Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Our cars are right hand drive, same as Japan, a major vehicle manufacturing nation. Actually it is easy to design cars that can be produced in right and left drive configurations, partly because of the large size of the market for right hand drive vehicles.

Our electrical devices are the same as EU current/voltage.

However the point is we can always get someone to sell us stuff but we want to sell stuff to other people too, so we have to make sure our exports meet necessary standards and the EU is the largest, richest market in the world.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Do other countries (the US, Japan etc.) comply with all of these directives?

It's the companies that have to comply with the standards. Obviously it concerns only the products exported to the EU.

For example, rowing boats made by US companies Kanghua and Wintech are exported to the EU and have to meet the RCD standards.

You can get more info here:

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/ce-marking

Other good examples include the Restriction of the Use of Certain Hazardous Substances and Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment regulations that ban the usage of certain chemicals (such as Lead) in many applications and require companies to design their products with recovery/reuse and recycling in mind at the end of their life respectively.

The risk with "Brexit means Wrexit" is that to encourage businesses and countries to trade with us some of this legislation will disappear making the 'environment' of the average consumer in the UK worse because there is no 'business value' of any single human being. In many cases these are the red tape issues business pro-Brexiters go on about because it costs businesses to comply with regulations that ensure the good 'environment' of all the populace. Without these pieces of legislation we are potentially back to lead paint on children's toys; no car/lorry emission standards; and the old style creosote being used on fencing which is toxic to everything and leaches slowly in to the ground simply because these materials are cheaper to manufacture.

That's fine. We can make sure our exports meet their standards but we ourselves can otherwise do want we want.

 Future War Cultist wrote:
That's fine. We can make sure our exports meet their standards but we ourselves can otherwise do want we want.

So you'll have british companies be manufacturing two different classes of goods? Why would they do that?

Yes, that even means bringing back pounds and ounces as unit's of measure, apparently.

Important stuff like that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
That's fine. We can make sure our exports meet their standards but we ourselves can otherwise do want we want.

So you'll have british companies be manufacturing two different classes of goods? Why would they do that?

An expensive one that's safe and works for the EU and a Morris marina for the UK.

 r_squared wrote:
Yes, that even means bringing back pounds and ounces as unit's of measure, apparently.

Important stuff like that.

Down with cultural imperialism that isn't a relic of our cultural imperialism!

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
So you'll have british companies be manufacturing two different classes of goods? Why would they do that?

Because they already manufacture different classes of goods, for the American market, the Japanese market etc etc. What's one more?

@ r_squared

You know what...I can't be bothered to deal with your sarcasm. It's late and I'm tired.

 Future War Cultist wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
So you'll have british companies be manufacturing two different classes of goods? Why would they do that?

Because they already manufacture different classes of goods, for the American market, the Japanese market etc etc. What's one more?

Many british companies do not trade with America and Japan. A lot trade with Europe, hence why it is our biggest trading partner.

Also really not seeing why you would want to intentionally reduce the minimum quality of goods coming into the UK, which is the only way you can "cut the red tape".

 Future War Cultist wrote:
That's fine. We can make sure our exports meet their standards but we ourselves can otherwise do want we want.

I don't really think you understand the implications of what you saying.

To keep businesses in the uk, any legislation that costs companies more to manufacture will be reduced in scope unless there is a political consequence. There will be intense pressure from lobbying businesses for this to happen so they can maintain their profit levels. That means unless you are well off all the products you will buy will be poorer quality, more environmentally and socially damaging; Such as

Reducing the need for special chemicals to keep children safe whilst playing, if they lick the leaded paint on their toys a bit who cares?
Do we need to meet those car safety standards, no we don't but who cares if the casualty rate goes up of it keeps things cheap and profits up?
Why not allow companies to discharge poisons into the rivers, but who cares that's only going to impact a few downriver but turning them in to poison hellholes like they were in the 70's.
Who cares that we no longer have to recycle as much of our waste; we'll have to build more landfills and incinerators, but then tha doesn't bother the well off because they won't be built anywhere near them.
Who cares that the emissions standards for vehicles, waste facilities are reduced etc, the well off will be happy in the country and does it matter the 'workers' are suffering from chronic diseases later on in their life.

Etc etc.

Anything with a human cost will be reduced legislatively, because this 'red tape' costs businesses and the well off money; and the people that will lose out of this aren't those that can afford to protect themselves but those on the breadline that have no option to sacrifice their environment just so they can live. I find it depressing that anyone could find this acceptable.

