The government is rushing to accept a Sanitary and Phyto Sanitary Agreement with the EU. They hope such an Agreement would allow the UK to sell more meat and dairy products into the EU with less inspection and documentation of the products. These products are already tariff free under the TCA, whilst the non EU products in these categories face high tariffs.
There are many questions to ask before signing any such EU drafted proposal.
How wide will the reach be of present and future EU laws and regulations? All the time we were in the EU there was substantial regulatory creep into most areas of business and family life.
What is the proposed cost the UK would have to pay to be regulated?
Will the UK have to stop researching and making new products that do not conform with EU rules? Post brexit we have developed new fertilisers and new ways of farming.
Will the EU rules undermine any of the new trade deals we have negotiated with other countries? Which TPP, Indian and US products would the EU make us ban or impose cumbersome rules on?
What will the impact be on inflation as we become more dependent on dearer EU imports?
What is the likely increase in our exports to the EU and their exports to us? Given they export more than 3 times the amount of food and drink to us as we do to them, will these measures further increase our trade deficit in food?
Will we have to go back to mainly importing EU citrus fruit with high tariffs on citrus from elsewhere?
May 27, 2025
I think the most important damage from the SPS part of Starmer’s deal will be constitutional, not economic, while the most important economic damage will come from permanently locking us into the EU net zero policy:
https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/climate-change/
“Climate change: what the EU is doing”
“EU countries are working to fight climate change and achieve climate neutrality by 2050”
May 27, 2025
From you link:-
“The transition to a net-zero economy is a must in order to tackle the climate crisis and it brings significant opportunities for:
economic growth
markets and jobs
technological development
The green transition aims to boost the EU’s competitiveness and be socially balanced and fair.”
What is actually a must (for growth, jobs, cheap reliable on demand energy, the economy, defence, living standards…) is ditching the net zero insanity in full now. Miliband has to go and now.
May 27, 2025
If Miliband went the EU would insist on his replacement by somebody else, another ecofanatic. My feeling is that the movement is unstoppable, and that the UK Parliament and government will continue to go along with it, but I would like some honesty, some realism, about the economic impact. Rather than putting the blame for our economic malaise on lingering effects of the global financial crisis, or the pandemic or, of course, Brexit.
This is hot off the press at Cambridge University, “Corporate Leaders Groups”, today:
https://www.corporateleadersgroup.com/news/business-and-investors-call-eu-set-greenhouse-gas-emissions-reduction-target-least-90-2040
“Business and Investors call on the EU to Set a Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Target of at least 90% by 2040.”
Reply I think we are winning the arguments that current net zero policies are damaging the UK economy and add to world CO 2. We do have to oppose the disastrous idea that the UK join the EU ETS and imposes a carbon tariff.
May 27, 2025
To reply:- the arguments against the insane net zero agenda are overwhelming, but the mad Miliband, Greta, Starmer, Kemi, Coutinho, Boris, Sunak, Gove, Uni Party… religion (like nearly all religions) simply does not deal in rational arguments or indeed with the laws of physics.
May 27, 2025
+1 LL. You wonder who is making money out of the net zero push. On a different strand of policy (defence) I saw that Rheinmetal shares have risen 2500% in five years. The returns, if you know where the politics is leading, can be astronomical! In this case not for me, I avoid defence stocks.
May 27, 2025
Indeed load of people making millions out of the net zero religion and indeed out of open door immigration levels. Lawyers and Hotel owners and intermediaries especially.
May 27, 2025
Much talk about self determination and indigeious people by King Charles in Canada. I wonder why he did not go to say goodby to the Chagos Islands and mention the Chagosians last week!
He, needless to say, got in his Carney’s “Climate Change” hypocricy in. It has always changed Charlie for billions of years. Changed rather alot when got smashed by a huge impact some 4.53 billion years back and we got the moon. Also when the Dinosaurs died out and when we had ice ages with far higher CO2 levels and no 4X4S EITHER.
