Who is in and who is out?

[Cheshirechappie]

Irrespective of who wins, it's time to be realistic about laws - maybe every time a new one is brought in regardless of from where it came it should be law that two laws are scrapped? The statute books are full of archaic laws that have never been repealed, to start with.

That's already started - the European Arrest Warrant legislation repealed part of Habeas Corpus, for example. The real problem isn't the archaic laws, it's the ones being put in place recently and currently!

 

[Jake]

the bits lower down about the EU Clinical Trials Directive and subsequently. This looks very much like a rather more serious restriction of freedom to me, and it's a good indication of what I was trying to say - heritage seeds and woodworking hand tools today, restricting the ability of doctors in the NHS to carry out clinical trials without needing the direct involvement of big pharmaceutical companies the next - and other serious problems. Who, exactly, does that benefit?

Interesting subject. The quack does much quoting from a failed UKIP MP candidate for Sutton & Cheam.

Here's a thoughtful and careful report from a Parliamentary Committee on the same subject, which has far more credibility in my eyes than some hideous quack preying on the vulnerable and dying by purveying at vastly inflated prices untested plant extracts for which unsubstantiated claims are made.

Unsurprisingly, it is a much balanced account. The Directive in question takes quite a clattering, and its replacement by a new Regulation is broadly welcomed, Whitehall takes quite some criticism for gold-plating the implementation of the Directive, but interestingly the Committee puts as much or more blame on NHS fragmentation and general UK bureaucracy, and some on the loss of public trust in the pharma industry leading to less volunteering for trials.


http://www.publications.parliament.uk/p ... 04/104.pdf

 

[Jake]

Jake - try reading it. In order to exempt a variety from Listing, somebody still has to put together a load of documentation (for each variety) proving it's heritage, describing it exactly, recording practical experience of it's cultivation - that's a lot of work. It's just bureaucracy for no real benefit.

That sounds a bit like you were trained in Whitehall. Any sensible country would have just put all traditional varieties on their national list with the bare minimum of paperwork. You only have to do what is required by the Directive, not more than that and the wording is vague enough to permit the national authority to accept a one line submission. I have grown this "Orange Balls" carrot on my farm in Norfolk for 50 years and its is always orange and ball-shaped. Tick.

 

[RogerS]

Jake - try reading it. In order to exempt a variety from Listing, somebody still has to put together a load of documentation (for each variety) proving it's heritage, describing it exactly, recording practical experience of it's cultivation - that's a lot of work. It's just bureaucracy for no real benefit.

That sounds a bit like you were trained in Whitehall. Any sensible country would have just put all traditional varieties on their national list with the bare minimum of paperwork. You only have to do what is required by the Directive, not more than that and the wording is vague enough to permit the national authority to accept a one line submission. I have grown this "Orange Balls" carrot on my farm in Norfolk for 50 years and its is always orange and ball-shaped. Tick.

That's not what the DEFRA website says. There's a lot more to it than that. And if it's a carrot....you're stuffed!

 

[Cheshirechappie]

Jake - try reading it. In order to exempt a variety from Listing, somebody still has to put together a load of documentation (for each variety) proving it's heritage, describing it exactly, recording practical experience of it's cultivation - that's a lot of work. It's just bureaucracy for no real benefit.

That sounds a bit like you were trained in Whitehall. Any sensible country would have just put all traditional varieties on their national list with the bare minimum of paperwork. You only have to do what is required by the Directive, not more than that and the wording is vague enough to permit the national authority to accept a one line submission. I have grown this "Orange Balls" carrot on my farm in Norfolk for 50 years and its is always orange and ball-shaped. Tick.

I was not trained in Whitehall. I was trained - and worked for many years - in an industry that demands very high levels of safety and attention to detail, so I'm no stranger to meticulous documentation - when it's justified.

Why regulate this stuff at all? People have been growing vegetables since time out of mind, without any harm to humanity or the wider world that I know of. Why does the selling of vegetable seed need regulating at all? Where's the risk to human health or the environment? Why do we need a National List of approved varieties? Approved for who's benefit? Yours and mine, or big seed producers and a small army of bureaucratic paper-shufflers?

That's the difference between the UK approach to legislation and regulation (apply if experience shows a need) and the continental approach (regulate everything, then we can control it). Some things just don't need to be controlled. Too much control restricts personal freedom. Personal freedom gives people scope to innovate, tight control restricts innovation. That's the point.

 

[RogerS]

Jake - try reading it. In order to exempt a variety from Listing, somebody still has to put together a load of documentation (for each variety) proving it's heritage, describing it exactly, recording practical experience of it's cultivation - that's a lot of work. It's just bureaucracy for no real benefit.

