Which EU laws to repeal?

Apparently people want me to go over this again. Here’s a few of the proposals I have put to government

1 Legislate to remove the NI Protocol by resuming the Bill in The Lords which passed the Commons with a majority of 71. That will remove EU laws from NI.

2. Abolish VAT on domestic fuel

3 Abolish permanently VAT on green products

4 Repeal The Ports Directive

5. Replace product specifications with a strong general duty on product safety and a merchandise quality rule

6. Suspend the emissions trading and carbon tax scheme which makes the UK very uncompetitive leading to more imports of energy intensive goods with no CO 2 savings

7. Remove the ban on making petrol and diesel cars after 2030

8. Change rules and taxes governing UK auction houses to match New York, removing EU imposed charges and taxes which lost us market share

9. Amend General Data Protection Regulation to cut costs and bureaucracy  to small charities and businesses whilst keeping suitable protections for individuals

10. Change fishing regulations to give priority to UK vessels and landings in UK ports


Some  of the ones from the Duncan Smith report:

1.5. Use digital sandboxes to test innovations more quickly and ensure regulation
is based on evidence of impact.
1.7. Give regulators statutory objectives to promote competition and innovation in
the markets they regulate.
1.8. Delegate greater flexibility to regulators to put the principles of agile regulation
into practice, allowing more to be done through decisions, guidance and rules
rather than legislation.
1.14. Set a UK standards strategy to promote the use of British standards
internationally as a way to boost UK influence and promote trade and exports.
3. Amend the Seed Enterprise Investment Scheme (SEIS) and the Enterprise
Investment Scheme (EIS) to maximise Private Equity and Venture Capital
investment in growth industries.
3.1. Amend the age eligibility requirements for companies to access investment
through EIS and SEIS to ensure businesses outside London and the south
east benefit equally.
3.2. Increase the maximum level of SEIS investment.
3.3. Commit to the continuation of EIS beyond 2025.
7. Replace the UK General Data Protection Regulation 2018 with a new, more
proportionate, UK Framework of Citizen Data Rights to give people greater
control of their data while allowing it to flow more freely and drive growth
across healthcare, public services and the digital economy.
7.1. Reform GDPR to give people meaningful control of their data.
7.2. Reform GDPR for artificial intelligence, including by removing Article 22 of
GDPR and focussing instead on the legitimacy of automated
11.6. Streamline clinical trial set up by HRA adopting automated AI or digital
processing of ethical and trials approvals.
11.7. The MHRA and HRA should accelerate the adoption of novel clinical trial
processes through better digitising of trials applications and data and use of
novel models like UK Trials Acceleration Programme (TAP) and IMPACT with
the capacity to deliver registration level trials.
11.8. Replace the Caldicott data guardians with a HRA Single Data Controller
˜One-stop shop€™ for Health Research Information Governance with
harmonised committees to reduce bureaucracy and standardise processes.
11.9. Establish a centralised health dataspine, where all data is stored for ease of
access by approved users across the health network, with standardised
format and approval routes for data collection and curation.
11.11. Accelerate Access to innovation by establishing clear digital framework for
Conditional Approvals and Adaptive Licensing of new therapies like gene
therapies based on data including from the new Electronic Patient Recorded
Outcomes Measure (EPROMs) dataspine.
11.12. Expand the MHRA remit and Innovation Team to include promotion of UK
leadership in innovative trial design, new accelerated access regulatory
pathways, standardising format and approval routes for data collecting,
curating and collation, and use of novel clinical and digital biomarkers and AI.

11.14. MHRA to work with stakeholders to establish a UK Regulatory Innovation Hub
on the same model as the US Centers of Excellence in Regulatory Science14. MHRA to work with stakeholders to establish a UK Regulatory Innovation Hub
and Innovation (CERSIs).
11.15. Regulation of medical cannabinoids and medicinal CBD should move from
the Home Office to DHSC / MHRA to create a regulatory pathway for
assessment and approval based on patient benefit.

13. Replace EU rules with an integrated agri-environment framework which better
supports the development of more environmentally sustainable agriculture,
with more proportionate and evidence-based, outcomes-focussed regulation…
13.6. Deliver a common-sense solution to transitioning chemical registrations from
EU to the UK REACH.
13.10. Remove burdensome EU regulation on the animal feed industry, whilst
maintaining rigorous safety standards.
14. The UK Government should actively support research into and commercial
adoption by UK farmers and growers of gene edited crops, particularly those
which help the transition away from agrochemicals to naturally occurring
biological resilience.
14.1. Interpret current GM rules on a case-by-case basis, to permit specific crops
with proven benefits and which are consistent with the UK s rigorous
standards on food safety and environmental protection.
15. Through reform of the Space Industry Act, the Government should address the
indemnity and liability issues currently holding back investor confidence in the
UK as a satellite launch and operations hub.
15.1. Amend the Space Industry Act 2018 to cap liability and indemnity
requirements for licence applicants to launch and operate satellites from the
(EO) data regulatory policy framework.
17.1. Amend the Weights and Measures Act 1985 to allow traders to use imperial
measurements without the equivalent metric measurement.
17.2. Develop an optional e-labelling system for devices with screens or that can be
connected to a screen, to display compliance information.
17.3. Repeal the Port Services Regulation 2019 (SI 2019 No. 575) to remove
unnecessary, EU-derived regulatory burdens on UK ports.
17.4. Liberalise parallel import laws to reduce prices and increase choice for
17.5. Urgently review guidance on hand sanitisers so that tested, effective
non-alcohol based sanitisers can be used




  1. formula57
    May 15, 2023

    To have any of the measures you list though wouldn’t one first need a government on the side of the people?

    1. Lifelogic
      May 15, 2023

      Rather than one captured (and/or largely bought) by vested interests such as the green crap renewables lobby, big pharma, rail construction interests, lawyers, businesses and charities wanting ever more immigration so they can benefit from hosing tax payers money into their pockets.

      An appalling suggestion that the online harms bill should restrict “medical misinformation”. Making government departments the arbiter of what is “misinformation”. True statements like the Covid vaccines are very unsafe, causing huge harms, should never have been given to the young and are generally ineffective too, masks do not really work or vitamin D does work rather well, or it came from the lab… would I assume all have been banned by government and the Ofcom censors. It seem Lord Bethel is keen on this massive attack on free speech.

      1. BOF
        May 15, 2023

        +1. I read that Ireland is introducing a draconian ‘Hate Speach’ bill which will completely shut down free speach.

        1. Lynn Atkinson
          May 15, 2023

          Note that the ‘Centre for Ukrainian refugees’ in Ireland was set on fire. Nobody said anything ‘hurtful’ however – they don’t want to break the law😂🤣

          1. APL
            May 17, 2023

            Lynn Atkinson: “Nobody said anything ‘hurtful’ however”

            Children are still being molested and raped by certain elements in nearly all of British cities. Nobody said anything about it, though. Utter betrayal by the political class.

            They’ll make sure to pay themselves a bumper pay-rise this year, because inflation, don’t you know.

      2. Richard1
        May 15, 2023

        It is correct that the vaccines didn’t prevent transmission as originally claimed, and true that they were of little benefit to young people and especially children. But there is no evidence they are very unsafe, although of course no vaccine nor medicine in history has no side effects for some people. On the other hand there is plenty of evidence the vaccines did save many lives of older people or people with other conditions, and also allowed the rest of us to be a lot less ill with covid than we would otherwise have been.

        1. graham1946
          May 15, 2023

          With several billion doses given worldwide, it would seem so. Every loss is a tragedy, but to damn the whole thing based on current statistics does seem to be an error. Hindsight is 20/20 vision.

        2. Lynn Atkinson
          May 15, 2023

          Arne Burkhardt, German professor has proven beyond a shadow of doubt the harms. He has written a paper including photographic evidence of post-mortems that he conducted. This is a specialist field – nobody has been able to refute his paper.