By leaving the EU we won't become an anarcho libertarian society overnight, none of the above is going to happen

 Kilkrazy wrote:
the EU is the largest, richest market in the world.

Sorry to be pedantic, but this is only true whilst the UK remains a part of the EU. Once we've left it falls to second place behind the US.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Whirlwind wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
That's fine. We can make sure our exports meet their standards but we ourselves can otherwise do want we want.

I don't really think you understand the implications of what you saying.

To keep businesses in the uk, any legislation that costs companies more to manufacture will be reduced in scope unless there is a political consequence. There will be intense pressure from lobbying businesses for this to happen so they can maintain their profit levels. That means unless you are well off all the products you will buy will be poorer quality, more environmentally and socially damaging; Such as

Reducing the need for special chemicals to keep children safe whilst playing, if they lick the leaded paint on their toys a bit who cares?
Do we need to meet those car safety standards, no we don't but who cares if the casualty rate goes up of it keeps things cheap and profits up?
Why not allow companies to discharge poisons into the rivers, but who cares that's only going to impact a few downriver but turning them in to poison hellholes like they were in the 70's.
Who cares that we no longer have to recycle as much of our waste; we'll have to build more landfills and incinerators, but then tha doesn't bother the well off because they won't be built anywhere near them.
Who cares that the emissions standards for vehicles, waste facilities are reduced etc, the well off will be happy in the country and does it matter the 'workers' are suffering from chronic diseases later on in their life.

Etc etc.

Anything with a human cost will be reduced legislatively, because this 'red tape' costs businesses and the well off money; and the people that will lose out of this aren't those that can afford to protect themselves but those on the breadline that have no option to sacrifice their environment just so they can live. I find it depressing that anyone could find this acceptable.

This is just silly - nobody will support cutting the 'red tape' that means we can put lead paint on a childs toy, why would we? It's a straw man argument and I think your a smart enough person to know it.

Cutting the following red tape however (and these are just the few I know of that spring immediately to mind, I'm sure that the people in charge of making the rules will find many more) makes sense:

1) Cucumbers that cannot be too bendy
2) Decent quality vacuum cleaners can be reinstated to the UK
3) Working time directive (which adds a burden of making sure all your employees opt out of it, I actually like the idea of the WTD but all it really achieves is the administrative burden as I've not met a single employers who doesn't make their staff opt out.)

As I say, this is just a very small list that I can think of today - all of which are just pointless 'red tape' and designed to ensure that small manufacturers cannot compete with the big boys. This is what is meant by 'red tape' - not the ban on lead paint on childrens toys.

I'm going to call BS on the cucumbers until we get a source for that.

I think the cucumbers thing was a misunderstanding. It was a ruling saying that bendy ones can't be classed as highest quality and therefore can't cost as much as the straighter ones. I think that's what it was.

However Stranger83s other two points are very valid. Some other things we can look at changing are the Common Agricultural Policy and the Common Fisheries Policy. I saw on the show Trawlermen how they had to throw back the wrong type of fish that had been accidentally caught despite the fact that the fish was dead. It's very wasteful and deprives them of earnings. I hear the Norwegians have found a happy medium so we could look to following their example.

Also, all those straw man arguments about bringing back lead paint and the like? Catch yourself on guys.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
I'm going to call BS on the cucumbers until we get a source for that.

It's a fairly well known law:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commission_Regulation_(EC)_No._2257/94
In fairness the link follows bananas but I'm reasonably sure it covers cucumbers too. Even if it doesn't I'll be happy to cut the red tape on bananas being too bendy.

Ah, here is a BBC article covering that the banans is a myth (probably why I'd not heard it before) but that Cucumbers are required to be straight

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6481969.stm

'Contrast the case of cucumbers (Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1677/88), where Class I and "Extra class" cucumbers are allowed a bend of 10mm per 10cm of length. Class II cucumbers can bend twice as much. '

So, we can have bendy cucumbers back. Brilliant.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
....Also, all those straw man arguments about bringing back lead paint and the like? Catch yourself on guys.

Rested enough now?

Do you think that firms will not try and take advantage of looser regulation then? There's no chance that any British firm will try it on and go the cheap route to maximise profit?

 r_squared wrote:
So, we can have bendy cucumbers back. Brilliant.