I am all in favour of the Monarchy but pLEASE get out of politics Charlie, especially as you are both wrong headed and a grade one hypocrite on this issue.
May 27, 2025
Will the UK be expected to follow the new energy performance certificate (EPC) rules that the EU is applying to privately owned homes? This will have devastating consequences for private homeowners. No doubt all part of their “you will own nothing” plan.
May 27, 2025
Indeed. Enforcing energy performance, solar panels and heat pumps on people will be an expensive disaster. We had an C class estate (bought second hand of course) with the state stop system at jams and lights. It had its own second battery which failed after 6 years and cost over £400 to replace. Probably save about £50 in fuel over the 6 years. But 2x£600 for the two batteries each of which probable uses about £200 of fossil fuel energy to manufacture!
Another example they forced condensing gas boilers onto us some years back. More complex and far more likely to fail. Saves slightly on gas say £40 PA on a flat at best but boiler man has to come out in diesel van and costs say £800PA extra in dep. maint. and repairs. They also often freeze up the water drip outlet and cut out. Just on the coldest days when needed most!
May 27, 2025
I see now Keith has given away our fish the Frenh want to ban us from the £125 billion defence fund. In typical French fashion they cannot be trusted
This of course will make no difference to 2TK s mission to embrace Brussels.
May 27, 2025
Any deal we make with the EU should show all their cards facing up to stop them twisting, causing us to stick or go bust.
May 27, 2025
This agreement seems little about the details or balance of trade with the EU, more about returning to the bussom of political dependence. A ticking time bomb for a Reform government who are the only party in the commons intent on a comprehensive Brexit.
May 27, 2025
+ 1 – a succinct summation of Starmer’s evil plans.
May 27, 2025
All good questions, but how many are to be answered by the Government and debated properly in the House of Commons. The “deal” seems such a bad one, one can only assume a malign intent by Labour to force us back into the EU by the back door.
May 27, 2025
Cost is not a consideration for these clowns in government. Being under the dead hand of Brussels is their most important consideration.
Keith wants us back as an associate member which had always been the aim.
More importantly how much are we going to be paying annually for the privilege of vassal state, defence cooperation, Erasmus, SPS and all the other nonesense he’s agreed to. Will parliament get a vote when he agrees EU citizens can bring their families, access the NHS, schools and benefits.
We are on the road to IMF surtfdom and Rachel from complaints is speeding that day along.
May 27, 2025
Joshua Rosenberg reports this morning that at an inquiry into a couple of cases where lawyers used AI to cite cases supporting their case, AI ‘created’ cases where there were none. Assiduous judges spotted them and held the inquiry.
We can expect to find Rachel Reeves and similar resourcing to AI to find evidence to support the Government’s case for being trussed like a chicken by the EU, being ‘good’ for us all.
How are The People to differentiate between truth and lies when the liars are deploying a whole new ‘science’ to blind and befuddle mankind?
One general in the modern computerisation world was asked if the computers could not find the lies? He said they could but we were even now ‘not sure they were telling us the truth when they said they had’.
May 27, 2025
@LA; Yes the risks posed by AI are starting to appear. Did you see the report yesterday (perhaps Sunday) were it was shown that AI has the ability to ignore explicit Human instructions, in the case reported an explicit instruction given by researchers to shut-down was not only ignored by the AI machine but the AI logic rewrote its own BIOS code to prevent a shutdown – I assume humans at that point pulled the plug!
As for the current govt using AI to support their case, perhaps, but equally what would stop a future Conservative or Reform government doing likewise, or using AI lies to hoodwink voters at the ballot box?
May 27, 2025
Correct. Associate Membership has been the plan since Cameron proposed a Two-Tier EU (Eurozone = EU and Non-Eurozone = Associate Members) when he was negotiating prior to the Referendum. Merkel said NO, presumably still hoping we’d eventually be forced to join the Euro and pay for the bail-outs.
