How is the Tory government doing?

Everyone has a price.

@gloswhite wrote:Everyone has a price.

At least he kept his trousers on.

Hhmmm, I wonder how much he got for his two Jags.

@gloswhite wrote:Hhmmm, I wonder how much he got for his two Jags.

Or his croquet set.

@gloswhite wrote:Hhmmm, I wonder how much he got for his two Jags.

Probably a millionth of what Boris will get from Putin when he's finally kicked out?
Face it - Putin could have spent billions f****** up the West. Boris and Donald are the cheap options.

So it turns out that the government has not been "following the science" advice recently at all!! 
SAGE  recommendations in mid-September were ignored or declined. (See BBC news today)

Just as bad, more lies abound:-
 "Mr Johnson said he had agreed some of the measures with  Liverpool's Labour Mayor Steve Rotheram - but Mr Rotheram said  that was "totally false" and that the new measures had been "dictated to us by the government". (Again BBC website today)


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54518002

Our borders are now open to import chlorinated chicken, hormone-fed beef and livestock reared in inhumane conditions thanks to Tory MPs overturning an amendment to protect food standards after Brexit.

@wanderlust wrote:Our borders are now open to import chlorinated chicken, hormone-fed beef and livestock reared in inhumane conditions thanks to Tory MPs overturning an amendment to protect food standards after Brexit.

Get on the veggie/vegan train Lusty. 

@wanderlust wrote:Our borders are now open to import chlorinated chicken, hormone-fed beef and livestock reared in inhumane conditions thanks to Tory MPs overturning an amendment to protect food standards after Brexit.

I might be missing something over all this big hoo-haw over chlorinated chicken business and other stuff but isn't this the same food millions of us eat when we've visited America?

I don't consider myself to be that well travelled but I must have been to the USA at least half a dozen times or more over the years - and bought chicken from the local supermarkets for instance (rather than being in a tourist bubble say like at Disney) and never been unwell at all, I've certainly have had Spanish tummy a time or too though and they are supposed to have the same food standards and hygiene as we do!

Think it’s more symbolic than anything else, despite the strength of the food lobby in America I think we’d know by now if there was certain harm.

Really, the concern is what lowering food standards could allow to crop up in future?

Also (and more importantly in my mind) we should be reducing our meat consumption if we have any serious aims to deal with climate change. Cut price chicken is only going to have the opposite affect.

As many of us warned at the time, Brexit will take this country backwards in so many ways.

The problem with washing chicken with chlorine is that is makes it impossible to detect bacteria in the lab ergo salmonella etc can still be present as the chlorine doesn't kill it - so it's a lottery. But as TROY points out , lowering the bar on food standards opens the door to a whole range of bad practice, animal cruelty, environmental and other issues.
Currently we don't grow genetically modified foodstuffs in the UK although they can be imported for animal feed so it gets into the human food chain indirectly. The EU ruling is that any GMOs in human foodstuffs have to labelled as such so we can at least make a choice.

Conversely, why abandon a perfectly good set of food standards that have served us well for decades?

My dad was a butcher, and worked for a large company in Manchester owned by two brothers. They were masters at getting around safety /health/animal welfare issues, and also had the Chief Constable of Greater Manchester in their pocket.
If I say 'religious nut' you might know who I mean.

'God's Copper' James Anderton I presume and Louis Edwards the butchers would be my guess.

@Sluffy wrote:'God's Copper' James Anderton I presume and Louis Edwards the butchers would be my guess.

Correct on cop, not on company.
They were taken over by a large American soup company.

@T.R.O.Y. wrote:Think it’s more symbolic than anything else, despite the strength of the food lobby in America I think we’d know by now if there was certain harm.

Really, the concern is what lowering food standards could allow to crop up in future?

Also (and more importantly in my mind) we should be reducing our meat consumption if we have any serious aims to deal with climate change. Cut price chicken is only going to have the opposite affect.

As many of us warned at the time, Brexit will take this country backwards in so many ways.

Thanks for the explanation.

Certainly agree with you on your other points about climate change and Brexit but those horses have bolted - too many selfish and greedy people about - always have been and always will unfortunately.