But this is why it’s red tape, let me choose which ones I want – offer them all at the same price and if I choose to pick up all the straight ones that’s my choice, if I choose to pay more for a bendy one that is also my choice It should be pointed out that we are not talking about the quality of the cucumber here, it’s nothing to do with how they have been grown, the taste, if they have gone bad – we’re simply dealing with the shape of them! By remoing this requirement we can lower the cost of cucumbers

The requirement to charge more for straight ones came about because big producers wanted to drive small ones out of the market, forcing them to spend money working out how bendy the cucumbers are adds extra cost to them that big producers can easily absorb but small ones cannot.

This is ‘red tape’ pure and simple and is what I’ve always understood to be what the leave brigade mean when they talk about abolishing red tape, certainly not dropping poison into the rivers are putting lead paint onto childrens toys!

 r_squared wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
....Also, all those straw man arguments about bringing back lead paint and the like? Catch yourself on guys.

Rested enough now?

Do you think that firms will not try and take advantage of looser regulation then? There's no chance that any British firm will try it on and go the cheap route to maximise profit?

I don't think it'll be any more likely post brexit than it is pre brexit to be 'tried on' as I don't see anyone removing the ban on lead paint in a childs toy, it'll therefore still be illegal. I'm therefore not sure what your point is - that people do illegal things? Well they do that inside the EU leaving isn't going to be the cause of criminals doing illegal stuff.

Stranger83 wrote:


1) Cucumbers that cannot be too bendy
2) Decent quality vacuum cleaners can be reinstated to the UK
3) Working time directive (which adds a burden of making sure all your employees opt out of it, I actually like the idea of the WTD but all it really achieves is the administrative burden as I've not met a single employers who doesn't make their staff opt out.)

As I say, this is just a very small list that I can think of today - all of which are just pointless 'red tape' and designed to ensure that small manufacturers cannot compete with the big boys. This is what is meant by 'red tape' - not the ban on lead paint on childrens toys.

OK, from those examples you listed,what do you imagine the savings actually will be to business, considering the opt out of the WTD ?
Apart from Dyson being able to produce ever more powerful vacuum cleaners to sell outside the EU, which he can do anyway.
I'm also not sure that savings on rulers to evaluate the straightness of salad constituents is going to fund more junior doctors.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Stranger83 wrote:
....I don't think it'll be any more likely post brexit than it is pre brexit to be 'tried on' as I don't see anyone removing the ban on lead paint in a childs toy, it'll therefore still be illegal. I'm therefore not sure what your point is - that people do illegal things? Well they do that inside the EU leaving isn't going to be the cause of criminals doing illegal stuff.

I never mentioned putting lead back into paint, or poisoning rivers, or in fact any criminal activity. When we leave the EU, we will be free to come up with our own legislation regarding anything we manufacture. Our past has demonstrated a plethora of ways that British manufacturers normalised practices that were harmful, but profitable, and they were not forced to stop until they were legislated against.
The current Tory government is unlikely to legislate against business, if it affects growth, we know that. They love light touch regulation, and are the party of smaller government after all.
It would take enormous harm, or loss of life to force them to act.

I also think you're overstating the cost a small grocery business faces classifying it's cucumbers.

There will be red tape but it will be British red tape. However, any company that wants to trade with EU members will still have to comply with EU red tape. Given we already comply with Japanese and American red tape if it differs to EU red tape, a new layer of properly British red tape simply adds to the "problem".

Isn't it ironic that the call for Brexit to lose red tape will lead to more red tape.
Another reason why Leavers are mostly talking out of their arse, how much of their own rubbish they will have to swallow remains to be seen. I hope it chokes them.

 r_squared wrote:


I'm also not sure that savings on rulers to evaluate the straightness of salad constituents is going to fund more junior doctors.

Yeah, cause you certainly don't have to employ someone to do the measuring or anything, not to count the added cost of trying to get them to grow straight in the first place to ensure you can sell as many as possible:

Your getting the cart before the horse here, the silly thing isn’t that we’re now able to do these things again – the silly thing is that we had a law regulating it in the first place.

Indeed that is the very definition of ‘red tape’ and why I don’t see removing red tape as things like lead paint on childrens toys or dumping poison into rivers, removing red tape is removing silly laws that served no purpose than to add costs onto stuff, therefore your going to make a joke of anything I suggest as ‘red tape’ along the lines of ‘hurray we can have bendy cucumbers again’ because ‘red tape’ only covers things such as this.

