Politics Thread 6

Fed up talking videogames? Why?

Who will you vote for at the next General Election?

Conservative
10
11%
Labour
30
33%
Liberal Democrat
24
26%
Green
18
20%
SNP
6
7%
Brexit Party
0
No votes
UKIP
1
1%
Plaid Cymru
0
No votes
DUP
0
No votes
Sinn Fein
2
2%
The Independent Group for Change
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 91
User avatar
KK
Moderator
Joined in 2008
Location: Botswana
Contact:

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by KK » Thu Jan 09, 2020 8:23 pm

Ban on chlorine washed chicken to remain in place:

Chlorine-washed chicken and hormone-treated beef will be kept out of the UK under any trade deal with the US, the environment secretary has promised.

Theresa Villiers told the BBC the current European Union ban on the two foods will be carried over into UK legislation after Brexit.

Until now the UK has been wavering on the issue.

But she told BBC Countryfile: “There are legal barriers to the imports and those are going to stay in place.”

Ms Villiers has previously talked of imposing tariffs on any future imports of US chicken and beef. But she’s been under great pressure from Britain’s farmers.

In the exclusive interview with the Countryfile programme, she said: “We will defend our national interests and our values, including our high standards of animal welfare."

Chlorine-washed chicken and hormone-treated beef are illegal under EU law for different reasons.

The EU says feeding cows with growth-enhancing chemicals could potentially result in harm to beef-eating humans – a suggestion the US fervently rejects.

There is, on the other hand, no human health threat from using a bleach solution to kill salmonella on chickens. In fact, it’s rather effective.

But the EU says using chlorine allows American farmers to be careless with the welfare of the chickens.

The US regards the rules against these products as a European ruse to protect its own producers, and has stated that the trade of both meat products will be central to any UK-US trade deal after Brexit.

So Ms Villiers’ promise may please British consumers unhappy with the thought of chicken sprayed with bleach.

But it may make things more difficult for Britain’s trade negotiators.

Analysis by Faisal Islam, economics editor
The environment secretary has made a strong promise that "legal barriers" to the import of chlorinated chicken and hormone-treated beef will "stay in place" and that the government will "hold the line" on this even if insisted upon by President Trump in trade talks. This makes a quick trade deal with the US rather tricky to envisage.

Leaked US-UK trade documents showed the US tried to establish how far the UK would, after Brexit, detach from the EU's hard line against US farm trade methods. US officials had made a presentation and repeatedly raised the "unscientific approach the EU maintains towards Pathogen Reduction Treatments [chlorinated chicken]". The US has been in a dispute with the EU over such methods since 1997.

If the environment secretary's rejection of such key US exports is echoed in the UK's negotiating position with the US, the US Congress might also object. When similar statements were made by Michael Gove, when he was former environment secretary, in 2017, it caused a rift in cabinet with Liam Fox, who was then trade secretary.

It is a clear example of the delicate balancing act and trade-offs involved in the UK's new post-Brexit trade freedom.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-51054700

Image
User avatar
Lagamorph
Member ♥
Joined in 2010

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Lagamorph » Thu Jan 09, 2020 8:37 pm

KK wrote:Ban on chlorine washed chicken to remain in place:

Chlorine-washed chicken and hormone-treated beef will be kept out of the UK under any trade deal with the US, the environment secretary has promised.

Theresa Villiers told the BBC the current European Union ban on the two foods will be carried over into UK legislation after Brexit.

Until now the UK has been wavering on the issue.

But she told BBC Countryfile: “There are legal barriers to the imports and those are going to stay in place.”

Ms Villiers has previously talked of imposing tariffs on any future imports of US chicken and beef. But she’s been under great pressure from Britain’s farmers.

In the exclusive interview with the Countryfile programme, she said: “We will defend our national interests and our values, including our high standards of animal welfare."

Chlorine-washed chicken and hormone-treated beef are illegal under EU law for different reasons.

The EU says feeding cows with growth-enhancing chemicals could potentially result in harm to beef-eating humans – a suggestion the US fervently rejects.

There is, on the other hand, no human health threat from using a bleach solution to kill salmonella on chickens. In fact, it’s rather effective.

But the EU says using chlorine allows American farmers to be careless with the welfare of the chickens.

The US regards the rules against these products as a European ruse to protect its own producers, and has stated that the trade of both meat products will be central to any UK-US trade deal after Brexit.

So Ms Villiers’ promise may please British consumers unhappy with the thought of chicken sprayed with bleach.

But it may make things more difficult for Britain’s trade negotiators.

Analysis by Faisal Islam, economics editor
The environment secretary has made a strong promise that "legal barriers" to the import of chlorinated chicken and hormone-treated beef will "stay in place" and that the government will "hold the line" on this even if insisted upon by President Trump in trade talks. This makes a quick trade deal with the US rather tricky to envisage.