          1. Lynn Atkinson
            May 15, 2023

            Incidentally, he did post-mortems at the behest of families of people representative of the whole human demographic, who had been declared not to have died of anything related to the ‘coof’. In over 80% of these people he found the cell damage – expression of the spike – that the silenced experts had predicted would cause auto-immune diseases of all types and release cancers from the constraints of the natural immune system (which defeats cancer in us all repeatedly).

          2. hefner
            May 15, 2023

            In which scientific journal has his paper appeared? I can only find something in worldcouncilforhealth.org, which, as everybody knows, is not a medically serious forum.
            It is the common trend these days, any Tom, Dick and Harry writes a little something, says it is about to be published in a refereed journal, but never appears anywhere or only in self-publishing outlets.
            So I would appreciate a proper reference if you have one. Thanks in advance.

          3. hefner
            May 15, 2023

            If I can add something more, looking at the 4-page paper, the 93% death rate is based on 14 out of the 15 cases that Dr Burkhardt actually studied. Paper is available at doctors4covidethics.org S. Bhakdi & A. Burkhardt, 10/12/2021.
            A number of questions should be asked to try to make sense of Dr Burkhardt’s claims: How were the 15 cases selected? What were the recorded causes of death? Why did the study only include 15 people? Why did the study not include a control group (of people of similar ages and similar causes of death, but who had not received a vaccine) in the paper? Including such a control group would have allowed a meaningful comparison in terms of histopathologic findings.

        3. Wanderer
          May 15, 2023

          @Richard1, you might be interested in some of the pieces on TCW about Covid treatments.

        4. Barbara
          May 15, 2023

          On the contrary, Richard, there is plenty of evidence they are unsafe and no way at all of proving an unprovable claim like ‘they saved millions of lives’.

        5. Fedupsoutherner
          May 15, 2023

          There is plenty of information out there showing the vaccine to be very dangerous and not to just a few. All over the world evidence is coming to light of the harm that has been done to many people and it needs talking about at least. I walked with a surgeon the other day and he is having no more vaccinations due to what he has seen while performing postmortems.

          1. Berkshire Alan.
            May 15, 2023

            We now know 3 people (close friends and family member) who have had diagnosed heart failure (not death), with the hospitals concerned very strongly suggesting that Covid, or the Covid vaccine was probably the cause.
            Age range 50+, 60+, 70+.
            The younger one passed a class one medical examination only a couple of years ago.
            All had exactly the same symptoms, difficult to breath, racing heart, extreme tiredness, over many months.
            All received similar treatment, after similar explorations, Multiple ECG’s, Scans, and blood samples taken on a regular basis.
            More Hospital examinations to continue for the next few months.
            Local hospital now reporting more than double the usual number of people reporting with heart problems.
            Clearly too many co-incidences to just dismiss a possible link, but clearly probably not enough information in general circulation as yet.
            As a point of interest, before I had my very recent jab, was asked if I had a heart problem !

          2. Lynn Atkinson
            May 16, 2023

            But the surgeon – like my family – we have a medical Professor who insisted ‘that everyone should be vaxxed and the younger the better’ had his own family jabbed. His advice was honest if unforgivably stupid!
            Take responsibility for your own health – make up your own mind.

        6. Enigma
          May 15, 2023

          Where can I find this evidence please Richard1?

        7. MFD
          May 15, 2023

          As an eighty year old the only thing I witnessed was the killing off of three of my friends, Richard. Two were quite fit hill walkers and the other had a pacemaker. I’m thankful I said no when offered the jab early that year.

        8. Mickey Taking
          May 15, 2023

          You are wasting your breath. The nay sayers can’t mentally balance the millions, yes millions not only avoided the dreadful death or period of serious health issues – many still ongoing as a result of catching COVID, but of course the small risks were there and conceded. Swallowing an aspirin might cause someone to cough and panic resulting in a coronary attack. The tragic real deaths which would need to be clarified should be balanced against the good outcomes for 99.x% of those who were protected.

        9. BOF
          May 15, 2023

          Based on what I have personally witnessed in hospital during an extended but unplanned stay, a friend who is dead, another local also dead, and several people I know personally who have had very unpleasant side effects, I have had no hesitation in telling everyone I meet that the jabs are dangerous, regardless of age. I have told doctors and nurses the same.

          We now know very few people who will be going back, and I see that in Europe the dreadful von der Leyen is in trouble for ordering millions of doses that no one wants. Serves her right.

        10. Hat man
          May 15, 2023

          I gather there is plenty of autopsy evidence from abroad, but the authorities don’t want to look at it.

          One of the measures under the 2020 Coronavirus legislation in this country was to ban autopsies after ‘Covid deaths’. I wonder why.

    2. Ian+wragg
      May 15, 2023

      You must be joking John

      These are the same people who build warships overseas and buy unproven SMRs from abroad.
      They don’t want to do anything that is beneficial to Britain

      1. Ian+wragg
        May 15, 2023

        Dominic Sandbrook in todays Mail saying Fishy is a blue blood Tory. If that’s true then God help us we’re doomed.

      2. MFD
        May 15, 2023

        100% Ian i totally agree!

      3. British Patriot
        May 15, 2023

        Quite right. The Tories are traitors who refuse to put the national interest first. One of the great benefits of Brexit was freeing ourselves from the state aid restrictions and the ruloes against favouring domestic companies in in government contracts. This would have allowed us to support British companies to grow and become successful. instead the government traitors have refused to do this, so British companies are starved of funding and are eventually bought up by their foreign rivals and Britain is asset-stripped and kept internationally poor.

        Sir John’s list is quite good, though I would repeat that the best option would be to delete ALL EU RULES, and simply go back to the status quo ante – ie. the rules that were in place BEFORE they were changed by the EU. I would also like to see a law that forces companies to clearly label ALL goods (including food) with their country of origin, so we can choose to buy British if we want (which polls show most people do).

        The problem is this do-nothing government which slavishly follows the EU, keeping us subservient to that enemy organisation despite Brexit. Even when the government does make a change to the rules it only does so in a very timid, half-hearted way, such as the liberalisation of gene editing rules. This is vitally important, so why do the new rules only apply to plants and not animals? And why are the rules still so restrictive? We are ruled by cowards and morons. Labour will not be any worse. Really they won’t. I want the Tory party to be destroyed so that a genuinely patriotic party can arise.

    3. Donna
      May 15, 2023

      You’d certainly need one that wasn’t under the control of the WEF.

    4. BOF
      May 15, 2023

      formula 57
      Got it in one. This has not been the case for at least 26 years when T Blair came to power.

    5. Peter Wood
      May 15, 2023

      Quite, elegantly put.
      In addition, referring to the big picture of the economic wellbeing, we heard from JR-M on Sunday that government spending accounts for 47% of GDP. This, if correct, is the greatest drag on UK PLC, and will only get worse unless government releases present constraints on the private enterprise economy. Disaster awaits our country unless government changes direction.

      1. graham1946
        May 15, 2023

        They won’t, so disaster awaits, if it is not already here. On LBC this morning Starmer, in his mealy mouthed way refused to say he backed the votes for EU people, (its just being looked at, he said) was asked directly if he would reverse the Corporation Tax hike and the Bill against demos and said he couldn’t. It is ever thus with politicians – when in opposition they rail against anything and everything government does, but carry on with it all when elected. As I said yesterday, courage is the most notable attribute missing in our politicians.

      2. Lynn Atkinson
        May 15, 2023

        Don’t fall for ‘U.K. plc’. No government has the authority to run a business! In fact all state funded institutions should be disbarred from doing so.

    6. Peter
      May 15, 2023



      Good luck with all this Sir John Redwood, but I think the government turn a deaf ear again.

    7. ukretired123
      May 15, 2023

      You also need an efficient, agile and untainted, proactive British Civil and not the EU trained present one in London.

  2. Mark B
    May 15, 2023

    Good morning.

    Well done, Sir John and thank you.

    I would like to just make to points.

    1.14. Set a UK standards strategy to promote the use of British standards
    internationally as a way to boost UK influence and promote trade and exports.

