Sure. But that is not the EUs problem. It is an issue with the UK. And not one we needed to leave the EU to fix. But instead agree on a party willing to change it.

The UK electorate has not been able to do that.

Much like most other EU nations got to vote on expansion of the EU mandate.

Our democratic leadership chose not to. So we again voted them in power so did get to vote.

The whole Brexit argument was based on UK government failure being pushed as EU issues. It sure as hell was not the EU as an org that lacks democratic ideals.

Yep they did.

Every nation in the EU is a democracy it is a requirement.

They elect there leaders. Those leaders send representatives to the council.

And citizens elect mep that approve or reject council mandates.

deleted by creator

You mean the arbitrary climate goals Germany and all members of the EU made up.

The EU is not some nebulous org that doesn’t exist without it’s members. Germany was a huge part of the members calling for these goals.

As was the UK in absolutely everything brexiters complained about.

Yes it dose just not in ELI5 language.

Alignment of on EU food standards clearly states our own standards must match the EUs.

Thanks.

Reread.

Alignment of UK food standards. Means our own standards must continue to meet the EUs.

This is the only reason the EU will ever accept removal of documentation confirming the standards followed in food it will eat.

And exactly what remainers claimed about EU trade throughout the ref.

It is also the exact reason the US trade deals keep failing. Their food standards do not meet ours. So importing US food into the UK would mean deals like this. Where our food standards must align are impossible.

It really is not that complex. If your standards don’t meet those of the folks your selling to. Your companies are required to proove the items sold meet their standards not yours. Hence all the last 4 years of difficulties selling to the EU. Has been created by brexiters insisting we should not follow EU aligned standards. Creating the same mountains of paperwork any nation with differing standards face selling to the EU.

The same reason the US wants us to accept chlorinated chicken. So they do not have to proove all their chicken is kept to the same standards we currently require.

They can sell chicken to us now if they are willing to breed it as we do and provide evidence at each import that they did so. Just like we are with the EU now.

But a trade deal giving them simple trade would require alignment between our rules.

All those ISO EN and CE standards you see on electronics and toys. Are the same thing for non food standards. If China wants to sell crap to the UK they need that documention. Of course it’s up to the UK to enforce those standards. Hence why non aligned crap gets in. But food tends to be closer watched.

Unfortunately the reason it won’t happen. Is it will be seen as also an entrance tax.

Discouraging wealthy investors from settling in the UK.

And given most wealthy living in the UK manage to avoid taxes. Anything discouraging them from leaving is not really going to achieve much. They will just stay and find/fund other ways to avoid taxation.

If I say “the life support system for the USS Enterprise”,

Unfortunately contact mean that example dose work both ways.

If we say enterprise system for life support. People will also understand.

But voyager system for enterprise could apply either way. To be fitted to enterprise or allow enterprise activity on voyager. Or voyager activity on enterprise. For is just bad language in this context.

Here Microsoft should’ve used a possessive. Voyagers enterprise support system would be more normal.

Or Windows Linux support system.

But marketing and a history of no other OS matters means Mickey$oft insists on it’s own layout. Over language clarity.

States it in the article

Nope. We are required to keep our food standards equal to the EU.

So also on items we sell to ourselves. Not an omission at all. And the very point that brexiters kept arguing. We have always been able to sell to other nations using Thier standards. We are not allowed to accept other standards.

Yep. By following EU rules on the items we sell. With no control of those rules. Exactly as remainers claimed.

Thanks til. After 30+ years using Linux exclusively. That is very useful.

Admittedly GPUs were not a thing when I started. It’s cool to learn new useful things. Thanks.

Yes theoretically.

But then so could you and I. But ATM the odds of us being made a gov minister are about the same. At least for me. You may have won a few MP elections I do not know about.

Def Possible. But given, such positions are political in a coalition. Again, the lack of power of vote risking party makes it unlikely.

I’d guess it’s more likely under a majority, where he gains a reputation for a specific subject. Under FPTP, coalitions tend to need to appeal to the multi MP parties to survive.

As an independent under FPTP.

Nope that can never happen. He can only ever win one seat.

Not to mention the telegraph claimed source. A private security company. Conveniently claiming they have no documentation because their customers (the supermarkets) do not want negative publicity.

Can only guess.

But it seems logical that the rules would define contamination, as including any ingredients not listed on the packaging.

That said. Issuing an "Urgent ‘do not eat’ warning ". Seems like an over reaction. Rather than warning folks of the error. Returns will be refunded and listing the real ingredients.

Then you are an arsehole.

She was attacked in a professional environment. And treated in a bullying way. By someone acting like a bully.

A hostile work environment was created. You are clearly the type of person who should be fired.

You responded to a law that was not in anyway a part of this case.

You just used the case to express an unrelated opinion. One I happen to agree with. But not this case.

You also used the opertunity to harness and bully someone. With no idea who she is or how she behaves.