Merged Now What?

[angrysoba]

It would also put us at a disadvantage. Using Don's example above, UK business could not sell Parma Ham or Champagne unless it comes from those areas but Europe would be free to sell/make and sell their own substandard products labelled as Stilton or Scotch whisky. We can bring the directives in to UK law but we would no longer be in the EU version.

Maybe, but two things:

a) They might have above-standard products that can be called such things.

b) It might not be a priority enough for the EU itself to change that particular legislation. This assumes that it's a backburner issue for the UK, and a hotbutton issue for the rest of the EU; "Quick guys! It's really important that Cheesy McCheeseface in Ruritania gets his goats cheese sold as stilton, and his elderberry wine sold as Scotch!"

 

[Tolls]

The Commission members are appointed one per member state by the state's government/
... snip ...

Hope this helps.

Well, those first two paras were summarised in my "(i)sn't the Commission put together after an EU Parliament election?"

You could have just said "yes"...

 

[The Don]

I'd like to point out that the reverse is probably also true: people who voted to "Lemain" (sic ) but now regret their decision.

I wasn't referring to people who voted leave and were now experiencing "Bregret" but rather those people who wanted to be out of the EU but who wanted to remain in the EEA.

For example, those whose primary concern was fishing rights may have wanted to leave the EU (and hence get control of UK fishing rights) but who wanted to remain in the EEA so that they could continue to sell the fish to the profitable Spanish markets. For those people a Norway solution would be ideal.

I haven't heard of anyone who voted Remain but who is now regretting that decision but that could be that no-one in the media is looking for people like that and/or because they will have got what they subsequently wanted (i.e. to leave the EU) then there's nothing to complain about.

 

[angrysoba]

their English is strongly accented and not always perfect.
There still isn't a huge cultural divide between us.

Well indeed, why would that distinguish the Poles from the Irish?

 

[Guybrush Threepwood]

Well indeed, why would that distinguish the Poles from the Irish?

Racist Xenophobe!!

 

[MCel58]

It would also put us at a disadvantage. Using Don's example above, UK business could not sell Parma Ham or Champagne unless it comes from those areas but Europe would be free to sell/make and sell their own substandard products labelled as Stilton or Scotch whisky. We can bring the directives in to UK law but we would no longer be in the EU version.

Actually not really true as these as covered by Geographical Indicators which is a form of trademark covered not only by EU treaties but a wide range of International treaties and managed through the World Intellectual Property Organisation.
The EU has created a way to manage these on an EU basis if companies desire multiple registrations in Europe through both the European Patent Office and the EU intellectual property office throughout the EU 28. The case of Scotch Whisky is different again and is managed through the UK intellectual property office.

The issue will be where UK businesses have planned their trademark and design rights strategies to use EU mechanisms which means that instead of registering in each country and paying both registration fees and translations costs they have chosen to register through the EU and pay only one fee and have no translation costs.

Also, for the last 10 years or so there have been ongoing discussion about an EU patent which would have reduced costs for Innovative EU companies by allowing a single patent application in one language that would cover all 28 countries. We were just about to have agreement.

 

[angrysoba]

Racist Xenophobe!!

I resemble that remark!

As it happens, I agree with you and disagree with Argumemnon's simplistic essentialism, as I will explain in the next post.

 

[angrysoba]

The difference is Polish people living in Ireland and Polish people in Poland. If I lived in Japan since a young age, I would be far more aligned with the Japanese way of thinking than the Canadian one.

Is there really a "Canadian way of thinking"? Are you people really all alike?

As it happens, my son is eligible for Irish citizenship and was born in Japan. He will be entitled to live in Ireland and to carry an Irish passport no matter how long he lives here in Japan.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Of course it does.

No it doesn't. And the fact that you either misunderstand or misrepresent this fundamental point throws everything else you say into a fairly dim light as either misinformed or deliberately misrepresented.

Poland cannot dictate law to the UK nor can the UK dictate law to Poland.

