Over-regulation started in the Middle Ages when council jobsworths tested the quality of beer by donning a pair of lederhosen and seeing if they would stick to a wooden bench. As for banning chalk in bread, red lead in Gloucester cheese and recycling tea leaves with sheep manure, that was Victorian 'elf 'n safety gone mad.

In my view, that is one of the crucial issues. Our public officials need to re-learn the art of regulation.

Is it not time for the British government to place and rank the priorities of the British people above those of the EU which of 40 years, they have deemed did transcend Briton's rights and those of the national interest. And is the British government actually practicing apartheid against it's own people?

Oh indeed they are.


On pesticides:

Turn the tables, ban them [neonicotinoids] and let it be known that all such chemically similar pesticides will be so banned. Furthermore that it is incumbent upon the product manufactures to be able to prove via empirical field and laboratory testing that they are harmless to pollinators.

On the UDI thing,

It's half a dozen versus 50% x twelve.

You may think contemptuously of this Richard but the objective imho is not insurmountable - if there is a will.

I think the middle road is the way - and we seemed to manage OK after the war - post war - there weren't many rools and regs then. If we put up barriers and think the job is too great - then we'll never commence what is necessary - people adapt quickly - that's how we have survived by thinking on our feet. OK, there will be some almighty cock-ups but if we are our own masters once more - then destiny is at least in our own hands - and responsibility which has become a dying art [all we need to do is to craft a big navy and armed forces].

What is needed is a simplification of all the complexity of so many statutes and bureaucratic red tape.

I personally would very much like to see the BSI standard reintroduced - it was infinitely superior to the CE mark - which to be perfectly frank legitimises mostly worthless trash - see French Breast implants or just inspect the worse than bog standard electrical sockets and fittings and there are so many others.

Umm.... I think the proposal is NOT to tear up all existing regulations. That would be a stupid thing to do even if the EU were nothing to do with the process.

The problem, as you have summarised in your piece, is that when we find a regulation not fitting our requirements very well, we are unable to unilaterally alter it because it proceeds from 'Europe'. And the answer would seem to be that, as and when we leave Europe, we will leave it retaining all the EU regulations. Then, gradually, as we find a regulation not fitting our requirements, we will consider changing it.

This consideration will probably include the possible effect of trade with EU partners if the regulation is trade-critical. But the point is that it will be up to US to decide whether to take a trade hit, negotiate some middle way, or stick with the regulation. As far as I know, no one is really proposing that we unilaterally abrogate ALL EU regulations, whether we agree with them or not. Though that might be a debating call occasionally to whip up an audience, such a course would obviously cause massive disruption and confusion, and could never be in our best interests...

" is that when we find a regulation not fitting our requirements very well" The burning question would be who is "our" A lot of legislation that is not in our interest would be perceived by the government as in "it's interest. Care of our monumental democratic deficit the regulation would be retained.

Big business er global conglomerates, they love the EU and it if it were possible in an impossible world - even more than the EU, corporates love lots of regulations.

Why? Because [as we all know well on this blog] - it prevents, stops, stymies just about all the competition. Ah yes that word......Competition - now let me see - wasn't that what all the fuss was about in the first place [Common Market = free trade 'n' all that stuff - what a joke and a half that is]??

Should I.......... have said cartel instead?

Competition.......... from the blokes trying to get a look in - ie the little boys - the people, who in our [the British] economy our Chancellor of the Exchequer depends upon - you see - they actually pay [some] taxes, unlike the corporate great whites.

BSI had already been infiltrated before CE became the standard.

I can't remember the actual number, just that it was in the 9xxx range. It was virtually a standard that said...

"I will tell you what I'm going to give you".

A roll your own BSI standard.

O/T as well, mea culpa - but some trouble in your neck of the woods in Wibsey tonight Dr. N?

A very sad case indeed, one sort of local yobbery which that, despite police protestations to the contrary we've heard many examples of just recently. Though I must be careful here not to intrude on some families very private and terrible grief, this is occurring all over the country, not only are the elderly neglected and abused in state institutions they are also preyed upon in their 'castles'.

God in heaven, truly do I despair,

R.I.P. Mrs Moulson.

Edited by user 29 November 2012 00:12:52(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

It is the same over here Richard, occasionally you may see in the town centre a PCSO during the day time - wrong time, wrong area - you never see a copper at night.

New York put coppers back on the streets - it worked but they had to recruit thousands of extra officers of course and pursue a zero tolerance policy................no chance in Britain because protecting the public from street crime, petty burglary and low level intimidation: is not the ACPO and police service remit.