    This is something the French government try to do in many areas. for example, the French could not stand that the world time is kept by Greenwich so invented UCT which is managed by Bureau International des Poids et Mesures.

    My second point is to do with agriculture. With the EU (Netherlands) seemingly set on a course to destroy their farming industry we here have an opportunity to import Dutch farming technology and farmers. The Netherlands is one of the worlds leading food exporters and I see no reason why we cannot create another Huguenot moment where those people and skills no longer wanted in their countries can be a benefit to ours.

    But as always we just slavishly follow the other Lemmings resulting in the inevitable.

    1. Christine
      May 15, 2023

      Good idea for the Dutch farmers as the EU is banning them from setting up in another country which really shows their true intention which is to cut the food supply and set up the WEF food hubs to control the people. The only problem is we have Gove here who is trying to destroy British farming.

    2. Mike Wilson
      May 15, 2023

      You want to import the people and glasshouses to grow completely tasteless tomatoes?

      1. Mark B
        May 15, 2023


        I want this country to thrive. I want immigration to actually work for this country and not be a burden. The numbers of both legal and illegal immigrants is unsustainable, but at least these Dutch farmers would be a benefit as the EXPORT even those tasteless tomatoes.

      2. Mickey Taking
        May 15, 2023

        Perhaps they grow ‘completely tasteless tomatoes’ due to the fact they are cheaper to produce and the fools keep buying them?

        1. Lynn Atkinson
          May 16, 2023

          Why are ‘completely tasteless tomatoes’ grown I. Glasshouses in, for instance, Spain, more acceptable? Sprayed with OPs too of course, so they don’t rot on their loooong journey to your tummy.

    3. IanT
      May 15, 2023

      This country had the most efficient farming industry in the world at one time, thanks mainly to the British Navy needing so much in the way of provisions to feed the fleet. So there is nothing lacking in our farming expertise. What we seem to lack is a desire to become more self-sufficient in food, as well as energy – the basic essentials.
      We need to be far more self-reliant in thought, belief and deed than our currrent leadership seems willing to be.
      Buy British, Eat British and Heat British would be a very good slogan for any new conservative (small ‘c’) party.

  3. Stephen+Reay
    May 15, 2023

    All items suggested seem very reasonable . The people want the EU laws revoked. I can’t see why any of the suggestions can’t be revoked in a week or less. The government just need to deliver, it would help come the next election.

    1. Ian B
      May 15, 2023

      @Stephen+Reay Irony, it was agreed to abolish them now some 7 years ago, not one has reached the stage of being inacted on.

    2. Bloke
      May 15, 2023

      A 1970s secretary received 60 items a day addressed to her boss to process. 18 were marked urgent. Reading all would consume half the day, and her boss could cope with only five priorities.
      Her first task was to eliminate the junk, so she cut the pile to ten items recognised as important.
      Checking carefully, she selected seven items to present to her boss. Only two of those were time sensitive and one did not even fit her boss’ defined priorities. However, she realised what he needed to know and do, acting accordingly.
      ‘Urgent’ is often unimportant. EU regulation added worthless burdens on UK lives. Retrofitting EU law for salvage adds to waste. Our prime task is to dump their heavy junk. Less is more efficient.

      1. glen cullen
        May 15, 2023

        This task has just landed on a civil servants desk ….what have they been doing

        1. glen cullen
          May 16, 2023


    3. Erith
      May 15, 2023

      Read the list carefully, especially Duncan Smith’s. “Change” … “Amend” … but no detail. Pie in the sky back of an envelope stuff. And for this we surrendered the biggest and best free market in the whole world

      1. a-tracy
        May 15, 2023

        It wasn’t a free market Erith; we had to pay for it, in Fees and free education and student loans for all EU students, plus all the fines, plus all the vat on RoW imports, plus have RoW exports going out of Rotterdam, causing a figures fix so tax got collected on it.

        Denis calculated on here the other day it affected 0.5% of exports but that figure has been made up in increases of RoW exports.

      2. Lynn Atkinson
        May 15, 2023

        We did surrender that – the English speaking worldwide dominions and commonwealth including our ex-colony, the USA – they accounted for, I believe over 70% of world trade – and it was done to ‘join the EU’.
        Criminal really!

        1. Bill Brown
          May 16, 2023


          Your figures are totally wrong again on the US.

      3. rose
        May 15, 2023

        There is nothing stopping you from importing whatever you like from the Franco German protection racket. Only 6% of British business was exporting there. I believe it is higher now.

        1. rose
          May 15, 2023

          PS there is nothing “free” about a protection racket to which one has to pay billions every year and from which one has to take unscrutinised laws and regulations. A protection racket which shuts out the third world, getting GB to give it aid instead and calling it EU aid.

      4. Mickey Taking
        May 15, 2023

        Free? Whatever gave you that idea?

      5. IanT
        May 15, 2023

        It’s not a “Free” Market Erith, the EU is essentially a protectionist one.
        For example, there used to be a very good reason that ‘ground’ (e.g. processed) coffee for sale within Europe was mostly produced in Germany (who grow no coffee at all) instead of being processed where it is actually grown. That reason was that raw beans were not subject to (any of) the same EU entry tariffs that processed coffee was, so Germany had an immediate commercial advantage over any imported processed coffee products from outside the EU.
        I don’t know if this still holds true (or how it works in the UK now that we are out of the EU). I’d certainly like to think that locally grown and processed bean is now coming directly into the UK, rather than being imported from Germany. Perhaps some of the poorer African counties can then start to get a larger share of the profits available from the UK retail coffee trade. It’s just one example of how the EU is certainly not “Free Trade” but I’m sure there are many, many more….

      6. Denis+Cooper
        May 16, 2023

        It seems to me that Rishi Sunak agrees with you, and Alistair Campbell, and Sinn Fein, and this morning I have circulated an email with this introduction:

        “The latest Newsletter from Briefings for Britain includes several interesting items.

        Alistair Campbell claiming that Brexit has already cost us 4% of GDP is not so extraordinary when Rishi Sunak and Sinn Fein and other Irish nationalist parties all agree that the Northern Ireland Protocol/Windsor Framework will spare the province from those painful losses through its unique/”privileged” “dual access” to both the UK and EU markets. So why has this UK Prime Minister endorsed the false Remainer argument that the economic benefits of the EU Single Market outweigh any minor constitutional damage it may entail? Because his predecessor but one, the Great Charlatan, had shot his mouth off about the huge importance of his “Canada style” free trade deal, even going on TV and claiming that it was worth £660 billion a year, that is to say about 30% of GDP, when in reality five government departments could not tell me how much it might be worth to the UK economy but the EU Commission estimated its value at a paltry 0.75% of GDP – equivalent to natural growth over about four months at the long term trend growth rate.

        Then there is the article by “Harry Western” looking at the reality of the minor overall impact that Brexit had on our exports in 2022, completely undermining the government’s argument that Northern Ireland will be better off staying under the economic thumb of the EU in perpetuity. How can the two former ERG members who are now in the Northern Ireland Office bring themselves to go along with this treacherous rubbish? Have they no consciences?

        Finally there is the sensible article by Titus pointing out that:

        “The controversy over-repeal of retained EU Law has been a foolish distraction. The better approach is that taken by the Irish after Independence. They did not rush to repeal pre-Independence statutes, but gradually removed what they did not want, and now all remaining UK Acts take their authority from an Irish statute. Reform of retained EU Law should be treated like any matter of law reform.”

        It is a distraction, when patriotic Tory MPs should concentrate on freeing Northern Ireland from dynamic alignment with swathes of EU laws; and I will repeat yet again that the correct solution to the problem of the open land border is for the UK to unilaterally introduce export controls on the goods carried across, and instead of nagging Kemi Badenoch over the number of retained EU laws that she is keeping for GB for a while longer they should be pressing her to use the Export Control Act 2002 to filter unsuitable items out of the trickle of goods heading overland into the Irish Republic, thus making it possible to restore regulatory unity across the whole UK.”

    4. Peter
      May 15, 2023

      True, but the government don’t care about the next election and will carry on regardless.

