What's so bad about EU regulation anyway?

[rover 623gsi]

OpulentBob said:

There are many major highway schemes that have an additional year on programme for environmental monitoring and mitigation, which includes for several months of manual searches for GCN's. As said, they are not rare here at all, so most schemes have to have the monitoring, trapping, relocation etc. If we didn't have to do this, while it wouldn't save a huge amount of money, it would accelerate construction programmes noticeably.

(former GCN licence holder, yes really)

You may be right - but as highlighte earlier in the thread, these are issues covered by UK Legislation so leaving the EU won't make any difference

[wst]

Dr Jekyll said:

Ah yes the inverted jingoist argument that the EU can obviously spend UK money in the UK much more wisely than the UK can.

...well, it does spend UK money more wisely than the UK can. If any of our successive Governments would show an interest in spending our money better than the EU does I'm sure they'd get a lot more support.

[Dr Jekyll]

Crafty_ said:

I presume that if British companies still wish to trade in the EU will have to comply with EU regulations/laws/directives ? Not only for their products/services but their business processes as well, for example accounting, supplier validation, security checks and all that (rather dull) stuff ?

So good or bad, businesses for the most part will still have to comply with whatever the Eu decides, but given we won't have any MEPs we get no influence whatsoever on future legislation ?

Presumably we'll need more civil servants to assess EU laws/regulations and help businesses understand them as well as to investigate if the UK should implement the same laws or laws that (roughly) achieve the same thing ? I don't expect we would take all of them (same as now).

This could turn in to a headache - if we deviate from Europe companies who operate in both jurisdictions would have two sets of laws/regulations to comply with - isn't that more red tape and cost ?

So in this respect the notion of "taking our country back" confuses me, to some degree or other we'll still be at the mercy of Brussels and bureaucrats, its just more of them will be UK based ?

I saw a comment or two about making it easier/cheaper to deal with the rest of the world if (when?) we are on our own - can anyone expand on how the EU currently makes it difficult/expensive ? I'm genuinely interested.

You do realise that countries all over the world manage to sell into the EU? Of course we will have to meet EU rules for stuff we sell to the EU, just as we have to meet Peruvian regulations for stuff we sell to Peru. What's the issue?

[Dr Jekyll]

wst said:

Dr Jekyll said:

Ah yes the inverted jingoist argument that the EU can obviously spend UK money in the UK much more wisely than the UK can.

...well, it does spend UK money more wisely than the UK can. If any of our successive Governments would show an interest in spending our money better than the EU does I'm sure they'd get a lot more support.

If you don't like the way the UK government spends money you can always vote them out. Or are you worried that the UK electorate might not share your superior insight so you want the EU to override them?

[mike9009]

don4l said:

I run a small business. However I also import and export around the world.

How much import duty do you think that I pay on fibre optic equipment that I import from China?


How much import duty do you think that I pay on fibre optic equipment that I import from the USA?


How much import duty do you think that I pay on fibre optic equipment that I import from the France?

The answer, in all cases is 0%.

Goods take one day to get here from France or the USA. They take three days from China (because the plane stops in Singapore).

We also import from Poland. Goods take three days from Poland because they travel by lorry.

Absolutely none of this will change for me if we exit the EU

Hi Don

Can I pick up on two points you made in your post.

1. Are you sure the goods you purchase from the US and China will not increase in cost. 12 months ago £1 = $1.56, now £1 = $1.33 (ish). (I assume you are trading in GBP.)

don4l said:

Tell me, how much does your compliance with EU directives cost you? You don't have a clue. I would suggest that you do not have any "facts" at all. Many times, in this and other related threads, I have invited people to prove me wrong. Once again, I extend that invitation

2. I understand like many businesses you are crippled by EU red tape? Can you quantify this against each regulation you comply with? (obviously approx. costs would be fine - but more interested in what red tape you struggle with?)

Thanks

Mike

[Dr Jekyll]

CrutyRammers said:

And technical standards, of course, do not tend to originate from the EU itself, but from higher up bodies where the EU has but one seat, representing all of its members.

Does that mean the UK might get a seat once we've left the EU?

[s2art]

Dr Jekyll said:

CrutyRammers said:

And technical standards, of course, do not tend to originate from the EU itself, but from higher up bodies where the EU has but one seat, representing all of its members.

Does that mean the UK might get a seat once we've left the EU?

Yes.

[ZDW]

Puggit said:

footnote said:

But staying on topic I really would like to know what and why are the regulations (other than immigration) that Leavers object to?

I'm not taking the piss - I really can't think of anything imposed on me from the EU that genuinely affects my life for the worse that I can get hacked off at the EU about.

