The Consequences of Brexit [Part 6] READ FIRST POST BEFORE COMMENTING

[Cyclone 10]

28 minutes ago, hauxwell said:

Hospitals in England are going to hand out pads and tampons free of charge to woman and girls if needed, and so they should. I wasn’t aware that hospitals hand out free razors to men but not sanitary protection to women, so this is the reason they are doing this.  

  

This was one of the reasons I voted to leave the EU, because the UK could not remove VAT on woman’s sanitary protection, the EU said no.  After a long fight with Brussels they did allow us to reduce the VAT, and after further campaigning  they have agreed to remove  VAT  altogether, but not yet, we have to wait a few more years, we must obey Brussels.  It’s disgraceful that we have to go to the EU to get their permission to do this.  

I’m not sure if hospitals can claim back VAT on these products already, but if not every  penny helps.

 

Last year Government said they will remove VAT on these items straight away after Brexit. 

 

This change is positive.

 

The great thing about the EU is than in 2015 we proposed that this be changed, and by 2017 it had been agreed that it would be.  The new VAT framework hasn't actually launched yet, but when it does member states will be allowed to zero rate anything they like with some specific exemptions like tobacco, alcohol and firearms.

That's how it works when you're inside the club, you get to help decide what the rules are.

 

Details here

https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN01128

Edited March 3, 2019 by Cyclone

[I1L2T3 10]

The tampon issue is a perfect example of a democratic process in action. Yes a mistake was made with the original VAT rating but it has been proved that the EU can change and can rectify mistakes.

 

[RJRB 688]

8 hours ago, apelike said:

According to SF its not about why its necessary but about the harmful effects which according to the EU is not harmful. People promote organic food production as better and it uses poo as its main organic nutrient and yet people are happy to accept it, but does that mean its also bad? Most people really dont care about it otherwise they would be vegan and this is just shows another example of remainer scare because they are losing the battle. The USA do what it is called pathogen reduction which we actually also do by chlorinating water, notice also that butchers also clean their implements and chopping boards using chlorine or other pathogen reducing compounds so nothing much there to complain about.

So “most people” is valid when you use it ,but not when I used it.

If you choose not to care about maintaining and improving the standards of animal welfare and also ensuring that we are able to buy food produced to the best standards so be it.

Why the chlorination of US produced chicken is the heart of this issue is fundamental and I raised it because the original comment by Retep was completely misleading.

”Some people “ understand this but “some people” choose to try to lead a wild goose chase to evade the real issues.

[mafya 243]

11 hours ago, RJRB said:

Water is chlorinated,at hopefully safe levels to kill harmful bacteria.

So ask yourself ,why is it necessary to use this treatment on US chickens,but not in the U.K.

Is it to give an enhanced flavour to your Kentucky Fried Chicken.?

 

 

 

Read this article regarding chlorinated chicken= https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47426138

In the article it states the EU chlorine washes fruit and vegetables so what is the difference?

[Cyclone 10]

3 minutes ago, mafya said:

Read this article regarding chlorinated chicken= https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47426138

In the article it states the EU chlorine washes fruit and vegetables so what is the difference?

It's an animal welfare issue.

Quote

 

 In the EU, cost is also important, but the law means it can’t come at the expense of the birds’ basic welfare. There is a legal minimum amount of space, lighting and ventilation for EU poultry-rearing houses.

 

 

The more space the birds have to move around in, the fewer can be housed in a single area, which in turn has an effect on production costs. As there are no laws governing this in the US, the birds can be crammed in tightly so they have limited movement, with little light or ventilation. This reduces production costs but increases the risks of disease and contamination in a flock.

 

They only have to be chlorine washed because they are kept in standards that in the EU and the UK are not acceptable.

Edited March 3, 2019 by Cyclone

[Cyclone 10]

Also

However, its British counterpart said the UK government should not accept a US deal "which allows food to be imported into this country produced in ways which would be illegal here".

That, Ms Batters said, "would just put British producers out of business".

 

If lower standards are allowed then it will drive our own industry out of business, or we'll have to reduce animal welfare standards to match.

[apelike 10]

4 hours ago, I1L2T3 said:

Want to tell me how they won’t be impacted if the economy is weaker? If there are fewer economic opportunities? With mass immigration of low skilled non-EUropean workers? How they won’t be impacted if our services deteriorate? What life will be like with reduced employment protections and diluted human rights? With reduced travel rights? With reduced food quality?

No, I want you to tell me how they will be impacted hence the question mark? People are making statements and I would like to see the data that backs them up and so far from you its just if's again.

 

2 hours ago, Cyclone said:

30% of the british people vote for something really stupid and you're too scared to have a second vote to confirm it.  That's your "british people have spoken".

The people who are scared of holding another referendum are the politicians as its up to them not us.

[Cyclone 10]

12 hours ago, apelike said:

In what way, exactly how will they be damaged?

Why should anyone bother to answer this again.

This thread has over 3000 posts, many of which spell out the detailed answers to this question.

1 minute ago, apelike said:

The people who are scared of holding another referendum are the politicians as its up to them not us.

They may well be scared of it, but that doesn't alter that most of the brexit supporters on this thread are also scared of it.

[apelike 10]

2 hours ago, ez8004 said:

Do you know the difference between raw chicken and how it is processed versus water and that is made for consumption via our water supplies?

Yes our water contains a small percentage of chlorine from its processing and US chicken also contains a small percentage of chlorine and both are within accepted consumption levels, and even the EU agree it is safe. 

[RJRB 688]

28 minutes ago, mafya said:

Read this article regarding chlorinated chicken= https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47426138

In the article it states the EU chlorine washes fruit and vegetables so what is the difference?

I have already explained but here we go again .

I agree that it is not an issue to use safe levels of chlorine to combat potential harmful bacteria (although we have had instances of contaminated water supplies due to high levels of Chlorine).

However it is used in the US as a shortcut instead of addressing the real issue of good practise in rearing chickens for human consumption.

So accepting it is a retrograde step.

I am a meat eater but we have had a succession of issues in animal welfare and the safety or quality of produce,so as far as I am able I try to go for free range and meat which is responsibly produced.

Also see articles on the levels of antibiotics used in the US beef industry which gets into the food chain at a time when harmful germs are increasingly resistant .

[apelike 10]

3 minutes ago, Cyclone said:

Why should anyone bother to answer this again.

Because its not bee answered? All that has been put forward is a load of if's.

 

3 minutes ago, Cyclone said:

They may well be scared of it, but that doesn't alter that most of the brexit supporters on this thread are also scared of it.

I dont think that is true and only just your opinion, its certainly not true in my case.

[Cyclone 10]

It's been thoroughly answered, you just don't like what the answer is.

 

Perhaps not in your case, but quite clearly true for very many others.