“This extension will only provide temporary relief. We need to secure an EU-UK veterinary arrangement as a long term solution. The only reason the Government would refuse to do this, is if their real goal is to reduce our food and animal welfare standards in order to secure deals with countries like the USA.
“The Government needs to start acting like a global leader, respecting international law, honouring the commitments we make, and rebuilding trust with our closest neighbours and allies.”
ENDS
NOTES TO EDITORS
About Best for Britain: Best for Britain is a pro-internationalist campaign group that strives for the best social, economic, environmental, and democratic outcomes for the British people. We believe this requires re-engagement with Europe, open, internationalist policies, and cooperation with business, all parties in parliament, and like-minded groups.
Note that a trade deal with the US is defined as not meeting open, internationalist, policies.
Remainiacs.
Stopped reading after the “Boo Hoo, it’s not fair..”
the best social, economic, environmental, and democratic outcomes
Once again it’s one of those “what’s not to like?” campaigns. The problem is that their order of prioity isn’t stated so that if, say, the environment trumps democratic consent, then tough luck peasants: no more cars or central heating for you.
Tim
Any reason why the ‘Timmy Around the web’ links are so dated?
The only reason the Government would refuse to do this, is if their real goal is to reduce our food and animal welfare standards in order to secure deals with countries like the USA.
Nothing says “I’m a well-educated professional” like a random comma.
“The only reason the Government would refuse to do this, is if their real goal is to reduce our food and animal welfare standards in order to secure deals with countries like the USA.”
Damn, that would bring us down to first world standards… how terrible?
Technically, second not first given that the USA is part of the New World.</pendant>
Second was socialist bloc, not New World.
Make that “communist”.. Plenty of western-european states that could be classed as at least partially “socialist” that are top of the “first world”.
Summat like the sum being greater than each part.
The bloody awful Warsaw Pact-ettos, as Spike might have said.
To me, pro-internationalist policies means you do what the wogs want, not what you want.
Since I have this I-am-God-the-sun-shines-out-of-my-arse complex, that’s definitely not the way I’d want to do things.
Given the horse meat scandal a few years back I’m not sure how accepting EU rather than US standards is seen as a step back.
And where do they stand on compromising standards for cultural/religious reasons?
“acting like a global leader”: ah yes, an appeal to the Führerprinzip.
Slightly OT but happy 5th anniversary of the EU referendum everyone!
@BniC that only counts if you disapprove** of horse as a substitute for pork…
Which in eastern europe and fairly.. anywhere outside the UK a valid option.
*Takes an extra-affrontive bite out of his HORSE-sausage sandwich, My current base/region is actually rather well-known for it*
** The real offensive bit is that they lied about the real constituents. The fact that it was horse actually *increased* the demand in clogland. We know the ponies are at least better treated than the most spoiled pig…. We knowz the meat is better..
They don’t *define* the trade deal as not meeting internationalist policies, they merely oppose it. It’s entirely possible that scrapping one deal with the EU in order to do a different deal with the USA is not internationalist. It seems that the EU and USA are incompatible with regard to some deals, so internationalism doesn’t really offer grounds for picking one over the other – just that one would be better than neither. If anything, it might prefer the EU to the USA as the USA is one nation while the EU consists of separate nations with potential to increase, leading to any deal automatically expanding.