Speak to small business owners

In the food businesses our council seem to make up new rules once the previous rules and standards are complied with. This seemingly results in a viscous circle of ever more onerous regs to comply with. I'd swear once there's legislation passed the legislators find themselves with nothing to do but come up with new rules for us to follow. EU seems almost reasonable in that case.

I mean how is the way we handle and prepare chicken more dangerous and need more rules than in France? Our even other councils for that matter?

[marshalla]

Dr Jekyll said:

CrutyRammers said:

And technical standards, of course, do not tend to originate from the EU itself, but from higher up bodies where the EU has but one seat, representing all of its members.

Does that mean the UK might get a seat once we've left the EU?

Which bodies are these?

[V8RX7]

jjlynn27 said:

V8RX7 said:

VOC in paint - so now white paint goes yellow in days

Health and safety that is ridiculously OTT - a step over 12" needs a handrail FFS ! We aren't supposed to use ladders etc It may not affect you but it's cost those of us in construction a lot of time, money and inconvenience for bugger all benefit.

Various weedkillers are banned or restricted - NOT because they were dangerous but because the costs to prove they meet the rules are too high.

As for VOC in Paint, we have repainted all doors in our house last year with white paint from Screwfix, as well as 2 external doors, and a double garage door. Still the same white colour as they were on day one. Is it possible that they are selling dodgy paint?

As for weekillers, they are so many on the market if some can't get approval for whatever reason, that says to me that they are not competitive enough?

(no comment/idea) on step part.

Sorry I should have mentioned it's specifically oil based gloss paint.

No they were specialised - the public get screwed over with branded versions of glyphosate - larger land owners need better versions specifically for woody plants or bracken etc

[Dr Jekyll]

EnglishTony said:

Dr Jekyll said:

One problem is that the EU believes in legislation for it's own sake rather than to solve a problem. Look at aviation for examples.
A UK operation offering passenger flights in DC3s had to stop because the EU demanded a facility for automatically supplying oxygen to passengers should the pressurisation fail. An impossible requirement since the DC3 has no pressurisation
.

Perhaps you would care to comment on the availability of flights on Lufthansa's definitely not pressurised Ju 52?

https://www.dlbs.de/en/Ju-52-Gift-Vouchers/Ju-52-g...

Blame the EU? Or is the problem closer to home, ie at the CAA?

Lufthansa lobbied the German authorities for a specific exemption, UK operators might have been able to do the same thing, but why should they have to?

[dandarez]

wst said:

Esseesse said:

I don't think anyones care who made the regs. You may think they're for your own good and be happy to be treated like a child. Wherever possible I would rather be free to make a judgement on whether something is too dangerous/risky.

What's wrong with regulations? I like knowing that I can plug electrical things in without them catching fire, because they conform to an armload of regulations that ensure this.

Regulations ensure safety?
That statement (bold) holds no water - just as well, or you'd be fried!

With just tumble driers alone (ignoring other appliances) 6000 fires were caused in the last 6 years.

3 people DIED! 300 injured ...tumble driers only!

edit
Oh, and to illustrate a point better, some piccies for you.

EU regulations ensure you can switch something on safely ...oh dear.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=beko+catches+fir...

Edited by dandarez on Friday 1st July 20:13

[wst]

dandarez said:

wst said:

Esseesse said:

I don't think anyones care who made the regs. You may think they're for your own good and be happy to be treated like a child. Wherever possible I would rather be free to make a judgement on whether something is too dangerous/risky.

What's wrong with regulations? I like knowing that I can plug electrical things in without them catching fire, because they conform to an armload of regulations that ensure this.

Regulations ensure safety?
That statement (bold) holds no water - just as well, or you'd be fried!

With just tumble driers alone (ignoring other appliances) 6000 fires were caused in the last 6 years.

3 people DIED! 300 injured ...tumble driers only!

Right you are! Regulations are half of it - companies will make decisions based on the risk of their product causing them expense . There was clearly a mistake made in their calculations. This would have happened in the absence of regulation as well. The regulation is quite good though for giving you a reasonable expectation that if it plugs into your wall socket, it is designed to plug into your wall socket.

[mike9009]

jjlynn27 said:

V8RX7 said:

VOC in paint - so now white paint goes yellow in days

Health and safety that is ridiculously OTT - a step over 12" needs a handrail FFS ! We aren't supposed to use ladders etc It may not affect you but it's cost those of us in construction a lot of time, money and inconvenience for bugger all benefit.