We’ll need a change of government to affect climate change, because it would need to be enforced change given how little time we have now. Ideologically the Tory party just aren’t going to do that.

Let's not kid ourselves - the sole purpose of dropping food standards is to try and salvage a deal with the Yanks.

@T.R.O.Y. wrote:We’ll need a change of government to affect climate change, because it would need to be enforced change given how little time we have now. Ideologically the Tory party just aren’t going to do that.

No one can affect climate change unless the world powers like China, USA and Russia not only take action to do so first but then ensure that the rest of the world do so too - and that is never going to happen irrespective of a Tory. Labour or even a Green Party government in this country.

Brazil demolishing the Amazon rainforest probably does more harm in a single day than what good any government we have could do in a year of wanting to positively halt climate change - we need to gets things in to perspective than just political pot shots at the Conservatives or Labour who happen to be in power at the time.

(I use the analogy as indicative rather than known to be factual just so people can better understand the point I'm trying to make).

@wanderlust wrote:Let's not kid ourselves - the sole purpose of dropping food standards is to try and salvage a deal with the Yanks.

What would you prefer no deal with the USA, food prices rocket and people can't afford to eat?

People are using foodbanks now remember and unemployment is rocketing all the time with job losses due to coronavirus.

Nobody wanted to be in the position that we are but people need to afford to eat and it's only the same stuff as the American's themselves eat isn't it and they aren't dropping down dead are they through eating it are they?

You've got to face reality the UK is no longer a world power, we can no longer dictate our terms as we have done so for the last couple of century's.

We aren't in a position of strength to bargain/be heard anymore.

I blame that on the people who voted for Brexit - and you, let me remind you - are one of them!!!

@Sluffy wrote:

What would you prefer no deal with the USA, food prices rocket and people can't afford to eat?

People are using foodbanks now remember and unemployment is rocketing all the time with job losses due to coronavirus.

Nobody wanted to be in the position that we are but people need to afford to eat and it's only the same stuff as the American's themselves eat isn't it and they aren't dropping down dead are they through eating it are they?

You've got to face reality the UK is no longer a world power, we can no longer dictate our terms as we have done so for the last couple of century's.

We aren't in a position of strength to bargain/be heard anymore.

I blame that on the people who voted for Brexit - and you, let me remind you - are one of them!!!

I imagine some sort of deal will eventually be struck with the USA despite their legitimate concerns about the Good Friday Agreement, their statements about the UK being a low priority and our concerns about them getting a foothold in the NHS etc. 
But it will be a shit deal compared to the deal that the EU will get given that they are a massive market compared to us and already do five times more bilateral trade with the USA than we do.

What I would prefer is to maintain EU food standards in order to facilitate a no tariff trade deal with the EU so that we can continue to get the low cost fresh quality food that we have enjoyed for many years now.

However this Government seems insistent on throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

@Sluffy wrote:

No one can affect climate change unless the world powers like China, USA and Russia not only take action to do so first but then ensure that the rest of the world do so too - and that is never going to happen irrespective of a Tory. Labour or even a Green Party government in this country.

Brazil demolishing the Amazon rainforest probably does more harm in a single day than what good any government we have could do in a year of wanting to positively halt climate change - we need to gets things in to perspective than just political pot shots at the Conservatives or Labour who happen to be in power at the time.

(I use the analogy as indicative rather than known to be factual just so people can better understand the point I'm trying to make).

You’re right that the UK alone can’t make a difference, but you lead and affect change from the front not by waiting for others to act first.

I want a government capable of doing this, and I’m afraid they’re not.

@wanderlust wrote:

@Sluffy wrote:

What would you prefer no deal with the USA, food prices rocket and people can't afford to eat?

People are using foodbanks now remember and unemployment is rocketing all the time with job losses due to coronavirus.

Nobody wanted to be in the position that we are but people need to afford to eat and it's only the same stuff as the American's themselves eat isn't it and they aren't dropping down dead are they through eating it are they?

