Agreement reached to ‘slash red tape’ on food products, in exchange for extended EU access to fishing waters

The deal – which will grant EU fishers access to British waters for an additional 12 years – will remove checks on a significant number of food products as well as a deeper defence partnership and agreements on carbon taxes.

The UK said the deal would make “food cheaper, slash red tape, open up access to the EU market”. But the trade-off for the deal was fishing access and rights for an additional 12 years – more than the UK had offered – which is likely to lead to cries of betrayal from the industry.

The two sides will also begin talks for a “youth experience scheme”, first reported in the Guardian, which could allow young people to work and travel freely in Europe again and mirror existing schemes the UK has with countries such as Australia and New Zealand.

The government said it would put £360m of modernisation support back into coastal communities as part of the deal, a tacit acknowledgment of the concession.

  • rah@feddit.ukOPEnglish
    1·
    2 days ago

    You have to be pretty fucking stupid to keep insisting that dose not relate to domestic sales.

    I haven’t insisted that.

    What the fuck else do you think standards aligned actually means.

    I’m not making any claim about what it means, you are. It’s on you to show that what you’re saying is true.

    • HumanPenguin@feddit.ukEnglish
      11·
      2 days ago

      Yes I am. Based on a whole history of treaty talks since Brexit where the whole topic was based on trading standards and how alignment was why we could not join the customs union.

      Expecting a fucking news article to teach you the topics you seem to have missed. Is expecting ELI5

      And you you did suggest a meaning, when you openly interpreted the article as a good benefit of Brexit. And stated that it said nothing about domestic food standards.

      You were specifically claiming we had some form of double standard that applies to food we export and food we don’t.

      Nothing in the article claims that. And I can assure you we as a nation do not. So you invested that meaning to make your rather pathetic point about the deal matching some Brexit benefit.

      I made a very clear pretty close to ELI5 maybe 10. Of why I and the other poster was able to interpret the “aligned to EU standards” as relating to domestic sales. Based entirely on facts differing news have covered in detail while May and Bojo were negotiating.

      Your failure to understand such simple points. Is likely why you voted Brexit.

      • rah@feddit.ukOPEnglish
        1·
        2 days ago

        And you you did suggest a meaning, when you openly interpreted the article as a good benefit of Brexit.

        I initially interpreted the article differently to you but I didn’t make any explicit suggestion of what “dynamic alignment on EU food standards” means. You did and continue to.

        So you invested that meaning to make your rather pathetic point about the deal matching some Brexit benefit.

        I don’t even understand what you’re claiming here. I haven’t made any point about the deal “matching” some brexit benefit, whatever that means.

        I made a very clear pretty close to ELI5 maybe 10.

        I’m not asking for you to explain anything. I’m expecting you to back up what you’re saying with references to information elsewhere. This is how rigorous debate and communication works. This is basic stuff. If you can’t back up what you’re saying then don’t bother saying anything, you’re just making noise.

        Unless you have some source which clearly states that “dynamic alignment on EU food standards” relates to domestic sales then to me, what you’re saying is just an unverified guess. An opinion. Of no value. Noise.