If it be your will wrote:Well I hope to speak for nearly all leavers here, and will welcome any leaver to object if I don't speak for them, but very, very few leavers would mourn the passing of May's deal. It was terrible. Absolutely woeful. That's not the same as saying a close variant of it won't be passed, though. But if it did, we have all - leavers and remainers alike - made a terrible mistake.

(Mala still sticks up for it sometimes, but that's about it)

martin_p wrote:That’s you schooled.

martin_p wrote:Absolutely. May’s deal is a hard Brexit. It was everything Farage and co had dreamt of but it was thrown away because you may have had to wait a couple of years for it (having waited a generation for a referendum). The harder the no deal Brexiteers push the less likely it is to happen in my opinion. We’re in a position now where Labour have moved to a referendum in which they’ll support remain and the Lib Dem’s revoke article 50. Unless the Tories can win (or manufacture) a majority at the next election (or Johnson pulls something out of the bag in the next month) then Brexit starts to look as far away as it’s looked since 22nd June 2016.

Elizabeth wrote:Then why post something that would for the normal way of thinking be unnecessary?

If it be your will wrote:Jeez. We're on different planets, aren't we?

If it be your will wrote:Jeez. We're on different planets, aren't we?

Lancasterclaret wrote:I think we are.

Nothing in a lexit is vaguely credible to me so we are bound to be!

If it be your will wrote:Your post I could at least get my head round. Martin's, no.

Oh well. Let's just sit back and see what the hell happens.

aggi wrote:I must have missed this earlier.

I'd say Yes. But that doesn't really seem a justification in my eyes for making it even worse.

I guess if your view is "these people are already suffering, we'll make it much worse" then that's fair enough but it's not one I agree with.

Whilst we're bringing up unanswered points, here's a few you've refused to answer:

[i]Please explain why RBS, Lloyds, HBOS and various other had to divest themselves of various business groups, spin off into separate companies and set up a fund for their smaller competitors. You need to do this without mentioning the EU (as you claimed the EU said the bailout was fine so it can't be anything to do with them).

Please explain why me wanting us to leave the EU on something akin to May's deal whereas you stamped your foot and said no makes me the one who is refusing to respect the referendum and leave the EU (bear in mind that the referendum only referred to leaving the EU, not what the deal was, so vague comments about not really leaving are meaningless, we're talking facts here).

In the Dame Laura Cox inquiry please show where the QC responsible for the inquiry concluded, "The fish always rots from the head down"?[/i]

martin_p wrote:You got me those Jelly Babies yet DA?

aggi wrote:Indeed. Not complimentary but the point was more that you tend to play fast and loose with "facts".

Anyway, you now, finally, accept that rises in the cost of food and goods disproportionately affects the lowest paid.

I've never not accepted that. What I'm waiting for is your evidence that the cost of food and goods has risen in real terms for the lowest paid.

The answer to your third question is yes, it's a matter of record.

However, your issue is that you have taken three discrete questions and tried to link them by putting them in the same post. In reality, unless you provide the evidence as above there is a disconnect in your argument.

Also, I note that you have refused to answer 2 of my questions. I assume you're trying to reconcile answering those questions correctly or sticking with your earlier statements that contradict the answers.

Elizabeth wrote:But not before saying DA.

Don't you get it, martin is making fun of you. And like the gang fool you think you are in on the joke.

I bet Lancaster is doing one of his ha, ha, ha routines while you are out at the shop.

Elizabeth wrote:Time for me to go I think

aggi wrote:I think the bit you're looking for is We will reject ‘no deal’ as a viable option and if needs be negotiate transitional arrangements to avoid a cliff-edge for the economy. It was in my previous post, not sure how you missed it.

MPs are still judged by their manifestos, it is just done retrospectively. Pretty much no party has ever achieved all the stuff in their manifesto but next time round the voters will look at what they did achieve those promises and decide whether they're going to vote their MP in again.

The LibDems ventured too far from what they had promised and next time round suffered badly.

What if a party that you hadn't voted for was elected as a government. Then wanting to bring in some extreme measures that you, and the majority if the People thought were outrageous, decided because they were acting "as best as they saw fit" decided to suspend all general elections for the next 20 years or something like that, if not exactly that. Would that be acceptable aggi. ?