You've got to face reality the UK is no longer a world power, we can no longer dictate our terms as we have done so for the last couple of century's.

We aren't in a position of strength to bargain/be heard anymore.

I blame that on the people who voted for Brexit - and you, let me remind you - are one of them!!!

I imagine some sort of deal will eventually be struck with the USA despite their legitimate concerns about the Good Friday Agreement, their statements about the UK being a low priority and our concerns about them getting a foothold in the NHS etc. 
But it will be a shit deal compared to the deal that the EU will get given that they are a massive market compared to us and already do five times more bilateral trade with the USA than we do.

What I would prefer is to maintain EU food standards in order to facilitate a no tariff trade deal with the EU so that we can continue to get the low cost fresh quality food that we have enjoyed for many years now.

However this Government seems insistent on throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

You might prefer it, I might prefer it, the government probably would prefer it too but as it stands it simply an option, we either do what the EU want - free movement and all that or there isn't a deal - and if we don't want free movement and all that (and you voted for Brexit remember), then we have to trade with others somewhere else such as the USA and if lowering food standards to theirs (which doesn't seem that unreasonable does it - after all they are a world superpower after all and not some third world backwater or other?) then what choice are we left with?

I can't see how having no choice in the matter is viewed by you as throwing the baby out with the bath water.

When you voted for Brexit did you really think the EU would roll over and still give us everything what we had before? Hardly surprising then that they've played hardball with us then and May clearly didn't have no leverage against them did she?

I'm not fan of Boris but at least he called their bluff and if the EU really wants some ties with us (which they should) and us with them (which we should) then he's at least created some doubt in their minds as to us really leaving with no agreement.

Maybe it might work, maybe it doesn't and we crash out but what alternative was there - May's agreement that was rejected THREE times at Parliament.

There wasn't an alternative was there?

And if we crash out we probably eat the same chickens that all of America do, it's not like we are going to be eating poison or something is it?

Do I want to stay in the EU - yes

Is that a possibility - No

Do I want free trade with the EU - yes

Is that a possibility - unless the EU gives way some, no.

Do I want to have lower food safety - no

Do I eat American food when in America - yes

As it made me ill - no

If we crash out of the EU and we have to eat American chickens like they do, would that be a disaster - no I don't think it would and as it stands we might not have and other choice anyway!

Did I vote for Brexit and got us into the situation in the first place - no

Did you...

@T.R.O.Y. wrote:

@Sluffy wrote:

No one can affect climate change unless the world powers like China, USA and Russia not only take action to do so first but then ensure that the rest of the world do so too - and that is never going to happen irrespective of a Tory. Labour or even a Green Party government in this country.

Brazil demolishing the Amazon rainforest probably does more harm in a single day than what good any government we have could do in a year of wanting to positively halt climate change - we need to gets things in to perspective than just political pot shots at the Conservatives or Labour who happen to be in power at the time.

(I use the analogy as indicative rather than known to be factual just so people can better understand the point I'm trying to make).

You’re right that the UK alone can’t make a difference, but you lead and affect change from the front not by waiting for others to act first.

I want a government capable of doing this, and I’m afraid they’re not.

You are right too, everyone does need to do their bit but our bit is negligible in the scale of things.

Christ people can't even be bothered sorting out their recyclables or taking their plastic bag to the super market on their next visit in this country, that's how seriously about 90% of people actually care about the planet.  (I just made that number up btw just to illustrate my point)

Having a Labour, Conservative or Green Party in government isn't going to change their behaviour.  It isn't at the top of their list of things they vote for and  the first rule of politics is to get elected to power, the second to keep in power, so the political party's (the greens apart) will be all about getting their votes first and saving the world about forty-first on their priority list of policies to woo them.

That's how it works and why I can't be bothered with all the political games that are played - they are all as bad as each other to me as even the Green Party, who in theory I would like to support, have some commendable ambitions but totally unattainable plans to achieve them - theory and practice are not always the same thing unfortunately.

Green Party manifesto 2019: 12 key policies explained

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50464641

I’m not sure why you’re so certain about this. The environment is a major concern for voters and it is going to increasingly be a vote winner for more and more people - plenty of historic polling data plots that shift in voter concern.

