Open Britain - Hard Brexit

And it is soooo in the farmers interests to kill the bees. Banging head against brick wall time!!

I think we need to be worried about more than Michael Gove.

"To find 700 species of bees in decline is shocking. That's more than half the wild bee species for which we have enough data to test.

It was only this year when the U.S. added the first-ever bee species to the endangered list. And this new data means there could be dozens or even hundreds more species that are unprotected.

We know that when bees die, food crops go with them. Bees pollinate 71 of the world’s top 100 food crops. No bees means no avocados, no apples, no strawberries...

We've already collected more than 115,000 comments from people calling on Canada to implement their bee-killing pesticide ban without delay. But the pesticide industry is among the most powerful lobbies in the country."

From www.sumofus.org about neonics. The EU has delayed a decision on banning them because the UK was against a ban.
When we leave, the UK can unilaterally allow farmers to use them. Bees will die. 90% of plants are pollinated by bees.

welsh thanks for that I haven't read that must have missed it. Personally I don't think that drugs can ever be tested too well.

I do know that the EU are not the only ones applying stringent rules, and I gave the USA as an example.

Yes, Welsh, I heard that several weeks ago, I think on R$ and also read it in the i.

The whole point of the enabling bill planned to go through Parliament to turn EU legislation into UK legislation is to ensure that the rules that currently stop the Michael Goves of this world from ruining our environment stay in place.

Perhaps we should have a referendum on whether Michael Gove should be sent to the US to take part in drug tests under their inadequate rules.

whatukthinks.org/eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Hard-but-not-too-hard.-Much-more-on-what-voters-want-from-Brexit.pdf

Interested to know how many Brexiteers agree with this.

Al this about the USA and the pharmaceutical testing- the women took a drug prescribed too soon - I thought that the last couple of posts would mean that things were tested too well - cannot both be right so thought perhaps the report was incorrect.

? welsh

Is the report I read in the Guardian incorrect then - about the women losing their sight?

rigby having a daughter who works in the Parma industry I am more than aware of the hoops they have to go through. In fact they are "audited" for procedures, standards etc on a regular basis. America is particularly hot on this. And long may it last I say. Who wants another thalidomide?

Just when you think that MG can't demonstrate his lying/stupidly/opportunism any more than he already has, he comes up with sheer unadulterated rubbish about clinical trials, drug development and leaving the EU reducing pain and misery as it frees itself of the Clinical Trial Directive. You know, I really can't decide which of the three characteristics above really describe him. He is so wrong that I don't know where to start - pharmaceutical companies are multi nationals - when drugs are developed they are obviously aimed at a world market (where they can be afforded). For countries to be prepared to prescribe and pay for a particulate drug, they will need to know about how it has been trialled and if the results are valid and reliable. There are international protocols on the testing of new drugs which the EU directive mirrors. This makes any drugs developed and tested acceptable across the world.. The very idea that the UK on its own could somehow develop and test drugs without following international protocols is so ridiculous it defies adequate description.. MG either doesn't understand any of this and/or understands all too well but will spout any rubbish in the sure and certain knowledge that he can fool the average Leave supporter. Aren't you insulted that he thinks you are so gullible?

Yes they have dd

Michael Gove is another one of those daft idiots who don't believe in safeguarding the human or flora and fauna British population. Green and pleasant land means nothing to him. Just money.

Profit, profit all is profit!!!!

Not hard Brexiteers, daphne. They are hard!

I thought the Brexiteers had accepted that immigration is unlikely to reduce that much.

Ah well! At least Michael Gove might be a happy chappy.

"Britain can slash Brussels regulations on clinical trials for new drugs and on building near protected wildlife habitats now that it is leaving the European Union, Michael Gove has said."

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-regulations-michael-gove-environment-drugs-a7649041.html

How is the much less immigration going to work? India has already told TM that any trade deal will need to have visa free access for the Indian people. I think places like Australia have said something similar although they have so much trade with nearby countries they are unlikely to want to trade much with UK.
There was an article in one of the papers yesterday about the lower standard in USA produced goods and also in the amount of testing done on medicines - this last feature resulting in medication being given too soon and three women being left blind! Is that the road we want to go down? If we do not keep the standards of Europe in UK there will either need to be two levels of goods/food etc manufactured - one for EU and another for USA and China etc or still retain the same levels as now.
However do we WANT to have food and goods at a less standard where things could catch fire or poison people?
These things are just a few on the sidelines of what worries people who are still uncomfortable about Brexit!

The point is, roses, that May does not want parliament to thrash anything out. She wants to act like Henry Vlll and do it all by herself, without reference to parliament.

Somebody else feel free to jump into the conversation now I have to go off and do things for the day.

We are all thinking ( naturally) of what the best deals will be, but it takes 2 to Tango, and in this case, takes even more, so public opinion ( although we have the right to marches,petition etc) will do little.The public opinion that actually did matter,was the referendum last June.Government, and Parliament, now, has to thrash out with the EU a deal which is forced to have compromises for both sides.

Exactly rose and as a citizen I will feed as much opinion as I can into the process through my MP, letters to papers, forums, and petitions (if necessary) and of course marches

immigration numbers, and our total lack of control of EU countries immigration here was part and parcel of being in the single market, and for many, not a price worth paying.There were other reasons for leaving, but total UK sovereignty covers most of it.
Who knows, we may yet stay in the single market, regardless of not accepting unlimited immigration, perhaps a cap on numbers.At this stage, before any negotiating has begun,almost anything is possible.

I thought that you had already had your last post to me ww ( obviously not)

Brexiters used immigration in a disgraceful way to persuade people to their cause. It was never going to be what they promised and the really disgraceful thing is that they knew it.

You seem very prone to exaggeration this morning rose very unlike you as you are constantly accusing remainers of the same thing.

Politicians, are or should be aware of public opinion. This will feed into and inform their decision making process. If they ignore the voter, they will pay the price eventually.

Careswell will be one of those - whilst I abhor UKIP he has let his voters down, and refusing to recognise the fact - what a silly man he is.

Brexiters do not want to stop immigration, we want to have the amount of it that we need, but as a country think it is up to us to be able to say what numbers we want, and from which countries, and perhaps what skill sets we need.

Yes....four basics for the single market,( unlimited free movement) but with EU citizens from 27 countries all wanting to work and live in either the UK or Germany, it was never going to be a fair distribution.