It wouldn't be acceptable but that's why we have checks and balances such as the Lords, the Supreme Court, requiring a majority vote, etc.

It's a pretty poor example because in reality there's nothing to stop that happening now. What would most likely stop it would be MPs rebelling against their party and not voting it through.

aggi wrote:
on the surface you may be voting for a party, manifesto, a PM, etc"

aggi wrote:
" as they see fit"

RingoMcCartney wrote:You've previously said,



So you have no problem with MPs straying away from their electoral manifesto based , mandate.

And you clearly approve of MPs acting




Do you know what happens when politicians stray away from electoral, manifesto based mandates and do "as they see fit " aggi?

They start illegal invasions of countries like Iraq and it leads to the deaths of hundreds of thousand of innocent men , women and children aggi.

CombatClaret wrote:Good to free ourselves from all that EU red tape! Farmers will rejoice as the plow those subsidy free and highly profitable sunlit uplands...

export.jpg

martin_p wrote:Just as a matter of interest, which wars were in party manifestos?

RingoMcCartney wrote:Probably none.

Who was talking about "wars" Marty.?

I said "illegal invasions"

martin_p wrote:Which court deemed it illegal?

Besides, your point wasn’t about the legality of the invasion but the fact that it had come about through a government’ doing as it deemed fit’. All conflicts/wars come about that way.

martin_p wrote:I’ll wait for dsr to tell us the real story.

Lancasterclaret wrote:I think this is the problem we all have with this.

It does matter what you call them, because you have to have a best and worst case scenario.

If you don't, then you are continuing the denying of reality in public to placate people who would otherwise might ask "Why the hell are we doing this again?" into actual government planning. If you do that, then when the inevitable inquiry happens to what went wrong, you'd better be 100% sure you are not going to get sold down the river and have a chain of evidence that protects you.

That is the same in any business that does contingency planning, and the "covering your back" mentality will be absolutely top priority in the civil service I'd have thought.

dsr wrote:No, I'm amazed. Frankly, I hadn't realised that until now, meat exports were subject to no health checks, no vet inspections, no paperwork, no customs or VAT forms, no farm licensing. I hadn't realised it was so easy. You'll be telling me next they're going to have to put tags in cows' ears after Brexit.

What was on the equivalent pre-Brexit flowchart?

(Just for comparison purposes, here is an outline from Bromley Council on what you have to do to move a pig. Obviously it's only an outline and the detail is quite a lot more. See link. It seems to me to be a bit more complicated than just "drive it through the tunnel".)

https://www.bromley.gov.uk/leaflet/237554/1/788/ch" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A yearly count of pigs must take place and the maximum number normally on the holding recorded together with the actual amount.[/i]

Greenmile wrote:No you haven't. You've posted one link that says (amongst other things) :-

"The High Court agreed with the Electoral Commission finding in July that Vote Leave had broken the law..."

I'm looking for something that says the same about the Remain campaign. Perhaps I've just missed it and you can point it out to me.

On the other hand, Claret-on-a-T-Rex did find a link which says :-

"The Electoral Commission has rejected allegations that the Remain campaign broke electoral law..."

So you really need to find me a credible source (ie not a random YouTuber) which says the Remain campaign "broke the law".

Or you can just keep repeating the same lie again and again, but don't expect me to engage further with you if you do (other than to point out the fact that you're lying so nobody else is taken in by you) - my time would be better spent trying to explain what evidence is to Ringo, or who sets the minimum wage to Jakub (that's an exaggeration, obviously).

I tend to base my opinion on known facts, rather than things I would like to be true, like you do.

Elizabeth wrote:And if anyone seriously think anyone who writes like Ringo could be able to change into my sophisticated style and humour all I can say is that they must be off their heads.
Then again........

Lancasterclaret wrote:I know its not going well when you turn into Ringo.

Wonder what could possibly have bought a Brexit post on from Rowls. Its normally to try to deflect from some really bad Brexit news............

Damo wrote:https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/ ... ssion=true
Awkward?

dsr wrote:No, I'm amazed. Frankly, I hadn't realised that until now, meat exports were subject to no health checks, no vet inspections, no paperwork, no customs or VAT forms, no farm licensing. I hadn't realised it was so easy. You'll be telling me next they're going to have to put tags in cows' ears after Brexit.