If you think the Tories, Greens and Labour are all equally unconcerned about the environment I can see why you don’t vote. But you’re massively mistaken, it doesn’t take much research on motives and intention to see that, even if you don’t follow politics. Would implore you to take more of an interest so you can use your vote in future.

The Green Party's manifesto and  aims are admirable and they have the most intelligent, articulate and convincingly honest MP in Parliament, but they don't get the fair media coverage that they should despite Attenborough. The Party's leaders are impressive too.... but Greta is clearly not popular and so much of modern politics depends on likeability.

@T.R.O.Y. wrote:I’m not sure why you’re so certain about this. The environment is a major concern for voters and it is going to increasingly be a vote winner for more and more people - plenty of historic polling data plots that shift in voter concern.

If you think the Tories, Greens and Labour are all equally unconcerned about the environment I can see why you don’t vote. But you’re massively mistaken, it doesn’t take much research on motives and intention to see that, even if you don’t follow politics. Would implore you to take more of an interest so you can use your vote in future.

Err no I certainly didn't say the Green Party was unconcerned about the Environment, I said that they aren't seen as being electable as the environment may well be a concern to many people but when they vote it isn't at the top of their reason which way the place their 'x' on the ballot paper is it?

Let's just think about it for a moment, in 2019 we had an election between Corbyn and Boris and the people overwhelmingly voted Boris as the least worst option (not because they wanted him - many didn't - but he was better than the alternative in their view (in mine to as it happens) - earlier in 2019 there was an EU election and whilst many people chose to use it as a Brexit referendum confirmation vote as such, the Green Party polled 12.1% of the votes and returned 7 MEP's

European Election 2019: UK results in maps and charts

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48403131

Just seven months later in election contested by the least popular two leaders of the main political parties the country probably has ever had, the Green's vote dropped to just 2.7%.

UK General Election results:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2019/results

You'd think, well I would, that the protest vote would go up for the Green's (and the Lib-Dems the traditional protest vote party) in the GE because plenty didn't want Corbyn OR Boris to win but instead it all but evaporated because when push comes to shove when casting their votes, the environment had less importance than something else at the time, which happened to be 'Get Brexit done' - and let's be honest, by then I believe a majority of people just voted that way because they were so utterly sick of the whole thing!

People are fickle mate, they will vote for what's best for them (or how they perceive it to be) and let someone else worry about saving the planet - they might say different outside the polling station but they certainly don't vote that way in it.

And thank you for your concern about me not voting.  I dare say I was casting my vote before you were ever born and all I can see for it in fifty or so years of putting my 'x' on ballot papers things have got worse in my view, not better, so clearly I'm not adding much to the process then really am I?

The public gets what the public wants I suppose, so I guess it is true that we must also get what we deserve.

When asked we all will say we want to save the world then can't even be arsed to sort our recycling out when we get home!

Actions speak louder than words, always have, always will.

@Sluffy wrote:
Did I vote for Brexit and got us into the situation in the first place - no

Did you...

Erm...for the four hundredth time...I didn't. Nor have I ever suggested otherwise. Which if you've read anything I've written on the subject even you would realise. 
Hoppy 510 on the other hand, apparently did, but not me. 
So for everyone's benefit, would be kind enough to either provide the link to anything I've written on this website that suggests I claim to have voted for Brexit or STFU. Don't mind which.
Oh - and I'd be happy to provide you with the link (on this website!) to where you gave the explicit order that nobody is allowed to reference or discuss stuff that happens on other chat forums here on Nuts if you wish?

As regards your answer to your own hypothetical question I don't think the government is in any position to want what I want as you suggest given that they were voted in on the basis that we sack off all EU legislature and write our own. It would be a betrayal to their own core if they accepted EU food standards/ H & S legislation etc. And I think it's part of a bigger geopolitical game anyway.
But leaving the EU was more of a sovereignty issue for many people rather than a considered response to a properly thought through strategy to improve the lot of the British people wasn't it, so we'll have to put up with the consequences.