It’s why we were stitched up with Johnson’s semi-Brexit which Sunak then rowed back on, and why Badenough refused to repeal 4000 pieces of EU Regulations/legislation which had already been approved by Parliament.
May 27, 2025
@Donna; Your comment appears a little confusing, is not the EEA/EFTA a form of “Associate Membership”?
As I recall it, that doesn’t sound like what Cameron proposed (and would have been shot down by UKIP and the Tory backbench in any case, the UK becoming a rule taker not a rule maker), his idea was more akin to having unique access to the single market but not having to accept other rules nor need to pay any membership fees if we chose – very few were surprised when Merkel said ‘No’!
Also what you describe as “Eurozone = EU and Non-Eurozone = Associate Members” is that not sort of what we left and Denmark is still a member of, by way of a different name, an Opt-out that the UK demanded in relation to the single currency (EMU) within the wider Maastricht Treaty.
May 28, 2025
I wasn’t party to the detailed discussions. It was reported at the time that Cameron was proposing a two-tier EU: the Eurozone which would be called the EU and the non-Euro countries which would become Associate Members – the terms of Associate Membership were to be agreed but were to apply to all the nations outside the Eurozone and who either didn’t qualify, or didn’t want, to join the single currency. That would have contravened the Maastricht/Lisbon Treaties.
The Associate Members would include the remaining EFTA nations, Turkey, Ukraine and, in due course, other countries bordering the Med (check out a map of the Roman Empire!)
The UK aimed to lead the Associate Members.
May 28, 2025
@Donna; You appear obsessed with the Euro, many of the Brexit issues had nothing to do with EMU as that was settled with the Opt-out in the Maastricht Treaty (which we have now lost were we to rejoin).
May 28, 2025
How is Donna “obsessed” with the Euro Jerry?
Donna mentioned the word only once in many hundreds of words in several posts.
The topic raised was about the two tiers of EU membership and what they entailed.
May 28, 2025
@Sam; Because EMU is an irrelevance, as I said, had you read further, the Euro issue had already been settled by the UK (and Danish) Opt-out of the single currency requirement.
May 28, 2025
So it’s hard for Donna to be obsessed with something she hardly raised in her posts and which you agree is an irrelevant matter.
But thanks for your explanation Jerry.
May 28, 2025
@Sam; It is an obsession if someone keeps mention something that is not relevant, she might as well be talking about the USD, AUD or the DKK! Donna mentioned the Euro in the post I replied to, she then mentioned the Euro again in her reply to me, that second time after having it pointed out EMU was not a relevant issue of Brexit due to an active Opt-out. Strewth!
May 28, 2025
But Donna only mentioned as a side issue it in her two long posts which in the main were about the two different levels of EU membership.
I’m beginning to wonder who exactly is really obsessed about this topic.
May 28, 2025
@Sam; “I’m beginning to wonder who exactly is really obsessed about this topic.”
YOU ARE!
May 29, 2025
No need to get all shouty Jerry
Keep calm and realise your error.
I’ll let you have the last word.
May 27, 2025
You and the rest of us look on transfixed with horror, as we see this government undoing the half-hearted Brexit our establishment foisted on us. Meanwhile the EU is a more despotic, grasping, anti-democratic, expansionist and aggressive organisation than it was at the time of the referendum.
Labour are unashamedly globalist EUphiles, who loathe many of the people who voted for them. They have 4 years more of absolute power. There is no effective parliamentary opposition to really take them to task, partly because the MSM are onboard with the globalist project.
What we need is an opposition emerging that has the stature, vision and popular leadership to get elected with a majority and take on the establishment.
May 27, 2025
The damage is to our supposed Democracy, with the Will of the British people overturned by an arrogant Elite who do not govern in the interests of this country.
A clear majority voted to LEAVE the EU. They did not vote to become a satrapy of the EU and a captive market for their products.
