Jump to content

Brexit Penny Dropping?


ManxTaxPayer

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, woolley said:

But they only consider the implications on a very mundane level. Very lucky to have broken free of it.

Isn't the now sovereign UK applying the same ruling?  That's what was said earlier.  

I can't be arsed looking for the detail but it is clearly something that you and VoiceofUnreason are not going to pay any attention to anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, manxman1980 said:

Isn't the now sovereign UK applying the same ruling?  That's what was said earlier.  

I can't be arsed looking for the detail but it is clearly something that you and VoiceofUnreason are not going to pay any attention to anyway.

Well I too can’t be arsed looking myself. Maybe the sovereign UK is applying the same ruling, maybe it isn’t.

But the whole idea of sovereignty is that you can decide what you want to do yourself. This has been pointed out to Remainers like yourself ad infinitum. I really thought you might have got it by now.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

Well I too can’t be arsed looking myself. Maybe the sovereign UK is applying the same ruling, maybe it isn’t.

But the whole idea of sovereignty is that you can decide what you want to do yourself. This has been pointed out to Remainers like yourself ad infinitum. I really thought you might have got it by now.

 

Sorry, but it is you citing this example as EU nonsense.  You should then know all the detail and, if the UK is applying the same rule, then you should also be able to explain why that is the case (and probably more importantly why that is the fault of the EU).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, manxman1980 said:

Sorry, but it is you citing this example as EU nonsense.  You should then know all the detail and, if the UK is applying the same rule, then you should also be able to explain why that is the case (and probably more importantly why that is the fault of the EU).

 

It is EU nonsense as explained above in this thread.


The information I quoted was from an article which was quite detailed. Short of being involved in the creation  and implementation of this EU legislation there’s not any more information I can give.

Similarly I’m not involved with implementing UK legislation.


I can however speculate that it’s pragmatism that the UK doesn’t implement a law that says bottled water in the UK can or should  carry a label that says drinking water can help reduce dehydration.

It’s not a case of applying the same rule, it’s more a case of not unapplying it. It would add extra cost to EU suppliers of bottled water to differentiate  the packaging between intra EU sales and sales to the UK, and for those UK suppliers selling to the EU.  
This should solve itself over time as manufacturers/ producers adjust to different domestic legislation and cultures in the various countries they supply as many  do in the course of marketing their products worldwide.

That is why it is “ the fault” of the EU if you want to put it in those terms.

I don’t think there is any “ fault”,  just  differences that occur when countries  decide they want to go back to running their own affairs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, manxman1980 said:

Isn't the now sovereign UK applying the same ruling?  That's what was said earlier.  

I can't be arsed looking for the detail but it is clearly something that you and VoiceofUnreason are not going to pay any attention to anyway.

Did you quote me in error? Attention to what? I have no idea what you are on about, MM1980. If it's to do with all of that baloney about wine measures, then it's nothing to do with me. I didn't read any of it, and certainly didn't engage on it. They can bring the wine in buckets for all I care so long as they keep bringing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, woolley said:

Did you quote me in error? Attention to what? I have no idea what you are on about, MM1980. If it's to do with all of that baloney about wine measures, then it's nothing to do with me. I didn't read any of it, and certainly didn't engage on it. They can bring the wine in buckets for all I care so long as they keep bringing it.

No, it wasn't in error and I was referring to the labelling of bottled water.

The pint of wine nonsense isn't an EU law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, manxman1980 said:

@The Voice of Reason

But pints of wine are fine and won't add extra costs for producers?

I’d be very surprised if wine started being sold in pints. I don’t believe I ever said it would.

The whole point of this discussion is that UK producers are no longer prohibited from doing so if they choose.

 I’m not sure how that point has escaped you after all the postings on this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

I’d be very surprised if wine started being sold in pints. I don’t believe I ever said it would.

The whole point of this discussion is that UK producers are no longer prohibited from doing so if they choose.

 I’m not sure how that point has escaped you after all the postings on this thread.

I’m not sure how it’s escaped you that the regulations affect sellers, in the UK, and are not just limited to “UK producers”.

So French champagne producers can now bottle in 568ml as long as they don’t attempt to sell where such sale is against regulations.

Its no different to the situation whereby Scots Whiskey and French Cognac producers bottle their spirits in 700ml and 750ml bottles ( the latter being for the US market ).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, John Wright said:

 

Clearly had

Clearly hasn’t. Just because I chose not to add “ and sellers” to producers in the sentence doesn’t mean I’m unaware that it equally applies to them.

I could write that Manchester City are contenders for the League Championship without having to mention that Liverpool are too.

What sort of logic are you employing here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

Clearly hasn’t. Just because I chose not to add “ and sellers” to producers in the sentence doesn’t mean I’m unaware that it equally applies to them.

I could write that Manchester City are contenders for the League Championship without having to mention that Liverpool are too.

What sort of logic are you employing here?

It’s your use of UK that lends the lie to that. First class revisionism, however.

And when caught out you obfuscate like mad.

What are you on?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, La Colombe said:
18 hours ago, woolley said:

But they only consider the implications on a very mundane level. Very lucky to have broken free of it.

What utter tosh...! And that's putting it mildly...

Brexit has not only been an inevitable failure but it hit the UK's GDP by at least 4% compared to the pandemics 2%. We are now having big investors not coming to the UK citing brexit as the direct cause like Tesla and China's BYD etc etc

So the much hackneyed "sovereignty" is now front and centre.

Our so-called "sovereignty" was never an issue since joining the EEC in 1973. In fact as far as I'm aware it was  never in the public's consciousness. Probably because since 1973 the UK was thriving as a full EU member with the best deal in one of the best trading blocs on the planet. Now all pissed away by the brexiteers with it's inevitable consequences.

With none of the brexit promises coming to fruition, mainly because they were mostly lies from various chancers and newspaper owners only interested in self-aggrandisment and tax dodging, the only "justification" they have left for the whole sorry farrago and the damage it has caused is "sovereignty" so we can "take back control" or some such nonsense.

I can't help thinking that Samuel Johnson made a small error in his famous 1775 statement. It surely should have read:

"Sovereignty is the last refuge of the scoundrel"

Amen to that...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...