remain machine - do you really trust the likes of Juncker, Blair and Mandelsson?
I trust him a lot more that i trust Johnson, Farage and Corbyn. It is important that those who have been lied to by the leeve eton and tory elitists are open to challenging the views of the people conned by them. there is no healing. Simple fact, most remainers and millions of families are going to get hammered by brexit. Families will be broken up and jobs lost. brexit itself bring no benefits whatsoever
You trust "Blair, Junker, and Mandelsson" more than... I can't believe any sane person could really mean that...
The leave movement is not to do with Eton or the Tories (Oliver Letwin could be considered part of the Remain elite), there are millions of working-class Labour (and ex-Labour) voters who are pro Brexit. Go and look at the results in the northern conurbations. Corbyn knows this, and that's why he is reluctant to alienate this large constituency by acceeding to the demands of Remainiac elitists in his own party, people who should be in that lunatic fringe the Libidinous Demagogues.
https://brexitcentral.com/how-did-the-p ... ic-rabble/
Nobody has been conned, the Leave campaign started in 1992, I know, because I joined the Campaign for an Independent Britain then, and there has been a 25-year campaign for the chance to leave. Yes, many remainers are self-interested, wealthy socialists/liberals, and they don't care about the impact on the working classes, the jobs lost and families broken of their grand project. Brexit brings hope to millions, to escape a failing organisation that is on the brink of sliding into recession and dragging the UK down with it to bail it out, like Germany had to do for Greece. There are countless benefits to Brexit, and bringing growth and global trade, jobs, and engagement, particularly with Asia, are part of them... along with a proper immigration policy, reducing the UK population, and reducing the cost of land.

pczz wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 2:19 am
There's a bonfire of laws promulgated mainly under New Labour that needs lighting too:
https://www.thomsonreuters.com/en/press ... rexit.html
I am no fan of any particular party but council Tax, universal credit, the Harsh Environment, insurnce tax, vat raised to 20% all need to go on the bonfire. they were not labour.
I prefer VAT to income tax, because then I can choose not to pay tax to some extent. The UK tax system offers numerous ways for people to avoid having their income harvested to fund left-wing social engineering projects. I would like to see the UK being more like Norway and Switzerland... building up a sovereign wealth fund, and having democratic subsidiarity in a Cantonal system to prevent wannabe presidents and career politicians selling snake-oil Euro-imperialist fantasies to line their own pockets and self-aggrandize.
The so-called "Hostile Environment" is called a normal modern immigration policy, and has a lot of support, and works well in places like Australia and Canada.
Local income tax would be better than rates, but the council tax lets plenty of people off the hook for tax. I don't like taxes on insurance, pensions, military personnel, and on property, or the anachronistic "licence fee", they don't solve any problem, just mug people. I dunno about UC, but I resented paying loads of tax to support other people's shopping at Argos, whilst even with a good salary, a middle-income famliy could barely get by because they are considered too wealthy (!) to get any tax credits.
I'm not like other boys...
Post Reply Previous topicNext topic
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 58 guests