What was on the equivalent pre-Brexit flowchart?

(Just for comparison purposes, here is an outline from Bromley Council on what you have to do to move a pig. Obviously it's only an outline and the detail is quite a lot more. See link. It seems to me to be a bit more complicated than just "drive it through the tunnel".)

https://www.bromley.gov.uk/leaflet/237554/1/788/ch" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Trading Standards Institute Advice
The keeping and movement of pigs
Pixel
In the guide

Before moving a pig to your holding
Notification of holdings
Reporting pig movements
Electronic eAML2 licences
How the system works
Movement of pigs to slaughter
Movement record
Feeding pigs
Identification of pigs
Requirements for pig movements
'Standstill' rules
Penalties
Pig keeping requires careful record keeping; the movement of pigs is also tightly controlled

This guidance is for England

Persons keeping pigs for the first time must obtain a county parish holding (CPH) number and then notify the Animal and Plant Health Agency (APHA). Pig movements must comply with the 'general licence' for the movement of pigs and must be reported.

Subject to certain exceptions, once pigs have been moved on to premises no pigs can be moved off those premises for 20 complete days (sheep, goats or cattle may be moved after six complete days). A haulier summary must accompany pigs being moved and moves must be pre-notified.

Records of the movement of pigs must be kept (in the correct format) and the pigs must be correctly identified with either an ear tag, tattoo or slapmark.

Swill and catering waste cannot be fed to any pig.

Before moving a pig to your holding

Whether you want to keep a pet pig or a commercial herd of pigs you will first require a CPH number, which identifies the land where the pigs will be kept.

To apply for a CPH number you need to contact the Rural Payments Agency (RPA) customer registration helpline on 03000 200301.

Notification of holdings

An occupier of a holding who begins to keep pigs on that holding, and any person who takes over the occupation of a holding where pigs are kept, must notify APHA of their name and address, and the address of the holding. This must be done within one month. APHA should be contacted on 03000 200301 or customerregistration@apha.gsi.gov.uk. They will provide you with your herd number at this stage.

You must also notify APHA, within one month, if you stop keeping pigs.

Reporting pig movements

Pig movements can be reported either online using the free eAML2 system, or via the telephone / in writing using a bureau service provided by AHDB Pork.

Electronic eAML2 licences

The eAML2 is the electronic version of a pig movement licence (AML2). It combines the AML2 and food chain information (FCI) paper forms that are required when moving pigs to slaughter.

The system allows you to report all moves undertaken online or via the bureau system.

You can register online free at the eAML2 website or by ringing the helpline on 0844 335 8400.

How the system works

You are required to pre-notify the movement of your pigs prior to the journey commencing. Once the journey has been completed, the destination abattoir / farm / market will confirm the move and receipt of the pigs.

By pre-notifying the movement online, a haulier summary can be printed and carried with you or by the haulier transporting your pigs during the journey, as required by law. If you pre-notify the move via the bureau service they will send you a haulier summary in the post and the movement cannot take place until this document is received (so please consider this when planning your moves).

There are occasions where you may not need to pre-notify a movement (such as taking pigs to a market). However, these are only in specific circumstances so you need to check this with the market / AHDB Pork bureau service before you move any of your animals.

More information for pig keepers is available on the GOV.UK website. In addition further advice on the eAML2 system can be found on the eAML2 website.

Movement of pigs to slaughter

The eAML2 electronic pig licence combines the AML2 and food chain information (FCI) paper forms that are required when moving pigs to slaughter.

If you pre-notify the move via the bureau service the movement will still combine the AML2 and FCI.

Movement record

The keeper of a pig must make and maintain a record, showing the following details:

date of movement
identification mark (including individual number, if applicable), slapmark or temporary mark (if applicable)
number of pigs
the holding the pigs have been moved from
the holding to which the pigs are moved
A template movement record is attached.

Details of movements must be recorded within 36 hours of their taking place and the record must be retained for three years.

A yearly count of pigs must take place and the maximum number normally on the holding recorded together with the actual amount.

Lancasterclaret wrote:Fascinating

This is for EU export

https://www.daera-ni.gov.uk/articles/ex ... ber-states" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

But it turns out you need MORE paperwork for non-EU exports

New Zealand

https://www.gov.uk/export-health-certif ... icate-7653" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

China

https://www.gov.uk/export-health-certif ... icate-7006" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Looks slightly harder to me.