 

[uke2se]

EU laws can overturn UK laws. Of course it's legitimate.

And now you change the subject. Yes, EU law overturns national law. Still doesn't make the way EU law is drafted any less democratic than UK law.

Just because you disagree with a reason doesn't make it not legitimate. I think you're confusing terms, here.

When the reason for the disagreement is that you have no idea what you're talking about, yes it does.

That is so removed from I've said that I'm starting to wonder if you're deliberately refusing to allow any sort of understanding on this issue.

That is what we're talking about: how responsible it is for someone to push for a drastic cause of action without any idea of what to do next, all the while lying about what will be achieved.

 

[Lothian]

Actually not really true as these as covered by Geographical Indicators which is a form of trademark covered not only by EU treaties but a wide range of International treaties and managed through the World Intellectual Property Organisation.
The EU has created a way to manage these on an EU basis if companies desire multiple registrations in Europe through both the European Patent Office and the EU intellectual property office throughout the EU 28. The case of Scotch Whisky is different again and is managed through the UK intellectual property office.

The issue will be where UK businesses have planned their trademark and design rights strategies to use EU mechanisms which means that instead of registering in each country and paying both registration fees and translations costs they have chosen to register through the EU and pay only one fee and have no translation costs.

Also, for the last 10 years or so there have been ongoing discussion about an EU patent which would have reduced costs for Innovative EU companies by allowing a single patent application in one language that would cover all 28 countries. We were just about to have agreement.

Thanks. Happy to accept your corrections.

 

[angrysoba]

Thanks. Happy to accept your corrections.

Come to think of it, I have never seen Japanese whisky sold here as "Scotch". I doubt they would ever do that.

 

[Francesca R]

Yeah right... That's just pathetic.

You think that Osborne-Cameron told the truth about taxes rising and spending being cut after a leave vote? Which Osborne then ruled out on Monday 27th.

I guess it's possible to convince yourself of anything if you are sufficiently blinkered. Congratulations.

Are you actually on a mission to try to show that the Remain camp did nothing nowhere no-time wrong? How spectacularly silly.

(i.e. more borrowing rather than more taxes or expenditure cuts).

More borrowing is fiscal expansion. More tax or spending cuts is contraction. You are peddling the crazy line that having a budget that does the fiscal opposite of what the initial promise was is somehow being true to it. Ha ha.

And not even of the same order of magnitude of the numerous Leave campaign lies.

Oh look sounds like you are contradicting yourself and conceding it was a lie. Make your mind up. Actually don't bother, carry on blinkering up.

 

[Lothian]

You think that Osborne-Cameron told the truth about taxes rising and spending being cut after a leave vote? Which Osborne then ruled out on Monday 27th.

If the current/next chancellor goes ahead as Osborne promised and cuts CT to 15% that would be a £12bn cut in income. Do you think such a cut will attract (1/3?) more businesses to the UK to realise similar returns or do you think s/he will look for more savings or will the deficit be allowed to grow at that rate? My guess is a CT cut will stop businesses migrating but will have to be offset by personal tax rises and or a rise in VAT.

 

[Belz...]

Are you arguing for ethnically-based politics?

No, and that you think I am shows how polarized this topic has become. It's basically impossible to have differing viewpoints without the entire proceedings becoming a complete cluster ****.

 

[Belz...]

The members elected by the government of Each country propose laws just as the officials appointed by the PM do it in the UK.

How can constituents in the UK effect laws as part of the EU?

Is there really a "Canadian way of thinking"? Are you people really all alike?

You understood my comments in the reverse. The point isn't that Canadians are all alike, but that they have different considerations from people of other countries.

No it doesn't.

Great. So in fact I was misinformed that there were EU laws and regulations that the UK had to abide by. My bad.

 

[Belz...]

And now you change the subject.

What? That's exactly what I was talking about.

Yes, EU law overturns national law.

Right. I disagree with that, and understand Brits who do.

When the reason for the disagreement is that you have no idea what you're talking about, yes it does.