      They have plans for alternative careers after the general election,

      1. Mickey Taking
        May 15, 2023

        Many already have another career, or at least significant earnings apart from their MP/Minister salaries.
        Why do you think the NHS Doctors contract allowed ‘private’ earnings?

      2. Lynn Atkinson
        May 16, 2023

        Oh yes! Many will ‘move back home’ to avoid the taxes and their repercussions that they have imposed here.

  4. James1
    May 15, 2023

    Implementing the measures you suggest would be an outbreak of common sense. Unfortunately common sense appears to be beyond the capacity of our current government.

  5. Donna
    May 15, 2023

    Sir John, the other day you said in response to a comment suggesting that you should ask for Bailey to be sacked that “politics is the art of the possible.”

    You know full well that Johnson/Sunak’s BRINO+ deal with the EU makes most of this impossible.

    We have been forced into operating “a level playing field” with the EU ….. which effectively means alignment across large swathes of policy areas, particularly the environment, including the chosen method of controlling the population – the Net Zero lunacy.

    The majority-Remainer CONs have deliberately created a situation which means that although we are not stuck IN the EU, we are stuck TO it.

    1. Mark B
      May 15, 2023


    2. Mickey Taking
      May 15, 2023

      ‘politics is the art of persuading the listener what is patently nonsense to appear as if it will benefit the listener’

      1. Donna
        May 15, 2023

        Starmer keeps trying ….. and failing ….. to do just that.

    3. Lynn Atkinson
      May 16, 2023

      Heath seems to think that the impossible was possible, and achieved it!
      Politics is factual and rational but ‘politicking’ is the art of getting your own way!
      JR is brilliant at politics – politicking – not so much. Powell was useless at politicking too. Actually I think women (that more or less includes Heath) are better equipped to play politicking.
      Maybe Englishmen achieved so much because they emancipated their women centuries ago and benefited from our ‘politicking’ advice behind closed doors.

  6. Sir+Joe+Soap
    May 15, 2023

    Amend the Seed Enterprise Investment Scheme (SEIS) and the Enterprise
    Investment Scheme (EIS)
    Can I suggest extending the income tax reliefs (50%) over 2-3 years for buying one tranche of shares? This would encourage pensioners and other basic rate taxpayers to invest meaningful amounts.
    Also the 30% upper limit is easily got around by couples buying a maximum 60% so why have 30% at all?
    You really need to derisk the capital cost of expanding an enterprise not through allowances against as yet unmade profit but against investors’ personal tax liabilities.

  7. majorfrustration
    May 15, 2023

    Put these suggestions to the Government and ask why these laws should not be withdrawn now.
    Presume the strategy in the run-up to the next election is in addition to tax give-aways we will get
    repeal of some EU laws. You just get the feeling that this Government does not know whats good for it.

  8. Sakara Gold
    May 15, 2023

    What a long list….. On the face of it nothing here is going to rebuild manufacturing and exports, reduce the twin deficits or persuade the public to vote Conservative at the next election. Just more Tory infighting.

    You spoke well on the BBC this morning though, good to hear you on R4 🙂

  9. Richard1
    May 15, 2023

    JR-M is accusing Rishi Sunak of betrayal over the EU laws. He forgets that this was a promise made in the Conservative leadership election campaign, not in a general election. Still a promise but hardly the same status. he forgets also one detail. In the meantime he and others persuaded the members to vote for Liz truss as leader as a result of which we went from roughly even with Labour (once it was clear Boris was going) to -30%.the blob took back control, Jeremy Hunt was already installed as chancellor and could not be changed that quickly without the risk of more loss of confidence.

    Had Rishi Sunak, clearly the stronger candidate, been chosen in the first place and had there been a smooth transition without the disastrous truss interlude there is every chance this policy would at the very least be more advanced than it now is.

    Another small thing – such people seem also to be agitating to bring back Boris Johnson. If he was as great as JRM and others think, why did he not move one iota on this policy during his 3 years as PM?

    1. IanT
      May 15, 2023

      I have absolutely no desire to see Boris back. None at all!
      I always enjoyed the Two Ronnies and Morecambe & Wise. Boris also used to make me laugh but being amusing simply isn’t enough if your beliefs are shallow and your policies non-existant. I remember having a senior manager once who got up in front of the staff and promised them the world. Afterwards, I asked him how on earth we were going to deliver on his committments? He told me it was his job to ‘Dream’ (and my job to deliver them). He left the company shortly afterwards. Somehow, I suspect Boris is that kind of boss.
      The kind who makes promises but isn’t around when the time comes to deliver on them… So I’m willing to give Mr Sunak the benefit of the doubt but I’d be much happier if he changed his Chancellor and revisited the NIP.

    2. Mark B
      May 15, 2023

      How do you rate Rishi Sunak’s time as Chancellor under Alexander Johnson MP ?

    3. Sir Joe Soap
      May 15, 2023

      Piffle. Stronger candidates win. He lost. He overtalked and treated Truss appallingly.
      He’ll lose again.

  10. keith Eyles
    May 15, 2023

    All suggestions seem eminently sensible Sir John, which I believe means that this government is unlikely to adopt any of them. I would add:
    1. Abolish many of the bureaucratic building regulations which were imposed by the EU. For example:
    A neighbour (living in the Wokingham BC area) who was renovating and extending his 3 bedroom house had to pay £4000 for a bat survey, when it was obvious from visual inspection (which, if the law allowed, could have been handled by Wokingham BC Building Control for a small additional fee) that were, and never had been, any bats in his loft.
    Great Crested Newts may be under threat in Europe, but Wikipedia gives the figure for the UK as 400,000 – hardly an endangered species.
    2. Abolish subsidies for wilding and not producing food; abolish all tariffs (which still currently favour the EU) and quotas on food; and revert to the pre Common Market system which subsidised UK food production and kept food prices low – the increase in food prices on entering the Common Market was noticeable.

  11. MPC
    May 15, 2023

    That none of this is to be done shows once and for all that this government is set on the destruction of our English way of life. They have taken us to the edge of the economic and regulatory abyss and have set the stage for a Labour led government to take us into it irretrievably. The most significant sector for this will be energy – never again will we have new domestic fossil fuelled energy production, just an irretrievable future of ever increasing cost, regular black outs and permanent loss to the far east of any remaining professionally skilled and qualified engineers.

  12. Magelec
    May 15, 2023

    None of what you write Sir John will happen whilst we have a remain government. Sunak and his backers know exactly what they are doing to this once great country of ours.

    1. Mickey Taking
      May 15, 2023

      We have a Remain Government? I’m stunned!

      1. British Patriot
        May 15, 2023

        @ Mickey Taking: You are “stunned”? Really? What planet are you on? Sunak is clearly an EU Quisling, just as Boris was (Truss wasn’t in power long enough to reveal her true identity). Neither has given us a Brexit that radically departs from the EU consensus, rules and costs. We have surrendered Northern Ireland to our enemies without a shot being fired – together with our fishing waters – we are paying billions for nothing, abiding by EU rules, and failing to support British businesses to defeat the EU ones. Sunak, just like Boris before him, is a weak, pathetic, cowardly and treacherous doormat who is betraying Britain and the British people.

  13. agricola
    May 15, 2023

    Thank you for that, one realises what an arachnoid web the EU span and mostlyas a protectionist mechanism. I can but comment on one area. Trade does not require items of trade to be universally specified . Some items going to the gereral public do require safety regulations. Generally specifications are down to customers and trade flurishes when the customer gets what he wants, when he wants, and at a price that triggerrs purchase. Anything that gets in the way of this is detramentally intrusive and there to support other considerations. In the case of the EU quite possibly protectionist.
    Having defined the problem, what is blocking its resolution. Is it the scribes, the HoLs, a pro EU government agenda,CBI lobbying, or collectively all, known as the Blob.