Leaked US-UK trade documents showed the US tried to establish how far the UK would, after Brexit, detach from the EU's hard line against US farm trade methods. US officials had made a presentation and repeatedly raised the "unscientific approach the EU maintains towards Pathogen Reduction Treatments [chlorinated chicken]". The US has been in a dispute with the EU over such methods since 1997.

If the environment secretary's rejection of such key US exports is echoed in the UK's negotiating position with the US, the US Congress might also object. When similar statements were made by Michael Gove, when he was former environment secretary, in 2017, it caused a rift in cabinet with Liam Fox, who was then trade secretary.

It is a clear example of the delicate balancing act and trade-offs involved in the UK's new post-Brexit trade freedom.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-51054700

I'm sure they're telling the truth this time.

Lagamorph's Underwater Photography Thread
Zellery wrote:Good post Lagamorph.
Turboman wrote:Lagomorph..... Is ..... Right
User avatar
Squinty
Member
Joined in 2009
Location: Norn Oirland

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Squinty » Fri Jan 10, 2020 8:08 am

They'll fold. They will have to.

User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008
AKA: Moggy

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Moggy » Fri Jan 10, 2020 8:14 am

So the NHS is off the table and food standards will not be compromised?

What is in it for the Americans then?

Image
User avatar
Oblomov Boblomov
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Mind Crime, SSBM_God

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Oblomov Boblomov » Fri Jan 10, 2020 8:14 am

Prince Harry.

Image
User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008
AKA: Moggy

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Moggy » Fri Jan 10, 2020 8:32 am

I Shot A Kid wrote:Prince Harry.


Fake news. Ginger people have always been free of tariffs.

Image
User avatar
KK
Moderator
Joined in 2008
Location: Botswana
Contact:

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by KK » Sun Jan 12, 2020 8:12 pm

Strange week for Anglo/UK relations continues...

The UK is abandoning its alliance with Trump as the United States 'withdraws from its leadership around the world'

Donald Trump's decision to assassinate Qassem Soleimani has triggered a major rupture between the United States and its historically closest ally in the United Kingdom.

In remarkably outspoken comments, UK Defence Secretary Ben Wallace said on Sunday that Trump's isolationist foreign policy stance meant the UK was now looking for alternative allies around the world.

"I worry if the United States withdraws from its leadership around the world. That would be bad for the world and bad for us. We plan for the worst and hope for the best." he told the Sunday Times.

He added: "The assumptions of 2010 that we were always going to be part of a US coalition is really just not where we are going to be."

The comments came after Boris Johnson's government distanced itself from the attack last week, with the UK Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab labelling it a "dangerous escalation," which risked a conflict in which "terrorists would be the only winners."

A spokesman for the Prime Minister was also quick to condemn Trump's threats to target Iranian cultural sites as a breach of international law and a potential war crime.

With the Iran crisis ongoing, the UK is now openly threatening to tear up its longstanding defence partnership with the United States.

UK Defence Secretary Ben Wallace told the Sunday Times that the UK was increasingly looking for alternative international allies,

"Over the last year we've had the US pullout from Syria, the statement by Donald Trump on Iraq where he said Nato should take over and do more in the Middle East," Wallace said.

"The assumptions of 2010 that we were always going to be part of a US coalition is really just not where we are going to be."

Wallace said the UK would need to reduce its dependence on US military assets.

"We are very dependent on American air cover and American intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance assets. We need to diversify our assets."

Wallace told the paper that the UK would increasingly need to turn to other allies that more closely share the UK's interests.

"Regardless of what the US does... we are going to have to make decisions that allow us to stand with a range of allies, the Five Eyes [intelligence partnership with America, Canada, Australia and New Zealand] and our European allies where our interests converge," he said.

Trump is also threatening to cut intelligence ties with the UK over 5G: https://www.businessinsider.com/uk-aban ... ?r=US&IR=T

So what began with chlorinated chicken, then moved to the US calling our request to extradite an American diplomat over murder "highly inappropriate", has now continued with this.

Image
User avatar
Tomous
I Pissed My Pants
Joined in 2010
AKA: Vampbuster

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Tomous » Sun Jan 12, 2020 8:15 pm

Their arguement for the the request being inappropriate was it "would establish an extraordinarily troubling precedent"

Because people with diplomatic immunity not being allowed to kill people would be a troubling precedent :fp:

Image
User avatar
Dual
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Stool Bloke

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Dual » Sun Jan 12, 2020 8:18 pm

If only we could be part of a economic and political union with other Western democracies on the same continent as the UK.

User avatar
Lex-Man
Member
Joined in 2008
Contact:

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Lex-Man » Sun Jan 12, 2020 8:57 pm

Merry Christmous Everyone wrote:Their arguement for the the request being inappropriate was it "would establish an extraordinarily troubling precedent"

Because people with diplomatic immunity not being allowed to kill people would be a troubling precedent :fp:


It's not even really a precedent other diplomats have been stripped of immunity after breaking the law.

Amusement under late capitalism is the prolongation of work.
User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008
AKA: Moggy

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Moggy » Sun Jan 12, 2020 9:50 pm

Am I missing something? Wasn’t it the wife of a diplomat, not an actual diplomat?

