The U.K. has moved on from Brexit.

Sure, Mamie.
Here's one, because it's a bugbear of mine, (and I do my best to get round things!)
On 21 April 2026 EU Regulation 2016/429 will come into force regarding the non-commercial movement of pet animals. This will replace the current EU Regulation 576/2013, which includes a derogation (Article 27) permitting pets to enter the EU from third countries using a Pet Passport instead of an Animal Health Certificate.
As usual it's unclear whether this refers to those with an existing EU pet passport, or those who have a residence in the EU. My understanding is that the derogation of the law is not being relaxed, but tightened.
I'll come back with more later, but I'm catching a train to Bristol in a minute.

I hope you had a good journey escaped. I don't know if it helps, but derogation means "an exemption from or relaxation of a rule or law".

👍
an annoyingly backwards step in strengthening relations!

Pressed the button to soon. So I would read it as you have., that the "relaxation" is being tightened. I think 2026 was always see as a date that finalised many of the negative changes that leaving brought with it.

There's a posh legal term for it I read - might be Latin, or I might have read it in French?
Anyway, I'm off now.

Merci PN 👋

Crossed posts! Other than being able to negotiate a strengthened relationship for ourselves, our best hope is that the outer circle of third countries, those who only want trade not political agreement (perhaps including Canada), is strengthened as a whole.

I’m somewhat baffled by this exchange about the new regulation pertaining to the non commercial movement of pet animals in the EU.

Why is it being used as an example of French bloody mindedness towards the UK when it is an EU wide regulation?

Why is there some apparent indignation that the UK is being treated as the ‘third country’ it became when it left the EU?

Remain voters told leavers over and over that third country status removed free movement and subjected us to extra regulation.

Third country status is what Brexeteers voted for. Why do they complain about what they have achieved?

MaizieD

I’m somewhat baffled by this exchange about the new regulation pertaining to the non commercial movement of pet animals in the EU.

Why is it being used as an example of French bloody mindedness towards the UK when it is an EU wide regulation?

Why is there some apparent indignation that the UK is being treated as the ‘third country’ it became when it left the EU?

Remain voters told leavers over and over that third country status removed free movement and subjected us to extra regulation.

Was that what it was bring used for MaizieD? I just took the fact and tried to understand it in a little deeper way.

I have no sense that the French are being bloody minded just that them seeing both themselves and the UK as sovereign nations and that this country CHOSE to be a third nation.

I have no sense the French are being bloody minded either. They are simply applying the rules to a third country. For those of us who live here Brexit has caused and continues to cause frustrations, but we have always felt supported by French people and the French state. The day after Brexit, President Macron made a broadcast and said, "aujourd'hui et demain vous êtes chez vous" (today and tomorrow you are at home). It was lovely to hear.

Sorry to baffle you, MaizieD. The whole process of transporting anything into the EU is baffling for sure, (eg. foods, building materials, pets etc.) The dog was just an example of the more stringent restrictions going to be being enforced in 2026, but there are others.

Mamie in France, asked how this pertained to France. And whether it was meant for a UK resident in France, a newcomer or a visitor. We could equally have spoken about Spain or Belgium, etc., but using my experience of France at least verified first hand the facts I gave about the upcoming changes. (Heaven forbid on a Politics thread that I should speak without facts, which I duly gave!) Where did I say the French are bloody minded? I am always at pains to say on here, their country, their rules. That's life! That's fair!

I am not indignant, just irritated that I pay an additional £1,500 to take the hound to France five times a year. The paperwork is a pain, but indignation would imply anger, and I'm not going to let the mild irritation I feel annoy me or spoil my travel.

As an aside, French vets always go out of their way to not subject us to any of the daft regulations, (they offer a pragmatic way round it), as no doubt Italian and other EU vets do. But that's another baffling subject!

The point of the post, and what my niggle was used for, was to illustrate that things can change in both directions, negatively too.

Sorry, escaped, but this sounded like 'the French are being bloody minded:

In that usual inimitable French way they are going to make things even more difficult for us UK citizens.'

Whatever.
It's a constant reminder that we are a third country... and that Brexit has caused harms to individuals.

It was tongue in cheek * MaizieD*. Flippant .
But if that's all you can find, I'm off the hook!😉

I’m still puzzled as to what the whole exchange was about. The thread was about Brexit. You appeared to be complaining about its effect on us third country citizens. But perhaps you weren’t 🤷

Don't be perplexed MaizieD. We can learn by discussing on here without twisting anyones words, or reading things into them.

OK, so let's repeat WWM2's premise:
The vast majority of people now understand the damage and division that was caused by the likes of Farage over the breaking of our ties with our nearest neighbours who share our values and ambitions.
It is time to start to renew those ties in order to strengthen our economy, defence and trade.
This thread is about more than just Brexit, (which has been discussed to death on here). It's about renewing ties, and reshaping Britain's relations with the EU. It's about moving forward, and establishing a shared agenda for the future. I am in favour of that.

Posters, including myself, referred to the review of the TCA which will start in 2026. This could, in a positive manner, fix the botched deal agreed by the Conservatives, or as in the example I offered, land the UK in a worse position. We don't know.