So you’ve actually proved my point, ‘red tape’ only covers silly stuff, so lets remove all that and get rid of the burden and cost of it all and keep sensible stuff like not putting lead paint onto childrens toys.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 r_squared wrote:
Isn't it ironic that the call for Brexit to lose red tape will lead to more red tape.
Another reason why Leavers are mostly talking out of their arse, how much of their own rubbish they will have to swallow remains to be seen. I hope it chokes them.

Have you got a list of the red tape that you apparently know is going to now come into play?

Can you give me a list of any red tape that existing in the UK before we joined the EU?

Stranger83 wrote:
.....Have you got a list of the red tape that you apparently know is going to now come into play?

Can you give me a list of any red tape that existing in the UK before we joined the EU?

LOL, you want me to cast my mind into the future and provide actual legislation that the UK government is going to come up with for small businesses?

OK, how about, due to the extensive use of petrochemicals, firms manufacturing non-essential plastics, must limit the range of their products to 5, none of which maybe above 20mm in height.

As to question number 2, Health and Safety at work act 1974. It's a fascinating read.

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1974/37/data.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwjR19z94-3OAhWoAcAKHaCfBtwQFghJMAI&usg=AFQjCNGhavIr1EN1raO0G4UJOk7Q1thjMw&sig2=wz5jWCm9qYlXfaM2vziibA

Strictly speaking we were part of the EEC then, but strangely enough after we joined these essential regulations suddenly appeared. Things like HSE and the consumer credit act 1974. Largely beneficial to the population, and business' too.

So not red tape then, these are beneficial and bring about actual benefits to the population, I asked for red tape such as bendy cucumbers (I know I keep going on about it but it really is the perfect example of red tape)

I’m not asking for anything, you made the claim that we are defiantly going to have MORE red tape once we leave the EU, I simply would like you to confirm 1) how you know this to be a fact and 2) what this red tape will look like.

If you cannot answer these two questions than how can you claim to KNOW that there will be more red tape after we have left the EU than before it?

I've been reading some of these comments, and to be honest, I'm not worried about meeting EU standards.

So a few i's need to be dotted, or this or that. Hardly likely to trouble a nation like the UK that co-designed Concorde, or the Channel Tunnel, and gave us the ZX Spectrum, and a million other things before that...

Not something we should be losing any sleep over.

@ r_squared

I was in the middle of typing out a response to your points, but then I realised that life is just too short and precious.

Turning back to the point at large; if in future we can avoid crap like this it would be a great start. As stranger83 said, just let the customer decide how to handle it. Let them ask what the shop deals in and let them take it from there.

just because we leave, it doesn't mean that we have to give up on matching European quality checks, the red tape will stay the same. It might get less if we look at British home grown products, like fish we have to throw away for some reason or another.

I was always more concerned with the idea that the EU wanted to start working with each of the nations budgets and start to meddle in their own money. Kind of like the whole Apple tax, which has now started a precedent.

 welshhoppo wrote:
just because we leave, it doesn't mean that we have to give up on matching European quality checks, the red tape will stay the same. It might get less if we look at British home grown products, like fish we have to throw away for some reason or another.

I was always more concerned with the idea that the EU wanted to start working with each of the nations budgets and start to meddle in their own money. Kind of like the whole Apple tax, which has now started a precedent.

It's no big deal for me if we have to change 3 pin plugs to 2 pin plugs for European markets - I can live with that.

Agree with your point about the EU and Apple.

If Apple end up paying the full amount, then I'm a Welshman

They'll get a slap off the wrist, told not to do it again, and everybody lives happily ever after.

Now we get to adhere to EU red tape, and not have any say on the red tape, hooray!

 Mozzyfuzzy wrote:
Now we get to adhere to EU red tape, and not have any say on the red tape, hooray!

We never had much of a say on it anyway.

Still, at least rail nationalisation will be back on the table as an option.

 Mozzyfuzzy wrote:
Now we get to adhere to EU red tape, and not have any say on the red tape, hooray!

Actually, only those who choose to sell within the EU will still be bound by the red tape, but those who don’t will be free to if they so choose or to not if they don’t – seems like a sensible solution to me.

But I agree that if we choose to follow the red tape or not isn’t the big issue here, I just took exception to the idea that when people talk about red tape we are discussing things like pumping poison into the rivers or putting lead paint onto childrens toys. That simply is not what anyone means when they talk about red tape.

Then which parts of the red tape are we talking about?

Or are we talking about the kind of "red tape" the Sun uses to rail against the EU?