Various weedkillers are banned or restricted - NOT because they were dangerous but because the costs to prove they meet the rules are too high.

As for VOC in Paint, we have repainted all doors in our house last year with white paint from Screwfix, as well as 2 external doors, and a double garage door. Still the same white colour as they were on day one. Is it possible that they are selling dodgy paint?

As for weekillers, they are so many on the market if some can't get approval for whatever reason, that says to me that they are not competitive enough?

(no comment/idea) on step part.

VOC regulations are not only regulated in the EU. Regulation also exists in the USA (plus others no doubt), but I know personally as I had to move investment casting shells from alcohol based system to water based in the UK, US and Mexico due to regulation.

Working at height regulations were introduced in the UK in 2004. The number of fatalities has reduced from 38 (2003) to 19 (2014) in the construction industry alone. The hysteria surrounding anything above floor level is exaggerated. As long as the risk is deemed as 'low', handrails, trsining etc. are not necessary.

Mike

[dandarez]

wst said:

dandarez said:

wst said:

Esseesse said:

I don't think anyones care who made the regs. You may think they're for your own good and be happy to be treated like a child. Wherever possible I would rather be free to make a judgement on whether something is too dangerous/risky.

What's wrong with regulations? I like knowing that I can plug electrical things in without them catching fire, because they conform to an armload of regulations that ensure this.

Regulations ensure safety?
That statement (bold) holds no water - just as well, or you'd be fried!

With just tumble driers alone (ignoring other appliances) 6000 fires were caused in the last 6 years.

3 people DIED! 300 injured ...tumble driers only!

Right you are! Regulations are half of it - companies will make decisions based on the risk of their product causing them expense . There was clearly a mistake made in their calculations. This would have happened in the absence of regulation as well. The regulation is quite good though for giving you a reasonable expectation that if it plugs into your wall socket, it is designed to plug into your wall socket.

Plugs made in China will plug into my wall socket. You will find many of them are indeed from China (no one, no country can compete with them, that's why), but just because they will have a EC mark (now CE mark) from EU regulations does not ensure safety. Nothing does.
I realise all what you followed with. But initially you 'said':
'I like knowing that I can plug electrical things in without them catching fire, because they conform to an armload of regulations that ensure this.'

Clearly they don't 'ensure' anything -that is bullst.

[Troubleatmill]

I think it was William Rees Mogg that said something along the lines of...

The people of our country have sovereignty. Not Parliament. The people.
Every 4-5 years - we elect politicians represent us - and those politicians have that sovereignty for a period of 4-5 years. Then an election must happen.

At that point - we the people have the sovereignty again - and we can review how they did - and if we don't like it - we kick them out - and put someone else in for another 4-5 years.

What we do next expect those elected to do - is give that sovereignty permanently away to those in a foreign land that can over-ride our own courts, our own parliaments etc

[mike9009]

Troubleatmill said:

I think it was William Rees Mogg that said something along the lines of...

The people of our country have sovereignty. Not Parliament. The people.
Every 4-5 years - we elect politicians represent us - and those politicians have that sovereignty for a period of 4-5 years. Then an election must happen.

At that point - we the people have the sovereignty again - and we can review how they did - and if we don't like it - we kick them out - and put someone else in for another 4-5 years.

What we do next expect those elected to do - is give that sovereignty permanently away to those in a foreign land that can over-ride our own courts, our own parliaments etc

The question was about EU regulation not sovereignty.

[jjlynn27]

V8RX7 said:

Sorry I should have mentioned it's specifically oil based gloss paint.

No they were specialised - the public get screwed over with branded versions of glyphosate - larger land owners need better versions specifically for woody plants or bracken etc

Hmm, we were using glossy paint. Still glossy, still white not sure if oil (water?) based.
Out of curiosity I run few searches and seems that every country (USA, Can) have their own versions where you can actually see more and more prescriptive versions, as I would expect anyway.

[jjlynn27]

otolith said:

Some interesting thoughts on why people who were receiving funding from the EU did not necessarily love the EU for it.

http://www.perc.org.uk/project_posts/thoughts-on-t...

Thanks for posting that. Very well reasoned even if I don't agree with parts of it. Last paragraph is spot on though.

[Dr Jekyll]

jjlynn27 said:

otolith said:

Some interesting thoughts on why people who were receiving funding from the EU did not necessarily love the EU for it.

http://www.perc.org.uk/project_posts/thoughts-on-t...

Thanks for posting that. Very well reasoned even if I don't agree with parts of it. Last paragraph is spot on though.

Did seem to start from the assumption that wanting to leave the EU was some kind of personality disorder in need of diagnosis.