AIBU to think Brexit voters did not foresee the gov shafting UK farmers

[SancerreSunsets]

During the build up to the 2016 referendum I saw several massive boards advertising Leave in local farming fields ... as a pro-European, it was the sight of these boards that made me worry about the potential outcome of the vote and my fears became reality.
Now it's possible that Johnson's gov will agree a trade deal with Australia that will flood our market with cheap Australian produce (that is not subjected to the same standards as in EU countries). It's even being suggested that this will make farming in the UK unviable and the gov will have to pay farmers off! This seems mental! Brexit voters I know are keen to buy British produce. Will they and the Brexit voting farmers now being to complain about the Brexit they're being given? They might be listened to more than Remain voters ... we tried for years are generally ignored.

Keep animals on the land to stop it becoming an "overgrown mess"

Yes but who’s going to do this? The farmers are retiring, remember?

The EU are negotiating a free trade deal with Australia as well - including agricultural products;

Report of the 10th round of negotiations for a trade agreement between the European Union and Australia 9–19 March 2021

trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=1865

LemonRoses
The hard of thinking who buy the Mail or Express cannot understand that they were being manipulated by the likes of Rees-Mogg who wanted to avoid tax payments being introduced by the EU.

Brexit: Claims about EU tax rules fact-checked, 2019;

There have been posts on Twitter for over a year claiming that Brexiteers' enthusiasm for a swift departure from the European Union (EU) is because of new tax rules that are about to come into force.

But the rules are, in fact, all already part of UK law. A small number of them will not come into effect until 1 January, but that would have happened anyway whether or not the UK was a member of the EU.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/50168357

The EU are negotiating a free trade deal with Australia as well - including agricultural products

This is true - and a market of 450 million people in 27 countries is able to insist that meat and other agricultural products sold in the EU is produced to standards that are approved by the EU. The EU is already Australia's second largest market, and the EU-Australia trade is worth $62 billion, so a FTA benefits both parties. Australia already exports meat to the EU - meat that is reared to EU-approved standards and is independently checked before it can be exported.

Truss is desperate to have a deal signed soon, and Australia is understandably keen to increase the market for its produce as there are difficulties selling to the Chinese market. The danger is that Truss and Johnson dive into a deal, any deal, just to be able to say that they accomplished something - only for the consequences to become clear later. [See also the Withdrawal Agreement and the Brexit Deal]

They also operate cow mega farms with up to 5000 head of cattle.
Avg herd size in the UK is 140.
That's more to do with the population density. It has nothing to do with the welfare of the cattle.

Brexit voters understood trade deals would be done, yes. The ability to negotiate our own trade deals was one of the selling points. The working classes aren't thick.

HTH.

I'm in Australia and remember very soon after Brexit, newspaper accounts of deals being planned, at least by the Australians. They certainly had their eye on the money from day one. Before even.

I remember my northern childhood: tins of Ardmona peaches, Bartlett pears, and apricots. Also Anchor butter and New Zealand stamped lamb. Until the UK went into the Common Market.

Hang on..........

That 'we haven't imported any chlorinated chicken yet' is just about the biggest boast that the brexiters can make says it all about their silly project.

No, that would be the magnificence of our independent vaccine rollout.

HTH

Not really, buying hormone filled meat from the other side of the world, freezing it for several weeks on a boat whilst at the same time making U.K. based farmers redundant seems like a pretty bad idea to me

@namechange34

I'm Aussie in the UK. The first time I took my European DH around an Aus supermarket he was WTF at the meat. The chicken breasts are almost double the size of those you find in Sainsburys

because they are pumped full of water and chemicals?

@echt

I'm in Australia and remember very soon after Brexit, newspaper accounts of deals being planned, at least by the Australians. They certainly had their eye on the money from day one. Before even.

I remember my northern childhood: tins of Ardmona peaches, Bartlett pears, and apricots. Also Anchor butter and New Zealand stamped lamb. Until the UK went into the Common Market.

Hang on..........

Yes it completed screwed them for years; and they have just about forgotten about it. They want tariff free access, and why not? Their standards are equivalent to ours, and despite all the huffing about beef etc I have not seen one bit of evidence here about how hormone beef is worse for human health. You may not like the idea, but actually, what is the difference in eating it?

Britain cannot tell Australia how to farm, nor New Zealand.

I don't know that anyone really had much idea what to expect, in terms of specifics.

I have farmer relatives who voted for Brexit. It wasn't really because of any specific regulations. They were both old enough to have voted back in the day to become EU members. They simply didn't think that what the EU is now was the same thing they voted for, and they didn't like what it had become.

Brexit voters understood trade deals would be done, yes. The ability to negotiate our own trade deals was one of the selling points

The selling point was that new trade deals would be better than existing ones - based on the false assumption that a country of 60 million consumers would be able to negotiate better deals than could be achieved by a market of 450 million consumers.