That's nice, but is just empty rhetoric.

That is what we're talking about: how responsible it is for someone to push for a drastic cause of action without any idea of what to do next, all the while lying about what will be achieved.

I find the lying and exaggeration reprehensible, for the record. But there's nothing drastic about leaving the EU any more than it was drastic to join it. It's a big thing, for sure, but drastic? I still disagree that when in the process of finding out what people want, you must already have the plan in place in case they decide against the statu quo.

I mean, by that logic, if you ask your kids whether they want to go to New Zealand or Italy for their vacation, you have to already have bookmarked all the websites you'll need to order the tickets and book the hotels. No such thing is needed at that stage.

 

[angrysoba]

You understood my comments in the reverse. The point isn't that Canadians are all alike, but that they have different considerations from people of other countries.

Some will and some won't. And some Canadians will have different considerations from other Canadians. Your observations are rather banal right now.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Come to think of it, I have never seen Japanese whisky sold here as "Scotch". I doubt they would ever do that.

There have been all sorts of weird and wonderful things like that over the years. The industry body for Single Malt Scotch is very particular and have done a pretty good job of stopping the more egregious stuff. I'm not sure how leaving the EU will impact it if it happens.

How can constituents in the UK effect laws as part of the EU?

By voting for their governments and voting for their MEPs.

You understood my comments in the reverse. The point isn't that Canadians are all alike, but that they have different considerations from people of other countries.

So they are not all alike but they all have different considerations than all people elsewhere who are also not alike and none of these overlap in any way? Co-operating on common regulations which all agree to is wrong in principle?

Great. So in fact I was misinformed that there were EU laws and regulations that the UK had to abide by. My bad.

The EU is not Poland. Poland is not the EU. Poland cannot dictate EU legislation anymore than it can dictate UK legislation. You know this. I'll put you down for 'deliberate misrepresentation' then. Still waiting for legitimate Leave arguments

 

[Ambrosia]

But chewing tobacco remains on sale? It's only snus that is affected?

Yes but it's not very popular as when you use the stuff you need to spit brown liquid out of your mouth every so often.

About the only difference in THR policy in Sweden is the availability of Snus. They have much lower smoking rates than any other EU country.

I decided to have a look at the makeup of the THR EU group and found it was made up not of EU officials but of the Dept. of Health officials from each member state. This means that the act was developed in line with the member states own Health policies and directed by the Dept. of Health Minister in those member states. I can find no suggestion that the UK argued for a different approach and in a number of areas actually appears to have submitted the research and the science.

This is correct, more or less. However the studies used to support Article 20 were badly flawed and mostly based on old technology(circa 2008). Vaping has only been around since the early 2000's and technology has advanced markedly in the past 3 years.

Other much better studies reflecting newer hardware etc etc were given to MEPs but they ignored them.

The pharma industry would like to control the market, (recently vape sales overtook NRT sales) they were lobbying very hard to implement Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standards, which are pharmaceutical standards of manufacture, far beyond the reach of all but the biggest companies.
Health dept officials quite like this idea, but it would likely kill the market and return us to 2008 technology. You've been able to register vaping devices as medicinal products since 2010 with the MHRA. IIRC to date there is one registered device. The MHRA quote an initial cost of £300k with annual costs running from anything up to £250k.

It is therefore highly unlikely that the UK would make any changes in this area in the future as they were part of the group that determined this approach in the first place.

Not true. In May this year the House of Lords strongly supported vaping. Lots of public health bodies, having viewed the literature are now in favour of vaping as a alternative to smoking. The Royal College of Physicians recently published a report on the subject, as did ASH (Action on Smoking and Health)

The opinion of public health officials and campaign groups is changing, based on actual real scientific evidence that shows the risks are much lower than the studies used to backup the TPD stated.

Much of the evidence that the RCP and ASH and others now base their opinions on was available in 2014 when this directive was passed. I handed some of this to my MEP and my local MP in person.