National News The House of Lords.

Essexyellows

Well-known member
Joined
7 Dec 2017
Messages
17,133
Probably hated by many but are able to apply a measure of the peoples wish`s even "against" a majority government.
Could be the end for the "chlorinated chicken" scaremongering.
 
One person's government submissiveness "scaremongering", another person's "standing up for Britain's standards against foreign powers wishing to walk all over us".
 
The food standards bill amended by Lord Curry, appropriately enough.

An objection to a drop in animal welfare standards and a further attack on the UK farming industry is not scaremongering.
 
Probably hated by many but are able to apply a measure of the peoples wish`s even "against" a majority government.
Could be the end for the "chlorinated chicken" scaremongering.

Could be the end for a US-UK trade deal as well.

If we won't open up the UK markets to US agricultural products, and we won't open up the NHS to pay market rates to US pharmaceutical companies, then we're basically taking away the two most important pillars for the US in a trade deal. They're not going to open us the US market tariff-free for the industries the UK cares about, if the UK won't open its markets for their key industries.

Interesting to see what happens when the amended bill goes back to the Commons, given that they've already rejected one such amendment before.
The Lords can add these amendments, but they can't make them law, and they can be overridden if the Commons is persistent enough.
 
Why on earth would anyone object to imported food having to be up to our standards? Or try to get something through parliament that allows this to happen?

Completely potty and shows that we are now in a race to the bottom.
 
Bit of a sad state of affairs when the elitist and anachronistic House of Lords is more progressive and public spirited than the corrupt Tories in the Commons. Who can seriously be in favour of lowering food standards, unless they own some horrific frankenfood camp in Norfolk? Still, I guess it means our parliamentary system still just about works
 
Why on earth would anyone object to imported food having to be up to our standards? Or try to get something through parliament that allows this to happen?

Completely potty and shows that we are now in a race to the bottom.
Because meat that is such bad quality that it’s currently illegal is incredibly cheap. It’s why Captain Wetherspoons made it the main pillar of his argument for Brexit being good news for the common man. He didn’t stop banging on about how cheaper food was on the table, but that a no deal was essential for that to happen. He wanted a scenario where food standards went through the floor because he could knock 20p off a mixed grill while still increasing his existing margins. Rees-Mogg has brought up Australian (hormone treated) beef a number of times in the last couple of years also. I wonder if he works with companies in his dealings outside of parliament who stand to benefit from a lack of food standards? Bit weird that he’s so concerned with Australian beef being carted all the way here, when it’s pretty much the furthest location from Britain on the entire planet. It must be absolutely delicious for him to want us to have it!
 
That comment about Aussie beef got me reading a bit. Despite being a regular consumer I didn’t know much about the use of hormones. This is an excellent article on it for anyone interested (although a bit old now). http://www.australasianscience.com.au/article/issue-may-2011/hormones-meat-science-or-spin.html
I might give it more of a miss, and if Britain wants ethical and ecologically sustainable food then it should also.

(Although I also have to say it actually is delicious. I think I only ever once had a source of better beef in the Uk than I always get in Oz, and that was from a local Highland Cow farmer at Dundee farmer’s markets.)
 
Back
Top Bottom