Course, stuff like this will be buried in a lot of arguing about who Liz is/isn't, and whatever Ringo and dsr decide to concentrate on rather than answer stuff like this, but every single thing in this whole shitshow is pretty constant

- we'll be worse off
- the country will be worse off
- everything will be more complicated

Reality eh?

No wonder so many of you ignore it.

dsr wrote:No, I'm amazed. Frankly, I hadn't realised that until now, meat exports were subject to no health checks, no vet inspections, no paperwork, no customs or VAT forms, no farm licensing. I hadn't realised it was so easy. You'll be telling me next they're going to have to put tags in cows' ears after Brexit.

What was on the equivalent pre-Brexit flowchart?

(Just for comparison purposes, here is an outline from Bromley Council on what you have to do to move a pig. Obviously it's only an outline and the detail is quite a lot more. See link. It seems to me to be a bit more complicated than just "drive it through the tunnel".)

https://www.bromley.gov.uk/leaflet/237554/1/788/ch" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Trading Standards Institute Advice
The keeping and movement of pigs
Pixel
In the guide

Before moving a pig to your holding
Notification of holdings
Reporting pig movements
Electronic eAML2 licences
How the system works
Movement of pigs to slaughter
Movement record
Feeding pigs
Identification of pigs
Requirements for pig movements
'Standstill' rules
Penalties
Pig keeping requires careful record keeping; the movement of pigs is also tightly controlled

This guidance is for England

Persons keeping pigs for the first time must obtain a county parish holding (CPH) number and then notify the Animal and Plant Health Agency (APHA). Pig movements must comply with the 'general licence' for the movement of pigs and must be reported.

Subject to certain exceptions, once pigs have been moved on to premises no pigs can be moved off those premises for 20 complete days (sheep, goats or cattle may be moved after six complete days). A haulier summary must accompany pigs being moved and moves must be pre-notified.

Records of the movement of pigs must be kept (in the correct format) and the pigs must be correctly identified with either an ear tag, tattoo or slapmark.

Swill and catering waste cannot be fed to any pig.

Before moving a pig to your holding

Whether you want to keep a pet pig or a commercial herd of pigs you will first require a CPH number, which identifies the land where the pigs will be kept.

To apply for a CPH number you need to contact the Rural Payments Agency (RPA) customer registration helpline on 03000 200301.

Notification of holdings

An occupier of a holding who begins to keep pigs on that holding, and any person who takes over the occupation of a holding where pigs are kept, must notify APHA of their name and address, and the address of the holding. This must be done within one month. APHA should be contacted on 03000 200301 or customerregistration@apha.gsi.gov.uk. They will provide you with your herd number at this stage.

You must also notify APHA, within one month, if you stop keeping pigs.

Reporting pig movements

Pig movements can be reported either online using the free eAML2 system, or via the telephone / in writing using a bureau service provided by AHDB Pork.

Electronic eAML2 licences

The eAML2 is the electronic version of a pig movement licence (AML2). It combines the AML2 and food chain information (FCI) paper forms that are required when moving pigs to slaughter.

The system allows you to report all moves undertaken online or via the bureau system.

You can register online free at the eAML2 website or by ringing the helpline on 0844 335 8400.

How the system works

You are required to pre-notify the movement of your pigs prior to the journey commencing. Once the journey has been completed, the destination abattoir / farm / market will confirm the move and receipt of the pigs.

By pre-notifying the movement online, a haulier summary can be printed and carried with you or by the haulier transporting your pigs during the journey, as required by law. If you pre-notify the move via the bureau service they will send you a haulier summary in the post and the movement cannot take place until this document is received (so please consider this when planning your moves).

There are occasions where you may not need to pre-notify a movement (such as taking pigs to a market). However, these are only in specific circumstances so you need to check this with the market / AHDB Pork bureau service before you move any of your animals.

More information for pig keepers is available on the GOV.UK website. In addition further advice on the eAML2 system can be found on the eAML2 website.

Movement of pigs to slaughter

The eAML2 electronic pig licence combines the AML2 and food chain information (FCI) paper forms that are required when moving pigs to slaughter.