I'm a realistic, not a complainer, (well maybe a tongue in cheek one), and I've lived and worked abroad long enough to know that France, for example, will only agree to changes of the current arrangements if it is in her interests. The dog example, was cited to me by a French vet, in pity and frustration maybe, but hopefully in the hope that our government can swing things round in the 2026 review by negotiating changes to the TCA. That might involve amending the pet passport rule in our favour or not. We don't know.

Nothing is a foregone conclusion, and nothing might change at all.

I love to read all these claims about percentages or fractions
e.g.

As of January 2025, 55 percent of people in Great Britain thought that it was wrong to leave the European Union, compared with 30 percent who thought it was the right decision.

55% of people in Great Britain?

How many people were actually canvassed in order to validate that claim?

Also, none of them say whether or not the people cited in any of these claims were in the group who didn’t bother to vote, but simply moaned and continue to moan about the result.

Nor is there any proof that if there was another referendum, those who CBB would bother to vote in that, or how they would vote if they did bother.

I voted remain, and would be delighted to see things improve e.g. trade, but I’m concerned that the reason we would be allowed to become more closely integrated, is that they’re missing the British financial contribution and that would be reflected in the terms.

In the recent council elections the 'progressive' gains by Lib Dems and the Greens, exceeded the gains of Reform. For all the publicity it gets, Reform isn't as popular as people think it is.

I think what happened was,even going back a year, Reform were not being taken seriously.

Now they have spooked many.

It seems that the public are less convinced that Reform are here to stay than I thought they would be though. I thought this was interesting, including the ‘how good are the electorate at predicting what will happen’.
yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/52160-do-britons-think-reform-uk-are-here-to-say

Interesting.
I will read in more detail later.

I do wonder what would happen to Reform, if anything happned to Farage.
But I think they are more stable as a Party than they were say 1 year ago.

Mollygo

I love to read all these claims about percentages or fractions
e.g.

As of January 2025, 55 percent of people in Great Britain thought that it was wrong to leave the European Union, compared with 30 percent who thought it was the right decision.

55% of people in Great Britain?

How many people were actually canvassed in order to validate that claim?

Also, none of them say whether or not the people cited in any of these claims were in the group who didn’t bother to vote, but simply moaned and continue to moan about the result.

Nor is there any proof that if there was another referendum, those who CBB would bother to vote in that, or how they would vote if they did bother.

I voted remain, and would be delighted to see things improve e.g. trade, but I’m concerned that the reason we would be allowed to become more closely integrated, is that they’re missing the British financial contribution and that would be reflected in the terms.

This BBC explanation is as good as any. It’s all to do with random samples and weighting.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35350361

Mollygo I do not want to go into all the maths and tsatistics that goes into the chocie of sample size, how it is done and the degrees of confidence to be selected, but I can assure you that if the sample is properly randomised or stratified then remarkably accurate results can be gt from quite a small sample.

Somewhere I have one of those card wheels that I could turn to find out how big a sample size I needed according to how many degrees of accuracy I required.

My market reearch days are longbehind me, but I hope this little wheel turns up in the packing, then i could quote sme of the figures.

You need to realise that any reputable market research team, especially the likes of You Gov and similar all employ professional statisticians and mathematicians to advise on their work.

They do not just wander down their local Hgh Street and interview the first willing 100 people coming out of Sainsburies, unless it is specifically those people they want to interview

escaped

Sorry to baffle you, MaizieD. The whole process of transporting anything into the EU is baffling for sure, (eg. foods, building materials, pets etc.) The dog was just an example of the more stringent restrictions going to be being enforced in 2026, but there are others.

Mamie in France, asked how this pertained to France. And whether it was meant for a UK resident in France, a newcomer or a visitor. We could equally have spoken about Spain or Belgium, etc., but using my experience of France at least verified first hand the facts I gave about the upcoming changes. (Heaven forbid on a Politics thread that I should speak without facts, which I duly gave!) Where did I say the French are bloody minded? I am always at pains to say on here, their country, their rules. That's life! That's fair!

I am not indignant, just irritated that I pay an additional £1,500 to take the hound to France five times a year. The paperwork is a pain, but indignation would imply anger, and I'm not going to let the mild irritation I feel annoy me or spoil my travel.

As an aside, French vets always go out of their way to not subject us to any of the daft regulations, (they offer a pragmatic way round it), as no doubt Italian and other EU vets do. But that's another baffling subject!

The point of the post, and what my niggle was used for, was to illustrate that things can change in both directions, negatively too.

Why are you paying an extra £1500 a time to take your dog to France 5 times a year? It would cost me £375. I'm missing something

I've sent you a message. There's too much weird unwelcome traffic on threads here, (every thread GNHQ* reported), this morning, that I'm not going to explain my situation to all and sundry. Just to say, I pay for multiple dogs on multiple occasions, when they would all have travelled without requiring fresh expensive documentation each time from a vet in the past.

... anyway, the actual dogs' issue isn't what should be focused on here, but ALL the Brexit amendments currently under review for 2026. Horizon, energy, and recognition of qualifications for regulated professions etc. It all needs to be negotiated, hopefully with a mutually improved outcome. I've said before, I think Starmer might be very good in this area at putting a case forward. 🤞