Truss has yet to negotiate any deals that are better than the previous deals that the UK had. The UK-EU deal is in no way better because it imposes £20 billion of customs costs on the UK taxpayers, exporters and importers. The government's own experts have assessed the UK-Australia deal as being worth a maximum of £500 million to GDP - a tiny sum in international business terms - and the UK could easily turn out to be worse off under the deal. This is before the damaging impact on rural communities is considered.

But maybe deals concluded with Australia, which will expand British markets and with looser regulations which Brexiteers like are okay? The EU is not "the best", though it likes to think so. The rest of the world make deals without much of their requirements, because they think pretty differently in terms of what they think is important for "trade". If you are a Brexit supporter, this is pretty important and a definite bonus.

Their standards are equivalent to ours, and despite all the huffing about beef etc I have not seen one bit of evidence here about how hormone beef is worse for human health

There are reasons why hormone beef is banned in the EU - even if you are not aware of them.

The issues, as stated several times in the thread already, are not just about hormones in beef. There are also growth stimulants, drugs, pesticides, animal welfare, food miles, food security and the impact on the UK farming industry to consider.

But maybe deals concluded with Australia, which will expand British markets and with looser regulations which Brexiteers like are okay?

What can the UK sell to these new markets that it cannot already sell - particularly if the deals are the same, or no better, than the current deals? In what way will British goods suddenly become more competitive if the deals are the same as before? In the meantime, what is being given up in return? Fisheries have already been shafted. Agriculture might be next. Then what - your pay packet; your standard of living; your job?

Actually I am aware - but what I would like to see is a bit of evidence on at least hormone beef because while the EU bans it, I think you know it is not that simple at all. Scientifically, I don't think matters have moved on very much since they lost their case at the WTO.

The other points you mention are certainly important, but I would have thought that the farming lobbying would have been working pretty hard to make sure they did not get shafted the moment Brexit was announced.

Animal welfare is what exactly, someone please say as the average caged chicken in this country in raised in a repellent environment! Many still eat it. Under the EU's excellent food standards, we had horse meat lasagne in British supermarkets. I don't think they are the only standards we can have.

I think in a way this should be separate from Brexit.

The UK can choose to support it's own ag industry and promote a more sustainable industry in terms of food production and standards. In some ways that's more possible now than it was before as part of the EU.

The government may choose not to, and there are some complex reasons for that, some of them contradictory. But those reasons aren't caused by Brexit.

@Havanananana

But maybe deals concluded with Australia, which will expand British markets and with looser regulations which Brexiteers like are okay?

What can the UK sell to these new markets that it cannot already sell - particularly if the deals are the same, or no better, than the current deals? In what way will British goods suddenly become more competitive if the deals are the same as before? In the meantime, what is being given up in return? Fisheries have already been shafted. Agriculture might be next. Then what - your pay packet; your standard of living; your job?

Goods trade is what people can see, but trade is now much more orientated towards technology, services, and data exchange. This is a growth area, along with a few others. I don't think we should be sweating about agricultural imports. Britain is a larger economy - we can say no in the end, and there's no suggestion that Australia is going to dump tonnes of beef on us immediately, tariff free. That seems from all the chat in the press very unlikely to happen.

Additionally cumulated products from other countries - not the same as the EU but good for Britain.

If Brexit voters had actually sat down and seriously researched all of the repercussions of their decision, rather than just thought it would mean fewer brown faces in the country, it wouldn't take long to realise what a shit show it all could become.

@FrangipaniDeLaSqueegeeMop

If Brexit voters had actually sat down and seriously researched all of the repercussions of their decision, rather than just thought it would mean fewer brown faces in the country, it wouldn't take long to realise what a shit show it all could become.

A grand irony since immigration now needs to expand since Brexit due to labour shortages....

@FrangipaniDeLaSqueegeeMop

If Brexit voters had actually sat down and seriously researched all of the repercussions of their decision, rather than just thought it would mean fewer brown faces in the country, it wouldn't take long to realise what a shit show it all could become.

Spot on.

I’d say that the majority were clueless and wanted to be ‘free of Brussels’, be independent and frankly wouldn’t have given a fucking shot anyway. If you think that the majority of pro-Brexit voters properly researched and thought of the impact, I fear you’re wrong. All I got from one was ‘Oh, but we’re subsidising French farmers’ and they had no clue how the EU in turn supports ours. 🤦🏼‍♀️

bylinetimes.com/2021/05/19/the-uk-australia-trade-deal-a-tale-of-brexit-insanity/

Apart from the hormone injected beef issues, we do also need to consider food security. If the gov decide to sack off agriculture in the UK, what happens if we get involved with some diplomatic blunder ... and other countries seek to take action against us ... we will have no food.