  14. David+Cooper
    May 15, 2023

    Item 7 – remove the ban on selling new ICE cars after 2030 – has been held out as an implementation of the manifesto pledge on page 27, which read “We will consult on the earliest date we can phase out the sale of new conventional petrol and diesel cars, while minimising the impact on drivers and businesses”. It does of course speak volumes that the minister who announced the 2030 ban was Grant Shapps, who might be suspected of having limited his consultees to Lord Deben, Caroline Lucas and Swampy. However, did this originate in EU law, UK gold plating of EU law, or Theresa May’s toxic Net Zero legacy? Either way, this ban does indeed need to be scrapped.

    1. glen cullen
      May 15, 2023

      Spot on David

  15. Dave+Andrews
    May 15, 2023

    Small beer when compared with home grown waste and costs. How about removing the link between the price of fossil fuel and renewable generated electricity? Far more benefit than the VAT element (which I agree should be removed).
    Good to hear you on R4 this morning. Perhaps you could explain why it’s a Conservative government that approves the 600,000+ legal migrants to the UK, when there aren’t the houses or services to support them?

    1. a-tracy
      May 15, 2023

      Scotland is short of people their population is reducing, there is a big shopping village with 40 shops left deserted for 20 years ‘a ghost town’ because of bad planning, allowing another centre to open nearby which became more popular. All those units could perhaps house some of the migrants, and Scotland is a welcoming place for immigration, the SNP tell us. The people temporarily housed their could spruce the place us as thanks for their free accommodation, where did all the little bed pods go from the Nightingales.

      1. Mark B
        May 15, 2023

        Most immigrants what to live in the South East and London in particular. They do not want to live in the Socialist Democratic Peoples Republic (pending referendum result) of Alba.

        Mores the pity.

  16. Aaron
    May 15, 2023

    To a lay person such as myself, most of these seem to represent a change of direction that could benefit the U.K., however, my experience is in IT, and if you mess with GDPR U.K. and the UK looses its current equivalence with the EU, our supply chain and international data processing becomes a lot more complicated.
    Given my knowledge in this one area, I wonder how practical and reasonable the other recommendations are?

    (As an aside, It seems to me the U.K. should be enforcing the current laws, and fining the companies who lose personal data, rather than removing those laws. But that’s just my view on GDPR)

    Also, I noticed reference to an NHS dataspine in the Duncan smith recommendations. Would this be a re hash of the 2009 NHS backbone project, which was cancelled as no one could see the benefit? An explanation of how such a dataspine, and sharing of medical information would benefit the average citizen whilst maintaining their right to privacy would be welcome.

    Just with these two rules repealed, I can foresee your medical records being breached, or sold on the open market, and your car/home/life insurance premiums increasing because of your medical history was purchased due to these rule changes.
    Can’t say I would be happy with such a scenario, would anyone else?

    1. British Patriot
      May 15, 2023

      @Aaron: We need to detach ourselves from the EU orbit, and create new links with other countries on OUR terms. So abolishing the EU GDPR rules would be an EXCELLENT idea. The EU is a giant boa constrictor that tries to crush all other countries, so we need to be completely separate from them. It might lose us some trade in the short term but this is a small price to pay for the freedom and independence that it will give us. The EU are evil, bullying scum.

    2. Mark B
      May 15, 2023

      So how does the RoTW manage to trade with the EU, when they do not have to adopt EU rules into their own internal market ?

    3. dixie
      May 16, 2023

      @Aaron, As an anyone else …
      The “rules” do not prevent bad actors or negligence nor compensate or correct for failings.
      When using our GP’s online service to access my details I discovered and reported clear confidentiality breaches of my medical data by the popular 3rd party IT service provider without my permission. Despite my repeated and detailed explanations of how this breach was occurring the parties involved refused to acknowledge and address the issue.
      Note, there is a legal requirement to preserve confidentiality but none in the case of privacy.
      There being no clear, effective route of “enforcement” to resolve such an issue and not wishing to utterly waste my life-seconds dealing with the civil service I terminated my use of that online service.

      And then the GPs were forced to surrender patient data to NHS Digital leaving it all open to wider abuse …

    4. dixie
      May 16, 2023

      @Aaron, As an anyone else …
      The “rules” do not prevent bad actors or negligence nor compensate or correct for failings.

      When using our GP’s online service to access my details I discovered and reported clear confidentiality breaches of my medical data by the popular 3rd party IT service provider without my permission. Despite my repeated and detailed explanations of how this breach was occurring the parties involved refused to acknowledge and address the issue.
      Note, there is a legal requirement to preserve confidentiality but none in the case of privacy.
      There being no clear, effective route of “enforcement” to resolve such an issue and not wishing to utterly waste my life-seconds dealing with the civil service I terminated my use of that online service.

      And then the GPs were forced to surrender patient data to NHS Digital leaving it all open to wider abuse … and no choice.

  17. Winston Smith
    May 15, 2023

    Yes all of that and the Germans have put back their ban on making petrol and diesel cars to 2035.
    The problem is who in Government will take your list and get on with it?
    Ben Habib says;
    “Boris’s Brino committed us to being aligned with EU state aid, competition, employment and environmental law. We cannot buy British first. We cannot support our own industries without falling foul of EU regulations. And we are bound into net zero insanity through the same deal. Our country is being sunk in a morass of EU regulation. Brexit should have been about ejecting all this nonsense and making policy for British National Interest – not that of the EU’s Single Market!”
    We are a long way from being an Independent “Sovereign” country having been completely let down by a Conservative Government. It’s unbelievable but true. Ian Duncan Smith and others have said under “Common Law” we don’t need any EU “Napoleonic Laws” Nanny State laws. Who is really running the Government?

  18. MFD
    May 15, 2023

    Why oh why do we tolerate people who want to destroy Great Britain.
    We must look after Number One and stop all the destructive world agreements

  19. Christine
    May 15, 2023

    “17.1. Amend the Weights and Measures Act 1985 to allow traders to use imperial
    measurements without the equivalent metric measurement.”

    I don’t agree with this one. Metric is better and there are few now alive who think in imperial measurements. It would confuse shoppers and lead to sellers conning customers.

    “17.5. Urgently review guidance on hand sanitisers so that tested, effective
    non-alcohol based sanitisers can be used”

    Not urgent and no longer relevant.

    1. Barbara
      May 15, 2023


      ‘there are few now alive who think in imperial measurements’

      People round here use imperial measurements in the shops every day, especially when buying meat – both at farmer’s markets and small independents – including people obviously in their twenties who serve you.

    2. Fishknife
      May 15, 2023

      Christine, 17.1
      Whilst I would agree that a metric system is superior for some things it lacks the human perspective and the dropping of shillings has resulted in a universal inability to do mental arithmatic.
      Feet and inches are particularly important, as are pints, and kilos aren’t readily subdivided.
      I’ll stick to 9″ rather than 228.6 mm, builders use 2″ x 1″ (in meter lengths, and then lop them down to feet), there is something to be said for a 12 bore, miles per hour, and teaspoons.

    3. forthurst
      May 15, 2023

      It’s clear to me you lack scruples.

    4. Sir Joe Soap
      May 15, 2023

      Anybody dealing with US companies or people uses Imperial. The plane you fly on was made most likely using parts measured in Imperial. As for the surgical instrument which is used to operate on you in hospital.

    5. a-tracy
      May 16, 2023

      In many things, Christine, but in height measurements, people use ft and inches, in weight – stones and llbs, journeys – miles and yards. I only know what 4ltr looks like because that is how I buy my milk. When baking, I still use oz’s 4oz x 3 + 2 eggs, and if giving a room dimension or curtain length, I use feet and inches. My children use those measurements too.

  20. Ian B
    May 15, 2023

    “Which EU laws to repeal?” It should be all of them without exceptions. If The UK Parliament, its MP’s, the UK Government, the only legitimate Legislators for the UK cannot make/create, amend and repeal the Laws, Rules and Regulations required for what happens in the UK’s own home domain, they have no right to assume the positions they were elected, payed and empowered to hold.

    The question is more subtle than ‘which’, its about the legitimacy of having an elected Parliament. Its about the legitimacy of our own Government. If MP’s don’t want to step up to the job they need to ask themselves why are they there.