That sounds a bit like you were trained in Whitehall. Any sensible country would have just put all traditional varieties on their national list with the bare minimum of paperwork. You only have to do what is required by the Directive, not more than that and the wording is vague enough to permit the national authority to accept a one line submission. I have grown this "Orange Balls" carrot on my farm in Norfolk for 50 years and its is always orange and ball-shaped. Tick.

I was not trained in Whitehall. I was trained - and worked for many years - in an industry that demands very high levels of safety and attention to detail, so I'm no stranger to meticulous documentation - when it's justified.

Why regulate this stuff at all? People have been growing vegetables since time out of mind, without any harm to humanity or the wider world that I know of. Why does the selling of vegetable seed need regulating at all? Where's the risk to human health or the environment? Why do we need a National List of approved varieties? Approved for who's benefit? Yours and mine, or big seed producers and a small army of bureaucratic paper-shufflers?

I agree with you wholeheartedly.

That's the difference between the UK approach to legislation and regulation (apply if experience shows a need) and the continental approach (regulate everything, then we can control it). Some things just don't need to be controlled. Too much control restricts personal freedom. Personal freedom gives people scope to innovate, tight control restricts innovation. That's the point.

But on this point, there are many instances - and Seed regulation is a case in point - where our homegrown paper-shuffling bureaucrats - over-egg things. Or in the case of the EU Regulation on the humane slaughter of animals (actually - this IS one of the more sensible regulations or directives to come out of the EU) bottle out completely and render it ineffective. Whitehall is not 'whiter-than-white'.

 

[Jake]

I was not trained in Whitehall. I was trained - and worked for many years - in an industry that demands very high levels of safety and attention to detail, so I'm no stranger to meticulous documentation - when it's justified.

Why did you want to gold-plate it then? Just misapplying your experience in a more safety critical arena, just for rhetorical effect, or because its a British disease? (It probably is the latter)

Why regulate this stuff at all? People have been growing vegetables since time out of mind, without any harm to humanity or the wider world that I know of. Why does the selling of vegetable seed need regulating at all? Where's the risk to human health or the environment? Why do we need a National List of approved varieties? Approved for who's benefit? Yours and mine, or big seed producers and a small army of bureaucratic paper-shufflers?

It's primarily about facilitating trade, as it gives seed producers more control over their rights to the varietals they have developed. If I spend £x creating a Yellow Balls F1 hybrid from Orange Balls and Yellow Spear, I want to be able to control the supply (hence all the certified seed etc). If I spend £££Y developing a GM Rainbow Balls varietal, I want that even more, and there is a definite risk to health or environment which needs to be regulated there. If I am a farmer and the cheapest supplier of Rainbow Balls is in Romania, I want to be sure if I buy from them something described as Rainbow Balls I don't get Yellow Balls, and then the Romanian supplier says well sorry we call those ones Rainbow Balls here sorry you misunderstood but that's your problem.

That's the difference between the UK approach to legislation and regulation (apply if experience shows a need) and the continental approach (regulate everything, then we can control it).

I think it more the difference between an international organisation/free trade agreement and a national government. All the bent cucumber and straight banana grading stuff is straight out of WTO rules, this stuff is not going to go away.

 

[Cheshirechappie]

I was not trained in Whitehall. I was trained - and worked for many years - in an industry that demands very high levels of safety and attention to detail, so I'm no stranger to meticulous documentation - when it's justified.

Why did you want to gold-plate it then? Just misapplying your experience in a more safety critical arena, just for rhetorical effect, or because its a British disease? (It probably is the latter)

Why regulate this stuff at all? People have been growing vegetables since time out of mind, without any harm to humanity or the wider world that I know of. Why does the selling of vegetable seed need regulating at all? Where's the risk to human health or the environment? Why do we need a National List of approved varieties? Approved for who's benefit? Yours and mine, or big seed producers and a small army of bureaucratic paper-shufflers?

Gold plate it? I've just stated that I don't think it needs regulating AT ALL.

This discussion is becoming sterile - a pointless fisking of minutiae. I don't know what you're trying to prove; maybe that Brussels is into light-touch regulation. It isn't. Maybe that you're smarter than everybody else. Whatever.

Just for the record, I'm voting leave. I'm doing so because I believe that freedom and democracy are precious, and that the UK's system of government is more democratic than the EU's. If you have a problem with that, Jake, I'm afraid it's your problem. not mine. You may cast your referendum vote as you see fit - and I'll cast mine as I choose.

Now, as far as this pointless arguing over a regulation about heritage seeds, I've had enough. Over and out.

 

[Jake]

Gold plate it? I've just stated that I don't think it needs regulating AT ALL.

You interpreted the EU regulation as being really onerous when there was no need to based on the actual words. This displays a bias in you, conscious or unconscious.

This discussion is becoming sterile - a pointless fisking of minutiae.

Just dissecting the arguments to see how much truth is in them. There is a bit in this one it seems to me, but not so much as it is being portrayed.