Image
User avatar
PatSharpsMullet
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: PatSharpsMullet
Location: Brighton

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by PatSharpsMullet » Sun Jan 12, 2020 9:53 pm

Partridge Iciclebubbles wrote:Am I missing something? Wasn’t it the wife of a diplomat, not an actual diplomat?

It was, but they're allowed to kill people too.

Image
User avatar
KK
Moderator
Joined in 2008
Location: Botswana
Contact:

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by KK » Sun Jan 12, 2020 10:07 pm

Officially the husband is the only diplomat, but the reality is the (immediate?) family all then share the same diplomatic immunity. I think it was intended so that other corrupt or hostile countries couldn't try to then pressure a diplomat or nation in any way, but as we see it’s open to being abused. You just don’t really expect it to be coming from the American government...well, maybe you do with this government, but still.

Image
User avatar
Squinty
Member
Joined in 2009
Location: Norn Oirland

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Squinty » Sun Jan 12, 2020 10:08 pm

Dual wrote:If only we could be part of a economic and political union with other Western democracies on the same continent as the UK.


Doesn't exist :capnscotty:

User avatar
Lex-Man
Member
Joined in 2008
Contact:

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Lex-Man » Sun Jan 12, 2020 11:35 pm

KK wrote:Officially the husband is the only diplomat, but the reality is the (immediate?) family all then share the same diplomatic immunity. I think it was intended so that other corrupt or hostile countries couldn't try to then pressure a diplomat or nation in any way, but as we see it’s open to being abused. You just don’t really expect it to be coming from the American government...well, maybe you do with this government, but still.


It's not really a new problem.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46609445

From 2018

An embassy official accused of two rapes - one of nine diplomats who faced serious allegations last year - was able to leave the UK without trial.

The suspect, also accused of attempted rape, was among about 23,000 foreign officials entitled to immunity from prosecution, MPs have been told.

The accused had been expelled after their home country had refused to waive immunity, the foreign secretary said.

Others were accused of blackmail, a gun plot, sex assault and driving offences.


EDIT:

It's been incredible common for US soldiers stationed in Japan to be involved in road accidents while drunk and get away with it.

An Okinawa-based Marine’s blood-alcohol content was triple Japan’s legal limit Sunday when his vehicle collided with a minitruck, killing its Japanese driver, police say.

The Marine was “slightly injured” in the 5:30 a.m. JST crash at a Naha intersection, Okinawa policeman Kazuhiko Miyagi told The Associated Press.


Amusement under late capitalism is the prolongation of work.
User avatar
Tomous
I Pissed My Pants
Joined in 2010
AKA: Vampbuster

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Tomous » Sun Jan 12, 2020 11:47 pm

Why do US soldiers even need diplomatic immunity?

Image
User avatar
Lex-Man
Member
Joined in 2008
Contact:

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Lex-Man » Sun Jan 12, 2020 11:54 pm

Merry Christmous Everyone wrote:Why do US soldiers even need diplomatic immunity?


I think strictly they don't have it the army just pays the family/ victim and quickly moves the solider. It's not like the Japanese police can go onto a US base and arrest somebody.

Amusement under late capitalism is the prolongation of work.
User avatar
Hexx
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Hexx » Mon Jan 13, 2020 10:28 am

This Harry Megan thing is just wierd.

Prince is a dodgy paedo? Business as usual, just stay in the background
6th in line to throne wants to sod off from racist abuse? EMERGENCY CRISIS MEETING!

User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008
AKA: Moggy

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Moggy » Mon Jan 13, 2020 10:45 am

Hexx wrote:This Harry Megan thing is just wierd.

Prince is a dodgy paedo? Business as usual, just stay in the background
6th in line to throne wants to sod off from racist abuse? EMERGENCY CRISIS MEETING!


Difference is that Andrew was shagging white kids, whereas Harry is a blood traitor.

Image
User avatar
Lex-Man
Member
Joined in 2008
Contact:

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Lex-Man » Mon Jan 13, 2020 10:58 am

Hexx wrote:This Harry Megan thing is just wierd.

Prince is a dodgy paedo? Business as usual, just stay in the background
6th in line to throne wants to sod off from racist abuse? EMERGENCY CRISIS MEETING!


I think that this is actually a massive risk to the royal family as a whole. Once somebody essentially leaves the Royal family it kind of normalises the process and if another royal gets ticked off they can just leave. Being part of the Royal Family sucks quite a lot as you're giving up a load of freedom to do the role.

Also it some senses by leaving they're creating a competing brand as well.

Amusement under late capitalism is the prolongation of work.

Return to “Stuff”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Benzin, Blue Eyes, Chocolate-Milk, D_C, Dowbocop, Frank, Lex-Man, Mafro, massimo, MSN [Bot], Outrunner, poshrule_uk, Preezy, Rax, Slimgrady, Somebody Else's Problem, Zilnad and 66 guests