If you pre-notify the move via the bureau service the movement will still combine the AML2 and FCI.

Movement record

The keeper of a pig must make and maintain a record, showing the following details:

date of movement
identification mark (including individual number, if applicable), slapmark or temporary mark (if applicable)
number of pigs
the holding the pigs have been moved from
the holding to which the pigs are moved
A template movement record is attached.

Details of movements must be recorded within 36 hours of their taking place and the record must be retained for three years.

A yearly count of pigs must take place and the maximum number normally on the holding recorded together with the actual amount.

Paul Waine wrote:Good morning, Lancs.

Is it a surprise to you that there's a lot of paperwork required for the movement of agri-animals? Are you concerned that the paperwork to export beyond the EU is even more extensive that the paperwork within the EU? For me, all it demonstrates is that exporting firms are used to handling all this paperwork and that it's not an insupportable barrier to trade. Now, who'd have thought that's where the realities lie?

Have a great day. I'm heading out to work - finished around 9pm last night, so coming in a later this morning is my flexibility.

claretspice wrote:Lets make sure that we're comparing like with like.

The flow diagram posted by Faisal Islam related specifically to export requirements. These will be new, because we are currently part of the single market.

Nothing you've set out above appears to be anything to do with export. Its all to do with domestic rules for movements of livestock - rules which exist to manage welfare standards, and most importantly to ensure the health of the animals and therefore the safety of the product. There's no suggestion that this will be affected by Brexit.

So the point Faisal Islam was making - which is blindingly obvious really - is that by leaving a common marketplace, we'll be erecting barriers at our borders, which will add a layer of red tape.

dsr wrote:The point Faisal Islam was making was that post-Brexit there is loads of paperwork and inspections and vet's bills to do, while pre-Brexit all you had to do was load the animal onto a truck and drive it through the tunnel. The point I'm making is that wasn't true. As you see, even moving a single pig within England takes up a vast amount of paperwork and inspections and so forth; I don't have access to the current rules about moving a pig to the EU, but if you want to suggest that they're less complicated than these, I'll take that bet.

If you're looking for reasons to stay in the EU, "farmers have no paperwork to do" isn't it.

android wrote:Anyone know what our Finnish and French Friends meant when they said we had 12 days to produce the goods or else "it's over". Did they mean over as in we leave with no deal or over as in we can't leave?

martin_p wrote:Clearly. Don’t get me wrong, as a remainer I’m against May’s deal. But as a committed leaver what are your problems with the deal? Just the backstop?

android wrote:Anyone know what our Finnish and French Friends meant when they said we had 12 days to produce the goods or else "it's over". Did they mean over as in we leave with no deal or over as in we can't leave?

Lowbankclaret wrote:Where to start really.
May’s Deal is designed to keep us in the EU for the long term.
We will pay them 39billion for nothing.
We will still have to accept all EU laws, remain in the customs union , have to abide by European courts and hence not be able to do deals with other countries.

The reason they will not talk about a trade deal is they will them make us pay the same amount per month as we do now and hence will have extorted 39 billion extra from the UK.

We will have been stitched up good and proper.

claretspice wrote:One other point - I'm fascinated by this argument that there's a mandate for no-deal because the ballot paper didn't distinguish between the different types of Brexit that were on offer.

At one level, it's perfectly true. The ballot paper made no such distinction. But that is as much an argument for supporting Theresa May's deal as it is for supporting no deal. Perhaps more so. And yet of course, many of those politicians who voted against May's deal because it wasn't their conception of Brexit, are now conveniently hiding behind the wooliness (inadequacy, you might say) of the referendum question to support a no deal brexit (which all credible evidence points to causing an immediate and significant recession).

You cannot have your cake and eat it.

You can find support in what certain campaigners said for the fact that "leave" could mean "leave with no deal". But the irony here is that these were primarily remain campaigners, and the inverse is true - the overwhelming message of the leave campaign was that a deal was inevitable and leaving the EU did not entail a cliff-edge, no deal brexit.

The ballot paper does not answer the question "what sort of brexit should we have". In that situation, it strikes me the grown up answer is, "one that does the least harm - based on expert evidence - to jobs and prosperity in this country, and which does not cause particular harm to any one nation within the UK". Quite obviously, that's not no-deal.