House of Lords votes to ban lower standard food imports

steveR

Member
Mixed Farmer
Should hopefully put serious pressure on the Govt, especially that dreadful woman, Truss. :unsure:

One, proposed by Lord Granchester, sought a “requirement for agricultural and food imports to meet domestic standards” and was supported by 307 members, compared with 212 who opposed it.

Disappointing that 212 Members, felt that lower standards were acceptable!
 

C.J

Member
Location
South Devon
Just a smokescreen to protect domestic production. (cannot blame you guys for that)
Always' singling out the same two products, saying they are the "tip of the iceberg" trying to con consumers into thinking its' dangerous to your health if eaten.
Be aware though that trade is a two way street and feel sure that it will be noted in Washington.

Do you have any laws,tariffs or bans to prevent south american meat undercutting the price of U.S meat ?

Or Canadian corn undercutting U.S corn ?
 

britt

Member
BASE UK Member
Just a smokescreen to protect domestic production. (cannot blame you guys for that)
Always' singling out the same two products, saying they are the "tip of the iceberg" trying to con consumers into thinking its' dangerous to your health if eaten.
Be aware though that trade is a two way street and feel sure that it will be noted in Washington.
We are net importer of food, cheep imports will do us far more harm than a lack of niche high end exports (which are more able to stand a bit of tariff).
 
Just a smokescreen to protect domestic production. (cannot blame you guys for that)
Always' singling out the same two products, saying they are the "tip of the iceberg" trying to con consumers into thinking its' dangerous to your health if eaten.
Be aware though that trade is a two way street and feel sure that it will be noted in Washington.

Ah, so you are in favour of cheap Chinese steel and aluminium imports into the USA?

European cars?
 

steveR

Member
Mixed Farmer
Just a smokescreen to protect domestic production. (cannot blame you guys for that)
Always' singling out the same two products, saying they are the "tip of the iceberg" trying to con consumers into thinking its' dangerous to your health if eaten.
Be aware though that trade is a two way street and feel sure that it will be noted in Washington.

Well personally, I would also add any GM Maize to those two products. But there you go....

The pertinent proposal was “a requirement for agricultural and food imports to meet domestic standards”

It's a pity a few of the Politicos here in the Tory party didn't take on board that viewpoint of Washington, well before rushing headlong into a TA with the USA. But water under the Bridge I fear.
 

GeorgeK

Member
Location
Leicestershire
If lower standard imports were banned it would hit huge quantities of imports we already rely on to keep food prices cheap, can't see that happening unfortunately.
The government will duly respond in the traditional opaque fashion with a statement that doesn't mean anything, something along the lines of:
"Let me be ABSOLOUTELY CLEAR, this government is FULLY COMMITTED to protecting our WORLD LEADING standards of FOOD PRODUCTION and ANIMAL WELFARE"
(Note that although this sounds impressive they are probably only referring to maintaining domestic production standards, not those of imports)
 

steveR

Member
Mixed Farmer
We are talking about falshoods concerning US agricultural products.
Tariffs on steel...whatever I cannot comment but this "lower standards" on U.S. food is just an outright lie.

Not really Roger. The crux of the matter, is that US agriculture is carrying out production practices which are illegal here. I can still recall the amazed response on a big MT ranch when I said that the "pellet in the ear" of young cattle, would put me in Prison in the UK!

Whether it is a "lower standard" is a matter, I believe, of semantics.
 
Last edited:

Highland Mule

Member
Livestock Farmer
this "lower standards" on U.S. food is just an outright lie

No, it's not. Chicken is chlorine washed because it needs to be - the production and processing standards with respect to hygiene are lower in the US and if it wasn't washed then the consumer would have far greater risk of food poisoning. As it is, the prevalence of food poisoning is still higher out there than here.
 
Does that mean that the House of Commons will have to amend the agricultural bill now or not?
To answer your question @jackrussell101 - Not necessarily - the House of Commons will consider the amendments (although there is still one more stage to go through in the House of Lords first), then either accept, reject or modify amendments. The bill then goes back and forth between the two houses (genuinely known as ping ponging) until the final text is agreed and can be granted royal assent. So although the amendment is significant, doesn't necessarily mean it will make it into the final text of the bill.
 

Make Tax Digital Software Poll

  • Quickbooks

    Votes: 33 16.8%
  • Sage

    Votes: 20 10.2%
  • Xero

    Votes: 89 45.4%
  • Other

    Votes: 54 27.6%

Man fined £300 for bonfire-related waste offences

  • 113
  • 0
Written by William Kellett from Agriland

court-640x360.jpg
A man has pleaded guilty at Newtownards Magistrates’ Court to waste offences relating to a bonfire next to the electrical sub-station on the Circular Road in Newtownards, Co. Down.

Gareth Gill (51) of Abbot’s Walk, Newtownards pleaded guilty to two charges under the Waste and Contaminated Land (Northern Ireland) Order 1997, for which he was fined £150 each and ordered to pay a £15 offender’s levy

On June 25, 2018, PSNI officers went to Gill’s yard, where they found a large amount of waste consisting of scrap wood, pallets, carpet and underlay.

Discussion with Northern Ireland Environment Agency (NIEA) officers confirmed the site...
Top