May 27, 2025
They are NOT ‘elite’. The reverse! If anything they are ‘elegises’ – people who believe in an elite.
May 27, 2025
David Smith in the Sunday Times praises these trade ‘deals’ and says since 2016 GDP per capita growth in the eurozone has outstripped that in the UK by 10% to 3%. Might be an FX sleight of hand in there, not enough source data to see.
May 27, 2025
But we are a world leader in fighting climate change. So while a group of other countries including some climate laggards may have grown their average per capita GDP at 1.1% a year (compounding to 10% over 9 years) and we have managed only 0.3% a year (compounding to 3% over the same 9 years) at least we have demonstrated that it is possible for a country to halve its greenhouse gas emissions and still have economic growth, albeit at a much lower rate than before it was decided that we should give top priority to the climate crisis.
I take this from Emma Pinchbeck, CEO of the Climate Change Committee:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/03/29/uk-net-zero-tsar-i-understand-why-people-are-angry/
“the first G7 economy to half its emissions; the first to prove you could do it while also growing economically”
May 27, 2025
Pleasant posh lass with an Oxford classics degree who has not got a clue about energy, co2, electricity, climate, entropy, energy economics…
May 27, 2025
The UK doesn’t produce enough food to feed its population. We have no need to export any. Let us just take in food from wherever on the basis of price and quality, tariff free.
We’d do well to cut the food miles. Buy local, buy fresh.
We can do without any further agreement with the EU.
May 27, 2025
@DA; I’m confused by your argument, it appears to be an oxymoron, a paradox.
On the one hand you say;
“We can do without any further agreement with the EU.”
But above that line you say;
“Let us just take in food from wherever on the basis of price and quality, tariff free.”
“The UK doesn’t produce enough food to feed its population.”
“We’d do well to cut the food miles. Buy local, buy fresh.”
That would appear to be an argument against Brexit, against buying citrus fruits from further afield for example, the EU is on our door-step, the lowest food miles bar growing the produce ourselves, which is not always possible. There is nothing amiss with EU quality and If we have a FTA with the EU we will not be paying EU tariffs, and before Brexit such trade was on a single market basis.
May 27, 2025
Too late to be quibbling now – just get on with it
May 27, 2025
Two-Tier’s plans to make the British Military subservient to Brussels are even more worrying than the SPS Agreement.
Two-Tier’s “negotiations” (I prefer to call it treachery) to join the EU Defence Fund will require “alignment” of foreign, defence and security policy. In other words, we will be passing control of these essential elements of Sovereignty and Independence to the EU.
We are being made a colony.
May 27, 2025
The socialists have never been good at getting the small print honest or specific – they prefer vagueness to accurate contents of a bill or a treaty.
So we should expect this latest rush over to the EU side to come at a high price and no doubt with hidden costs and restrictions.
This is yet another ‘tailored’ constraint on the UK, devised by those that seriously hate this country. Any such changes are an insult to all those brave people that got Brexit done, now being undone, stitch by stitch.
Who does Starmer imagine he serves?
It certainly is not the UK and yet he holds the position of Prime Minister for the United Kingdom!
He doesn’t just answer in ‘doublespeak’ – HE LIVES IT
May 27, 2025
The short answer is “as much as possible” for socialism depends upon making and keeping people poor. And hence also the deployment of the Net Zero Strategy designed to sabotage our energy, economy and national security. The SPS will be employed to affect a Chagos Islands negotiated agreement to ensure we pay the EU for access to our fishing grounds. Sir Oliver Robbins KCMG CB, the permanent under secretary at the FCDO, is in charge of negotiations, the man who Guy Verhofstadt said had asked him if he could become a Belgian citizen after Brexit.
May 27, 2025
British food producers complain that they have to pay for expensive vetinary certificates for every single export package to the EU and this makes sales impossible. Why don’t we insist on the same for EU imports and buy substitute products from the US and Africa? Until the EU drops this ridiculous requirement.