I don't know what you're trying to prove; maybe that Brussels is into light-touch regulation. It isn't. Maybe that you're smarter than everybody else. Whatever.

We are not heavily regulated by world standards - according to the OECD we are pretty lightly regulated.

No, I'm not smarter than anyone else, I just like to test things thoroughly and not take propaganda at face value. Call it (actually) sceptical if you will.

Just for the record, I'm voting leave. I'm doing so because I believe that freedom and democracy are precious, and that the UK's system of government is more democratic than the EU's. If you have a problem with that, Jake, I'm afraid it's your problem. not mine. You may cast your referendum vote as you see fit - and I'll cast mine as I choose.

I have no problem with how you vote - that is your choice and your democratic right to exercise within our constitution, and it's been quite obvious your mind is made up. It's been useful to me to try and find out if your reasons are good ones I should take into account, but I think at heart they are not that evidence based, and more emotional. Which is fine, but not something which will sway me.

Now, as far as this pointless arguing over a regulation about heritage seeds, I've had enough. Over and out.

OK, bye now, take care. Thanks for pushing me into looking at some stuff I wouldn't have otherwise, as the devil is always in the detail.

 

[Inoffthered]

Just for the record, I'm voting leave. I'm doing so because I believe that freedom and democracy are precious, and that the UK's system of government is more democratic than the EU's..[/quote]

=D>
Eloquently put.

I would also add that the Remain side have had nothing positive to say to support their case, they have consistently resorted to project fear and personal attacks on anyone from the Leave campaign which continue despite their stated wish for a clean campaign. The way they are using the death of Jo Cox to support their case and go for the sympathy vote is sickening.

They are now also going for celebrity endorsements with David Beckham and Posh Spice adding their support to Remain. David B may have been a good footballer but why Remain think I will be swayed by the voting intentions of this particular millionaire and his wife escapes me.

It is the Remain side that is poisoning the political debate, not the Leave campaign and they are playing a dangerous game.

 

[RogerS]

I think this must be the relevant bit of the earlier seed directive re national lists and heritage varieties.

Article 44

1. [irrelevant snip]

2. Specific conditions shall be established in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 46(2) to take account of developments in relation to the conservation in situ and the sustainable use of plant genetic resources through growing and marketing of seed of:

(a) landraces and varieties which have been traditionally grown in particular localities and regions and threatened by genetic erosion without prejudice to the provisions of Council Regulation (EC) No 1467/94 of 20 June 1994 on the conservation, characterisation, collection and utilisation of genetic resources in agriculture(8);

(b) varieties with no intrinsic value for commercial crop production but developed for growing under particular conditions.

3. The specific conditions referred to in paragraph 2 shall include in particular the following points:

(a) in the case of paragraph 2, point (a), the landraces and varieties shall be accepted in accordance with the provisions of this Directive. In particular the results of unofficial tests and knowledge gained from practical experience during cultivation, reproduction and use and the detailed descriptions of the varieties and their relevant denominations, as notified to the Member State concerned, shall be taken into account and, if sufficient, shall result in exemption from the requirement of official examination. Upon acceptance of such a landrace or variety, it shall be indicated as a "conservation variety" in the common catalogue;

(b) in the case of paragraph 2, points (a) and (b), appropriate quantitative restrictions.

That seems to like a right to have an exemption for heritage varieties to me. The next step would be to check what Whitehall then made of it (they often over-egg things, and we aren't getting rid of them in a hurry!)

I checked with them. No way out. You still have to do all the paperwork, etc etc.

So....a pointless EU regulation, IMO.

 

[Jake]

I checked with them. No way out. You still have to do all the paperwork, etc etc.

So....a pointless EU regulation, IMO.

National list conservation varieties: make an application

Write to APHA’s Cambridge office with:
•your name, address and contact details
•a cheque payable to APHA for £175
•the species and proposed variety name - the variety name will normally be that under which the variety is historically known
•a description of the variety using the DUS (Distinctness, Uniformity and Stability) criteria - if you can’t describe your variety, contact APHA for advice
•a brief history of the variety including information from your experience during its cultivation, reproduction and use
•evidence of the variety’s conservation status and regional adaptation as well as its region of origin, ie where it has historically been grown and is naturally adapted
•include information on when the variety was removed from the national list if it was previously listed - if you’re unsure, please ask APHA, who’ll check as part of the application process

If your application is successful you must send a representative sample of the seed to APHA’s Cambridge office.

Amateur varieties

You can register amateur vegetables, eg a variety developed with no commercial value, for sale in small packets.

Apply to add an amateur vegetable to the national list.

So two lower-impact routes are in fact provided, one for conservation varieties and the other for non-commercial seed stock. How low impact they are in practice is DEFRA's responsibility as it will have drafted the SIs.