  21. glen cullen
    May 15, 2023

    Repeal all and every net-zero, climate-change, green-revolution related laws

  22. Philip+Hatton
    May 15, 2023

    You’ve been in power for 13 years now and your party doesn’t seem to want to listen to you.

    As one of your constituents I would rather you applied your time to more local issues. How about sorting out the third world state of the roads in Wokingham.

    Reply I have made my views on the state of our roads well known to the Council. All our roads in my constituency are controlled by the Council, not the government. The Conservative Opposition on the Council agrees with me we need better response to potholes and to continue with more bypasses and better junctions.

    1. Mark B
      May 15, 2023


      The problem of pot-hols is nationwide. Councils are cutting back on roads and investing in non-car related things such as the Woke Agenda and Net Zero.

    2. Sir Joe Soap
      May 15, 2023

      Apparently they can only be mended in Wokingham if > 40mm deep. So at 39mm computer says no.

  23. George Sheard
    May 15, 2023

    Bloody hell !!!
    Who is going to do all these changes ?
    Let’s get on the one holding us back especially the EU holding the uk to ransom
    Thank you

  24. beresford
    May 15, 2023

    Raise the limit at which VAT is charged on goods sent from abroad. This tax currently costs more to collect than it raises and is a nuisance to purchasers, but George Osborne was unable to alter the limit because of EU rules.

    1. James Freeman
      May 15, 2023

      You should remove VAT on prescription drugs: zero-rated within the UK but 20% if imported. I am curious to know how they get around WTO rules on this one, as it is equivalent to a tariff for pharmacies based outside of the UK.

  25. glen cullen
    May 15, 2023

    Repeal all and every EU and international regulations that impede UK law i.e ECHRs

    Under the European climate law, EU countries must cut greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55% by 2030. Their goal is to make the EU climate neutral by 2050.

  26. Ian B
    May 15, 2023

    From todays Telegraph
    ‘Mr Rees-Mogg, who quit the Cabinet after Mr Sunak was elected party leader, will say on Monday that a decision to scrap the deadline of the end of the year for the implementation of the Retained EU Law (REUL) Bill will prevent the UK making economic gains from Brexit.’

    Says it all and highlights the PM’s master plan, to work with the ‘Blob’ and Starmer to construct a way of the UK being subordinate once again to a foreign unelected, unaccountable EU Commission. So far he is wining as after nearly 7 years after leaving the EU they(the EU) are still 100% in charge of the Conservative Government through their disciples in the ‘Blob’ that control him.

  27. Mike Wilson
    May 15, 2023

    How many of IDS’s suggestions are simply ideas or actual repealing of laws? A lot of the simply sound like even more laws – as if we don’t have enough already.

  28. Graham
    May 15, 2023

    Headbanger stuff – I don’t know how you find the time to put all of this together especially when you know there’s not a snowballs chance in hell that any of it will be passed. What you’re at is pure vandalism to upset everything just to make the ideological point that Britain leads the way irrespective – well maybe it was the case one time –

    Just to take one point – remove the NI Protocol will have such far reaching consequences that we don’t even know about yet – as I say headbanging stuff

    1. Peter+VAN+LEEUWEN
      May 15, 2023


      1. Sir Joe Soap
        May 15, 2023

        Oh yes, +1, of course…. Until there’s a problem in Europe, you need our help and we have a tough nut at our helm instead of the soft flaky stuff we have now and have had recently. The worm will turn.
        EU reap what EU sow.

        1. rose
          May 15, 2023

          It always strikes me as odd the way EU agents are allowed to call us “headbangers” or approve of other people doing it, without anyone pointing out the double insult – to mentally ill people as well as to us. Where are the language police on this?

        2. Peter+VAN+LEEUWEN
          May 16, 2023

          @SIR JOE SOAP:
          The Window Framework which replaced the N.I. protocol was already accepted in Parliament with a very large majority. Why, as a minute minority, keep on fighting a war that has already ended?

          1. rose
            May 16, 2023

            The Windsor Framework was never discussed in Parliament. A small part of it, the Stormont Brake, was rammed through without scrutiny or debate, and that was used as assent to the undebated whole. The MPs who were taking these numerous documents seriously had not completely finished examining them when this was done, let alone had a chance to discuss them with the public, their constituents.

            So why, Peter, do you think it was considered necessary to behave in this high handed, anti democratic way? So very EU. If right had been on the side of those handing N Ireland and our sovereignty over to the EU, surely there would have been a full and fair public and parliamentary debate?

    2. British Patriot
      May 15, 2023

      @Graham: Removing the NI Protocol/Windsor Framework agreement will simply mean that the UK will be like every other country in the world: one country with no internal border. Wow, such a radical idea! To be a normal, sovereign country. Yeah, really crazy man … I don’t think. You clearly have a slave’s mentality, in that you cannot accept that we should be free and independent. How very sad for you.

  29. William Long
    May 15, 2023

    This does not seem a very long list, though presumably there are reams of small print with which the Civil servants are delighted. But it should not be beyond the capacity of a Government that meant business about freeing us from the EU; but clearly that is not the present Government, starting at the top.

  30. RDM
    May 15, 2023

    Well done, you’ve always had attention to detail!

    Can I enquire into the possibility of Deregulation and Simplification of;

    Accountancy Rules, especially for the Self Employed, Owner Drivers, and other appropriate SME’s ?

    Other suggestions;

    – IR35 operation still requires a Limited Company to operate, thus stopping Cash Book keeping. A Great simplification for the Self Employed, allowing the build up of a company, quicker?
    – NDA’s used by big company’s; They use it to catch all IP, regardless of who’s it is. I’m looking for a re-balance of Power, just they have a Legal Department.
    – Owner Drivers: Taking a CPC for an Operators License, requires two exams (both pass of 70%), that is based on Fleet Management. Not of interest to the Owner Driver. The relevant parts (for the Owner Driver) of each CPC is similar to the CPC the Driver has to take every five years anyway!
    – Operating centres; there aren’t any, too expensive.
    – DfT £8k before you can even operate. Surely there is a better to operate?
    – Industry are still operating as if we are in a Customs Union; We need to open them up, and have a Competitions Regulator ensure big company can’t push Operators into ‘Price Takers’. This Is important if you want Owner Drivers to specialise (into Steel, Plant, Machines, operate across the continent, etc,…), or Innovate (delivering Steel Coils to EU factors would normally operate at 15 tonne per coil, so would want to take 45 tonne Net). This has been a rigidity in British Transport for some time! NL/Denmark drivers can operate at 60 tonne Net! It would help gain access to Capital, with legal oversight of Prices, an arbiter? This does NOT undermine a Free Market, not so big company’s can screw the single Tractor and Trailer Owner, trying to pay down large capital repayments.
    – HGV Driver CPC every five years is exactly the same materiel? It costs the best part of £500?

    – VAT threshold £250k?
    – Fixed Tax rate, posterior to the Book, may be into a Company Savings account for it? How else would they know what to pay.
    – No allowances unless provable; Specialised function, standardising by using Fuel Receipt number into software (Not a photo) ? So, simplifying Fuel Cards, for example.

    – International (Heavy) transport routes with Secure/Cheap Overnight and Weekend Parking; Port Talbot to Felixstowe?

    So on….

    Transport is so regulated/Rigid it is very difficult to Innovate or Specialise!

    Hope this helps?



    Reply Yes some more good ideas there. I am seeking a higher VAT threshold and change to IR 35

  31. Belinda Knott
    May 15, 2023

    Number 1 is illegal under international law, since it violates the EU-UK Withdrawal Agreement. I didn’t waste my time reading any further, you obviously don’t intend the government to take you seriously

    1. Dave Andrews
      May 15, 2023

      There is no such thing as international law, only treaties, which a sovereign nation like the UK can break at any time. It would however be courteous to give fair notice.
      In my opinion, the NI protocol violates the Act of Union and is itself illegal.