May 27, 2025
It will be and is a disaster as a result of a weak, wishy washy PM who does not care about the UK! France is now trying to cut us out of the £125 billion defence spending by the EU.
After the Chagos and EU deal, every world leader knows Starmer is a pushover with no backbone, quite happy to act against the UK’s interests. Even worse, every trade union leader in the UK knows he is a pushover, as per the current ballot for strike action by the Doctors, despite getting 22% with no conditions a year ago and being offered 4% this year. Starmer blithely ignores the UK financial situation and makes it worse, and then will be surprised when interest on our debt goes higher and higher, and he ends up begging for an IMF handout. Then he will be forced to make severe cuts in government spending, as well as tax increases!
May 27, 2025
Starmer should sign up Brigitte Macron for his negotiating team.
May 27, 2025
Unless the UK is prepared to accept non EU derived Standards from elsewhere there is little point in not signing a SPS Agreement. There appeared little will from the last govt. to accept non EU Standards, merely copying EU regulation into UK regulations – so much for the Great Repeal Act, more akin to a Great Copy-n-Paste Act, yet in 2016 we were told that Brexit was oven-ready; yeah, about as oven ready as a turkey still deep frozen on Christmas morning!
“Post brexit we have developed new fertilisers and new ways of farming.”
Given, post Brexit, the UK remains aligned with swaths of EU regulations on SPS issues (and many others) those fertilizers etc would likely have been developed anyway, indeed many would have started their research and development cycle before Brexit, perhaps even before the referendum.
May 27, 2025
That goes back to Theresa May in March 2018:
http://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2025/05/01/the-costs-and-damage-of-eu-food-policies/#comment-1511653
There should be a general UK legal requirement on businesses that goods they intend to offer in a particular market, home or abroad, must be suitable for that destination market, so that in effect the UK will enforce the standards of our trading partners with respect to the goods we supply to each of them.
That was the basic concept of this ‘dual autonomy’ or ‘mutual enforcement’ proposal:
https://verfassungsblog.de/an-offer-the-eu-and-uk-cannot-refuse/
which the EU rejected out of hand because it went against their imperial strategy.
May 27, 2025
@Denis Cooper; No it does not go back to Theresa May in March 2018, it goes back to Boris Johnson after Jan 2020, by then he had a unchangeable HoC majority and a manifesto mandate that the HoL would not veto, his govt. could have annulled anything previously agreed or proposed, walked away on WTO rules, given the EU were never going to budge on their fundamental principles.
There are good reasons why the EU rejects ‘dual autonomy’ or ‘mutual enforcement’ with regards Standards, given the open trading border between the EU, the EEA/EFTA, the ROI and NI, whilst GB, post Brexit, wish to keep such trade as friction-less as possible – in other words, few if any customs inspections, as little paperwork as possible etc.
May 27, 2025
They actually said that they would not trust us to enforce their standards on our exports to them, they insisted that it be under the control of the EU institutions – which it will be under Starmer’s deal.
May 28, 2025
+1
May 28, 2025
@Denis Cooper; “they insisted that it be under the control of the EU institutions”
And quite understandable, given how the EU’s own ‘Horse Meat’ scandal came about for example, and that involved differing animals, not different origins of a single breed of beast.
May 28, 2025
Jerry
Every exporter has to provide goods and services which meets the requirements of the national market they import into.
They do this successfully and have been find so for many decades.
Only the EU insists that the UK be formslly under their legal controls.
That doesn’t happen if you export to Mexico or Canada or USA or Africa or Middle East for example.
Do you see the difference?
May 28, 2025
@Sam; Any fraudster can forge paperwork, more so were there are few if any forensic customs inspections. The UK can not expect to have it both ways, be a part of the internal market but enjoy the freedom of being outside its boarders, whilst not necessarily complying with EU Standards!