The Commission's proposed (but ditched) replacement for this lot sounds like a real error of judgment by them, but caught in the decision making process, but this all looks a bit like a storm in a tea-cup.

 

[RogerS]

... but this all looks a bit like a storm in a tea-cup.

To you and me, maybe, but to smaller seedsmen, nurseries ?

What's next ? Only allowed to sell certain plants?

 

[RobinBHM]

The regulations on joinery can be frustrating.

Windows should be CE marked, not so easy for a bespoke maker, ok for a large factory.

Of course thats before the U value calculations, window ratings etc (yes I know they are important, but in reality, joiners will use the same glass spec, same timber, pretty much same section, yet conveniently 'trickle vents are energy neutral' for the regulations). These are of course UK regulations, driven by building regulations, driven by Kyoto agreement etc.

Somewhat moving away from the in/out discussion, but its an example of regulations that are punitive to small businesses and favour large businesses, rather like the seedsmen.

 

[rafezetter]

It would be interesting to hear how many going on about the lack of accountability and democracy have ever done anything more than turn up at a ballot station every few years.

Policies get made and changed by lobbying and direct contact. I'd guess only a very, very tiny minority ever have bothered actually engaging in the process and discovering how well it works.

I'm somewhat guessing you havent done it either because I know someone who has, and it takes a great deal of time; more time than most people have to spare, lobbying isn't just writing an open letter to your local representative, it's rallying groups of likeminded individuals, planning your schedule to coincide with the person(s) you are trying to lobby schedule (if you manage to get it) and a bunch of other stuff that is very VERY not trivial.

That's why there are PROFESSIONAL lobbyists, because part time lobbyists just don't get the job done adequatly enough.

 

[Jake]

Apparently I am being harsh on DEFRA, who reportedly sensibly turn a blind eye to small scale stuff under the existing Directive (article is discussing the nixed Commission proposal).
http://www.thelandmagazine.org.uk/artic ... resistance

 

[Jake]

Robin, but in practice do you find building inspectors care? Mine wants to see the receipt for the glass to prove spec and that's it (one example, and I know they can be a random power unto themselves).

 

[Terry - Somerset]

The UK is fortunate to have a fairly high level of technical and cultural integrity. We buy goods and services generally expecting that what is delivered is what is promised, and have a legal process to back up consumer rights. Sadly scu**ags do still trade but they are very much in the minority.

Some other member states (particularly more recent joiners) are not so fortunate. Poor quality standards and limited legal redress are common. A very legitimate function of the EU is to ensure all states adhere to a common high standard to protect consumers and other customers.

It follows that trade between member states needs to adhere to similar standards.

Not all regulation makes sense and some is unquestionably frustrating. It is not helped when on implementation it is made yet more impenetrable by our own civil servants. In the case of seeds the Commission eventually withdrew its proposals when it was clear there was no political agreement between the Commission and European Parliament. Interesting because it does illustrate that democratically elected Euro MPs wield at least some power and influence.

But at the end of the day its your choice - accept and act upon harmonisation of standards and regulations as the price for unfettered access to the European market, or go it alone with the risks implicit in that option.

 

[rafezetter]

Look at the appalling EU track record in fraud, awful political decision making, and complete inepitude in major practical issues, and at the various changes they are trying to keep hidden from us until after the vote, and ask yourself why you would want more of the same for the foreseeable future !

Here's a question maybe no-one here has positied yet (or I've missed it in the 50+ pages); if these new addendums and changes are so beneficial to the UK and the general euro populace, why are they not shouting them from the rooftops in a "if you vote to leave, people of the UK, look at all the benefits you could be missing out on in the coming months and years ahead..... aren't they amazing?"

The very fact they have not been fully disclosed does not put them in a positive light, this isn't christmas presents we are talking about now is it?

Oh and those remainers that say the EU will collapse if we leave - surely they can see the stupidity in such a statement - that's just asserting how much it's leaning on us, like the keystone in a bridge.

It should be that the EU instead of threatening sanctions will be saying - "go then, we don't need you and if you don't wish to be here we will gladly release you, you will not be missed, we are strong enough and absolutely fine without you."

Seems to me instead it's a lot like an employee who's always given the ar$e end of the crappiest jobs, threatening to leave unless things change and the employer saying he'll ruin his chances of finding another job anywhere ever again, so he's better off staying and accepting his fate.

 

[Cheshirechappie]

Somewhere in the deep recesses of this thread, I mentioned a small firm no longer able to make mercury stick barometers because the EU banned them. They can still buy, sell and restore antique ones, but can't make new ones. I'm not quite sure how this makes the world a safer, better place, though. Is this really a necessary regulation, or the unintended consequence of regulations aimed at industrial handling of mercury?

http://www.barometerworld.co.uk/stick_mercury.htm