      1. Matt
        May 15, 2023

        Dave Andrews – there are the various laws of the sea covering pollution, navigation and a whole lot more all under the umbrelka of the IMO itself part of the UN but these are international laws. There are laws also under the ILO international labour Organisation as well in fact there is a whole lot of agreements parked with international bodies like the UN another one for which there are rules but also laws.

        If you want to consider treaties then there are people around who think that the Act of Union itself was ilegal since it was never entered into freely by the people of Britain or or Ireland.. neither was it ever ratified only forced on the people by way of bribery and corruption. And not stopping there we can then go back in time and throw out all the older treaties that govern our links to places worldwide of course if we don’t do it ourselves according to your logic countries on the other sides of the world would be free itself to get rid of anything it wants – however it would be courteous to give us fair warning – your words –

    2. a-tracy
      May 15, 2023

      Belinda, you spent all weekend asking for the list, it is provided, and you can’t be now bothered to read it, laughable.

    3. Mark B
      May 15, 2023

      And what international law is that ?

      Link please.

    4. formula57
      May 15, 2023

      @ Belinda Knott – the legal principle upon which your point relies is the well-established and understood concept of pacta sunt servanda.

      What is needed, clearly, is Ministers serious and resourceful enough to apply the equally well-established legal principle of clausula rebus sic stantibus. That would be sufficient to proceed entirely legally to see Sir John’s point 1. implemented.

      1. Mark B
        May 15, 2023

        Clever clogs 🙂

    5. Peter+VAN+LEEUWEN
      May 15, 2023


    6. British Patriot
      May 15, 2023

      @ Belinda Knott: There is no such thing as ‘international law’. There are international agreements (AKA ‘Treaties’) but these are NOT ‘laws’. For a Treaty to become a law it must be ‘incorporated’ into NATIONAL law – and it is then, as the term sugests, purely a NATIONAL law, not an international one. And being a national law it can be revoked by a national parliament in exactly the same way as any other naltional law. Remember that no government can bind its successors. Since you clearly are too ignorant to know what you are talking about I didn’t bother reading the rest of your (literally) nonsensical comment.

  32. Mike Wilson
    May 15, 2023

    I’d like to know exactly how much we pay the EU every year.

    1. Mark B
      May 15, 2023


    2. rose
      May 15, 2023

      It depends on how often they take us to “court” and how much they fine us. We should have cut loose so they can’t do that.

    3. Mickey Taking
      May 15, 2023

      Perhaps Sir John will ask? And we will have a laugh at how well it is evaded.

  33. Bert+Young
    May 15, 2023

    Thanks for the list ; it makes hard reading and disbelief that we implemented them . Get rid of the lot !.

  34. Kenneth
    May 15, 2023

    No. 5 (Replace product specifications…) is extremely important as it has stifled innovation and depressed competition.

    By freeing ourselves from this straightjacket we can accelerate innovation, competition and progress in the UK which will give the economy a big boost.

  35. Lynn Atkinson
    May 15, 2023

    Why not remove VAT from energy? Why leave un-VAT registered small business alone paying VAT on energy and @ 20% luxury rate?

  36. Judith+Hoffman
    May 15, 2023

    I agree 100% with all of them. it can’t happen soon enough and would be a good start!

  37. Bryan Harris
    May 15, 2023

    That would make a very good first step…..

    The problem will be in getting enough civil servants into the office to actually do the work required.

    Time a few heads rolled to encourage cooperation!

  38. Denis+Cooper
    May 15, 2023

    I’ve been keeping out of this debate because I’ve never agreed with the wholesale indiscriminate repeal of all the UK laws which originally derived from the EU. It is already the case that they continue to have legal force within GB only because the UK Parliament has decided to retain them for the present.


    “‘Retained EU law’ is a concept created by the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018. This act took a ‘snapshot’ of EU law as it applied to the UK at the end of the Brexit transition period on 31 December 2020 and provided for it to continue to apply in domestic law.”

    I’ve previously referred to India still tidying up the legal legacy of the Raj, and this article:


    refers to the case of Ireland:

    “It is instructive that the Irish statute book still contains a very significant amount of pre-Independence legislation. The Irish Free State and the later Irish Republic did not rush to remove the laws of what they saw as an illegitimate and colonialist Westminster Parliament. It was only with the Statute Law Revision Act 2007 that Ireland enacted a law that repealed all pre-Independence statutes save those listed in that Act, and thus made absolutely explicit that the authority of that legislation came from the post-independence Irish legislature.

    If the Irish could take such a long time about de-Anglicising its statute book, then supporters of Brexit can be more relaxed about de-Europeanising the statute book of the United Kingdom.”

    But as a supporter of Brexit for the whole of the UK I am not relaxed that Rishi Sunak clearly has no intention to de-Europeanise the statute book for Northern Ireland, and fighting that betrayal is far more important.

  39. Original Richard
    May 15, 2023

    “7. Remove the ban on making petrol and diesel cars after 2030”

    Isn’t it a ban on the UK sales of new petrol diesel cars after 2030?

    I presume petrol and diesel cars can be still made in the UK for export to the ROW including the EU where no such ban has yet been applied and indeed where ices can continue after 2035 using e-fuels?

    This ban, as indeed the whole Net Zero Strategy, will prove to be a pointless and economically damaging disaster for the UK, as intended.

  40. Denis+Cooper
    May 15, 2023

    Meanwhile, and relevant to the disgraceful betrayal of the unionists in Northern Ireland, here is another article:


    “UK exports and Brexit – what has really been happening?”

    And in the light of the 2022 trade figures the best answer so far is “Overall, not very much”.

    To be completely fair, when I wrote yesterday about:


    “… George Osborne signing off a Treasury analysis which grossly overvalued our membership of the EU Single Market at around 6% of GDP, when the latest trade figures … suggest that it was worth a tenth of that or less … ”

    I could have pointed out that the Treasury forecast was for fifteen years hence, a point repeatedly ignored by those who warned against a “cliff edge” and set out to tie the hands of government to prevent a “no deal” exit, and if we carry on losing an additional 0.6% of GDP each year that could add up to the “Project Fear” 6%.

    Basically Rishi Sunak has now endorsed the false Remainer argument that membership of the EU Single Market was so economically valuable that we should be willing to put up with the minor constitutional damage.

    1. halfway
      May 16, 2023

      Denis the Unionists have betrayed themselves, they had it all with Uk government backing but they blew it because they could not behave in an open honest and decent manner to their nationalist neighbours. On Thursday NI goes to the polls again for council elections – we’ll see the results then whether the DUP 25 per cent vote share is holding up or not.

  41. ChrisS
    May 15, 2023

    At last you had a sensible interview on the Today Programme this morning.

    You managed to put the issuers over housing, growth and migration over in a very clear manner and were hardly challenged on them at all. Your points are so obvious and sensible, it is hard to see how any sensible commentator to the right of Corbyn could disagree with them.

    So why is the Conservative Party leadership not adopting them ? It can only be that they are being unduly influenced by big business which has become used to bringing in millions of low paid workers, at no cost to themselves, while saddling taxpayers with the responsibility of housing them plus providing medical, education and every other requirement.

    As you said so clearly, the idea of bringing in up to 750,000 new people a year is completely unsustainable and has to stop immediately.

    1. a-tracy
      May 16, 2023


      2016 Immigration to UK was 650,000, the highest estimate recorded and this was under the actual number an extra 2m people applied for settled status.

      This commentary looks at what has changed and what that may mean. Since the opening of the EUSS in mid-2018, over 5.5 million people have received grants of status, and almost 40% (2.1 million) of those are pre-settled status holders.3 Mar 2023

      What I want to know is how we ensure we don’t get a repeat of the Windrush where these people that applied went straight home afterwards but come back at some point in the future to claim pension and benefits they may not have accrued, how do they prove they were here if they aren’t economically active, is there a register?

  42. George Brooks
    May 15, 2023

    Reading both lists is a perfect illustration of how much damage, being in the EU, has done to this country. The Remainers are off their trolleys to delay us getting rid of these restrictions and this most certainly applies to the Lords which is now made up of a mob with questionable motives.