If our host will allow, I ‘ll be a little more explicit than in my comment to Denis, were the UK to allow USDA ‘hormoned’ beef into the UK, at a vastly cheaper price, how long do you think it would be before some fraudster mixed that beef with (EU citified) British ‘Red Tractor’ beef, palming it off as the latter with little or no paperwork to show provenance?
Brexit was only ever going to be a WTO exit or BRINO; in the absence of the former we are clearly moving towards the latter and I suspect that was always the intent, of both the original Withdrawal Agreement and then Windsor Framework.
“That doesn’t happen if you export to Mexico or Canada or USA or Africa or Middle East for example.”
At least you didn’t mention Australia…
I doubt that very much, indeed the USA has very strict import requirements on many items, check out the work of the FDA, check out their C&U Standards on motor vehicles for example. If it does happen, that might say more about those other countries than it dose anything of the UK or the EU. Caveat emptor indeed.
May 28, 2025
Forgery and fraud is a serious criminal offence Jerry
If you have proof of any such currently undiscovered offences then it is your legal duty to report it to the authorities.
In your lengthy post you fail to realise big companies export from the UK all over the world to a huge number of different export markets.
They meet the legal and technical requirements of those markets and have done for decades.
You seem to be insinuating that big named PLC businesses who employ thousands of people would conspire to defraud and break those rules.
Despite them being inspected and audited regularly by the nations they import into.
A quite ridiculous conspiracy theory Jerry
May 28, 2025
@Sam; “A quite ridiculous conspiracy theory Jerry”
It’s called RISK ASSESSMENT.
Go look up the EU Horse meat scandal, then stop harassing me but more importantly stop wasting our hosts time.
May 29, 2025
I used to be involved in the process of Risk Assessment in my job Jerry
And the fact the EU uniquely demands legal powers over our country, in order to import goods into their member States, whilst other nations do not has absolutely nothing to with it.
PS
Why put risk assessment in capitals?
Very odd.
May 27, 2025
Given the undue haste that 2TK has applied to everything that has nothing to do with anything other than wreck the UK and its People, it would be reasonable to suggest his aim is to create havoc with all other nations so as to force us into back under full EU control as the only option.
It is his continued fight and malicious punishment for the people daring to ask the Government and Parliament to step up and take responsibility for managing the Nation. Back under EU control he personal will find high paid work without responsibility.
May 27, 2025
@Ian B; Undue haste, pull the other one! It is five years since Johnson’s WA, eight since the referendum. If Starmer is acting in “undue haste” then so was Mrs Thatcher in 1980, having only been Conservative Party leader for about the same number of years as Starmer has been leader of the Labour Party. Both came to office with a full set of polices, clearly flagged within their election manifestos, and the electorate made their choice.
“under EU control he personal will find high paid work without responsibility.”
Just as ex Tory politicos did, back in the day when the EEC/EU suited the cause.
May 27, 2025
You mean like his clear flagged manifesto commitment not to put up National Insurance which he promptly broke ? That’s the sort of thing you mean ?
Must be embarrassing having to defend such a failure. What high hope you must have had, all turned to dust.
May 28, 2025
@Roy Grainger; Oh dear… Best you check the Tory manifesto of 1979 and then their first Budget, sh!t happens when a new government gets full access to the books, same happened when the Conservative/LibDem coalition took over from the previous Labour govt.
May 28, 2025
More whataboutrry from you Jerry.
Try answering the actual current argument in front of you.
Instead of a irrelevant one from 1979.
May 28, 2025
@Sam; Tax rises are tax rises, who ever announces then, nor was I only recalling 1979, try reading beyond the first line before replying, I also pointed to 2010, surely you recall the cries of “there is no money left”, from the government benches whenever the Labour Party objected to the actions of the new Chancellor?
May 28, 2025
In 1979 whilst VAT went up income taxes came down.
Both basic rate and top rate were reduced, leading economists to headline it as a tax cutting budget.
May 27, 2025
When Mrs Thatcher endorsed the E.U. it was then for Trade, as time went by Thatcher could see it was becoming more and more of a Power Grab, Thatcher didn’t want to sign the Maastricht Treaty which meant closer alignment with the E.U. so wanted to give the electorate a vote, Parliament didn’t want this including most of her own party as the M.P.s knew it wouldn’t be accepted by the British people which is why she was removed from office.
May 28, 2025
@Francesca; Nonsense. Go read the 1957 Treaty of Rome that created the EEC, or at least the exec. summary, for goodness sake. The road map was always a fiscal and political union, what is more Ted Heath stated as much in a BBC Panorama interview in early 1972. What Thatcher dislikes was the fact that by mid 1988 the EEC was moving to the left whilst she wanted to move to the right, hence her Bruges speech (which many view as a reply to Delors speech to the TUC 12 days previous);
As for why Thatcher was removed from office, strange I do not recall riots in the streets over the impending Maastricht Treaty, I do recall such events due to the implantation of the Poll Tax, she was warned, she ignored, she was removed, there would have been no way the Party could have won in 1992 had she remained.
May 28, 2025
Did this 1957 treaty mention the Common Market eventually having a currency, a flag, an anthem, 5 Presidents, a court making binding judgements on member states, ambassadors around the world in Embassies and the ambition to have its own armed forces?
I don’t recall that do you Jerry?
May 28, 2025
@Sam; Yes to all, obviously if the intent was political union!
“I don’t recall that do you”
Yes, well more than you do clearly, but then unlike you I’ve researched and debated facts regarding the creation of the Council of Europe, the thinking of Jean Monnet, the establishment of the ECSC, the Treaty of Rome, and so on…
As I said, Ted Heath talked openly about such matter, politicians such as Powell, Benn, Shore and Foot all protested about the eventual aims of the EEC, doing so in the 1960s and ’70s, how could they have possibly done so if it all so recent as you appear to claim?
By the way, the EC/EU adopted the flag from the Council of Europe, and I think I’m correct in saying the stars are in reference to a religious significance, not political.
Reply I read the Treaty of Rome before voting in the EEC referendum, The Treaty showed how many politicians tried to mislead us by saying we would not lose our sovereignty and it was just a common market.
May 28, 2025
No answer from you Jerry to my question as usual.
Did the 1957 treaty specifically mention any of the things I mentioned?
“Ted Heath talked openly about these matters”…so give us proof of this claim.
Looking forward to your reply.
May 29, 2025
“The road map was always a fiscal and political union”
Jerry, you are of course absolutely right, but Brussels did not divulge that in the Treaty of Rome, or the German government could and would not have signed it: the electorate would not have allowed them to. I lived there, and I can tell you for a fact that there is no way they’d have agreed to such a programme had they realized the consequences.
May 27, 2025
“Which TPP, Indian and US products would the EU make us ban or impose cumbersome rules on?”
All of them ?
It is interesting that Starmer has championed gene editing research in UK which is specifically banned in the EU. The government has made vague noises that there’s a carve-out in the text of the EU surrender agreement on that as it relates to crops and food but I bet the EU don’t see it that way.
May 27, 2025
Not content with selling our soul to the Net Zero priests, this wretched Labour Government has now GIVEN AWAY our fishing waters to those not-so-little devils in Brussels.
What is the matter with this PM and his underqualified Cabinet that they feel obliged to agree to every demand laid upon them by anyone who is not British? Do they hate OUR country that much?
May 29, 2025
Sir JR: Given they export more than 3 times the amount of food and drink to us as we do to them, will these measures further increase our trade deficit in food?
of course they will. German-style mercantilism is the EU’s sole purpose. When we were members they stitched us up good and proper as if we were not members, and refused to concede on services. Now we are out, they will double down, and Starmer has deliberately hitched us to their door scraper, so they can give us even more punishment beatings at their convenience, until an ignorant majority can be found to rejoin – and adopting the euro will be a key condition.