    It is rapidly becoming evident that we are not being governed by MPs who want this country to progress and increase our standing in the world today. The worst and most serious example is the PM failing to keep his word to scrap at least 2400 laws and regulations. He cannot be trusted and I hope he never gets back into No10!!!! at the next GE. The party has to find and support a new leader.

  43. Francesca+Skinner
    May 15, 2023

    No noe could disagree with you proposals but do we have a Prime Minister and a cabinet willing to scrap your recommendation’s I somehow doubt it.

  44. Mark+Thomas
    May 15, 2023

    Sir John,
    Regarding point 8 – UK auction houses, it was John Major who stupidly introduced these rules. This was after pressure from Paris art dealers who complained that the (much larger) London art market had an unfair advantage, having fewer taxes and regulations and able to match New York. As a result collectors and dealers in the UK suddenly found they had to pay EU import vat on any work of art or antique bought from outside the EU.
    This still continues as UK import vat. My latest e-auction invoice from the US, for a total purchase of $1,235 plus buyer’s fee and charges, also includes UK import vat of $75.60. Often what I buy had already been exported from the UK for sale in the US. Imagine having to pay import vat for a penny of Aethelred II.

  45. Steffi
    May 15, 2023

    If we abolish VAT on domestic fuel presumably the loss to the treasury will have to be made up somewhere else – but where?

    Abolish permanently VAT on green products – however ‘permanently’ probably not possible

    Repeal the ports directive – yes and allow ships to pump whatever they like into the harbour

    Replace Eu product specification for a UK lookalike – but for what? For what – and what’s to gain?

    At this stage I have lost interest and am going back to bed.

    1. agricola
      May 15, 2023


      Wherever taxes/VAT are abolished or reduced you have two option. Spend less by the same amount or run the economy at tax levels that increase turnover and therefore produce more tax revenue from a smaller percentage take.

      Even yachts pumping efluent into harbours would attract attention and heavy fines. You can pump it ashore for treatment.

      Tying production to EU specs, may not leave you in the best position to supply other markets. No need to tie your production unit to anything other than what the market / customer wants.

      Realise, many of these EU rules were designed to protect the EU’s single market and large manufacturers from more inovative smaller manufacturer. The market was rigged for the big boys.

  46. agricola
    May 15, 2023

    Sitrep from the front line.

    The definitive referendum ( D Cameron ) we had in 2016 divided the country into two camps, 17.4 m voted leave, 16.1m voted remain. However not as simple as it looked. Appart from the 48% who voted remain there were the institutions of remain who have had an ongoing remain vote, exercised at every opportunity. They are the CBI, Civil Service, 83% of Parliament, House of Lords, BBC, Channel 4, Legal and Judicial professions, Bank of England, and the Treasury to name but the obvious ones. Judged by their actions, totally undemocratic if not illegal.

    After Cameron’s resignation, leaving no Brexit plan, May and Robins, an EU fedralist scribe, take over and make a fateful decision to negotiate with the EU, rather than trade under WTO rules, protect our maritime borders, and institute effective immigration controls. Result, many years of getting nowhere and May lying to Parliament and the electorate with regular monotony, “Brexit means Brexit”. The Cabinet, then mostly leavers, did not buy it at Chequers. Boris became PM.

    Boris dazzles himself with “Get Brexit Done”, and falls into an EU elephant trap in his enthusiasm, and puts Northern Irelands membership of the UK in dire peril. Boris loses the premiership under dubious circumstances as a scribe called Sue Gray has since demonstrated.

    Liz Truss is democratically elected PM with a visionary programme, but the Blob react, organising an undemocratic coupe, and Sunak plus Hunt arrive as proxies for the Blob. The Civil Service, having not lost their taste for power, but having discovered a preference for working from home with all the perks of working in a ministry, exert that power against the democratic wishes of the electorate. They are:-
    Against controls on immigrstion.
    Against the removal of EU law which they have previously gifted us.
    Giving mediocre service where they interconnect with the people.

    Government have become totally disfunctional and consequently sore arsed after local elections. A foretaste of their fate in 2024. I list:-
    Health Service in chaos.
    Taxation at unprecedented levels.
    Roads dreadful.
    Farming confused.
    No viable Energy Policy as government still prays at the altar of Nett Zero.
    Fishing still predated by the EU.
    Water Companies polluting our rivers and sea.
    Immigration of all types off the scale for integration and out of control, appart from by the traffickers.
    Inflation at 10% to 20% depending on what you buy.
    Railways disfunctional.
    War with the motorist at local and national level.
    House building failure, and financially out of reach for first time buyers.

    The Remain camp pay periodic lip service to Brexit but fight at every opportunity against it. Those who voted leave plus 17% of MPs can do nothing to alter this situation. 83% of MPs render themselves unelectable having fought Brexit from 2016 to the present day. Effectively killing democracy. I am fearful of what the future holds, and havn’t mentioned the war on free speech in our universities, woke and political correctness that sweetens our every day. Those the gods would destroy they first drive mad.

  47. beresford
    May 15, 2023

    It is now being reported that House of Commons staff have been told to monitor their colleagues’ usage of preferred gender pronouns and adopt ‘zero tolerance’ to transgressors. Which minister is driving this policy, for which there is no democratic mandate?

    1. R.Grange
      May 15, 2023

      What on earth makes you think it’s a politician who directs policy, Beresford? The civil servant responsible for HoC staff seems to be Marianne Cwynarski CBE, Director General (Operations) of the House of Commons. She became a Paliamentary role model in 2015 and chairs the ParliREACH (Race, Ethnicity And Cultural Heritage), the Workplace Equality Network. The network represents ‘the interests of Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) people in Parliament, although it is open to all passholders’. So you can expect identity politics to be very much on her agenda, and the pronouns to go with it.

      1. rose
        May 15, 2023

        Another sinister route by which our democratically elected parliamentary representatives can be removed by faceless bureaucrats without our knowledge or permission.

  48. Peter Gardner
    May 15, 2023

    This is the first set of actual proposals I have seen. So far so good but why isn’t Kemi Badenoch working from such a list – assuming there has been some consultation apart from the work of Ian Duncan-Smith?
    I am surprised MiFiD2 is not on the list. Perhaps it is being modified already?
    The handling of REUL by the Sunak Government is an object lesson in how to make the simple really difficult. It seems to me that Sunak really wants the UK to remain closely aligned with the EU. After all, that is the effect of his NIP Framework.

    1. rose
      May 15, 2023

      After the imposition of the Windsor Frameup and the removal of the NIP Bill, together with the payments to France, that is indeed the only possible conclusion.

  49. Bill brown
    May 15, 2023

    Sir JR

    So you wish to abolish recent legislation on NI protocol that was supported by a majority in the house.
    How democratic of you

    Reply The NI Protocol legislation passed the Commons with a large majority so I am being democratic in wanting it to pass the Lords

  50. Derek
    May 15, 2023

    A handful of laws compared with the bulk of those 4000 odd still remaining on the Statue Book. So why can they not be sorted? Any answers from the Minister?
    Surely this Minister should have told her lazy civil servants if they were not up to the job she would be forced to induct experts who could from the Private Sector and declare her own staff ‘no longer required’ in her department. And furthermore, make this a common standard policy.

  51. Denis+Cooper
    May 16, 2023

    I’ve just heard James Cleverly tell a Lords committee that we cannot dictate to the EU and they cannot dictate to us, but while that be true for Great Britain it is certainly not true for Northern Ireland.

    1. Denis+Cooper
      May 16, 2023

      Now he is trying to pretend that the ECJ will no longer have jurisdiction over state aid questions.

    2. Denis+Cooper
      May 16, 2023

      And here:


      he is saying that “form follows function”, when clearly the form of the protocol does not follow its function if that function is to protect the integrity of both the EU and UK markets without impeding cross-border traffic, only if its function is to keep part of the UK in the regulatory orbit of the EU to assist its detachment from the UK.

Comments are closed.