Why isn't Canada jumping in and working on trade deals with the UK. Seems to be they would be a prime partner for Canada to expand it's exports with. Or are they and I'm just not seeing any thing about it.

Yet the transition period is over.

https://www.businessinsider.com/boris-johnson-break-eu-uk-food-standards-wto-chlorinated-chicken-2020-2

The UK farming industry fears that Johnson will ditch current EU standards which forbid the sale of products such as chlorinated chicken and hormone-injected beef.

Last month, the National Farmers' Union's Brexit director told Business Insider that the industry fears the government will ultimately trade away current UK food standards in talks with "fearsome" US negotiators.

EU rules block US food like chicken and beef from entering its markets due to rules on hygiene and animal welfare.

Bullshit. The UK is abandoning the bizarre rules on food that the vegan and communist fuckwits from Brussels have tried to impose and now they'll be free to take in less expensive and SAFER imports of food from the US and other countries.

Besides, the US processing plants have mostly changed from chlorinated rinses to simply using chlorine to sanitize processing equipment and sometimes simply using the same chlorinated water as is used for drinking water.

Also...



Simply put, this is a trade issue that the fucking EU uses to both close its market to US meat and to compel Europeans to eat a vegetarian/vegan diet.

This is why I would make a poor ambassador / politician. If I was Canada at the negotiation table I would be working towards 2 separate deals. one with the EU and one with Brittan. With the 1 year transition period taken in effect. Any trade deal with Brittan would be set to start on or after Jan 1 2021.

Play ball with both and get the best deal you can. If it profits Canada why give a shit if someone else gets a "better deal" a win is a win.

That's quite a lot of Remoaner Fear Mongering Bullshit.



Chlorinated chicken, right, that will go very well with the chlorinated salads
that the EU doesn't want anyone to know about.





No they are afraid of having to change.

Farmers have had a good ride on the backs of the EU taxpayer for decades now.
30% of the trillion euro EU budget is farm subsidies.



No, the EU blocks EVERYONE from EU markets, to keep the farm rackets going in the EU.



The America haters like to use lies like chlorinated chicken to bash on the US......
the one place in the world where if you kill people with bad food, you are going
to court. That doesn't happen in the EUSSR.


As far as animal welfare goes, just ask me about the IKEA meatballs that were
actually diseased Romanian horse meat. Proud product of the EU, shipped to every IKEA in Europe.

There is more if you want.

Nobody subsidizes farmers more than the US taxpayer It’s one of the main reasons why US food is so cheap, followed by lax regulations.

So again I ask how is it you supposed nationalist anti-import Brexiters think Britain should allow cheaper US taxpayer-subsidized food to displace British food producers?

Which is completely irrelevant when taking about EU subsidies and punitive tariffs
for anything coming from outside.
Again, if you kill people in the EU with bad food, nothing happens to you.
In fact, the EU can even force you to keep buying bad food. Can't say that for the US.

Also, remember freedom ? Right, you have no idea.

Just because a product is offered in the shops, does not oblige a person to buy it.







The British don't produce their own food. They haven't since about the 1950's,
using American tractors, Canadian wheat seeds, and Communist hold over laws forcing
land under the plow.
Then they were... close.




But I see you are fundamentally opposed to cheaper food prices for poor people.

Good for you, you have become a real leftist today.

It's not just chlorinated chicken: five foods a US trade deal could bring to the UK

Nick DeardenMon 2 Mar 2020 11.59 GMT
In place of stringent EU food regulations, the US is demanding a ‘science-based’ approach with disturbing consequences

Pig farming in Illinois, US
Nothing symbolises British fears of a standard-slashing US trade deal better than chlorinated chickens: those zombie birds, barely able to move, cluck or feed, stuffed with chemicals that force them to grow to unbelievable sizes, sitting in their own waste, covered in sores rather than feathers. At the end of their miserable life of confinement, they are washed in chlorine or a similar chemical to get rid of the bacteria that infect them.

In fact, the wash is believed to hide rather than eliminate some bacteria, potentially driving much higher rates of food poisoning in the US, not to mention the appallingly treated workers in the industry who suffer “rashes, burns, destruction of the eye tissue, difficulty breathing, and inflammation of the respiratory system” as a result of exposure.

But chicken is only the tip of the iceberg. Despite government claims, here are five other unpleasant foods that could make their way to our menus as part of a UK-US trade deal.

Antibiotic meat

Much US meat is produced on an industrial scale, with conditions as bad as those in the chicken sheds. In particular, hormones, steroids and antibiotics are regularly used to make animals bigger and faster, and to prevent them getting ill in the unnaturally close conditions in which they are kept. Many cows and pigs never see sunlight, walk freely or eat grass. Many of the chemicals used are bad for us too – antibiotic overuse is threatening to make these vital drugs useless, and to bring down a pillar of modern medicine. Another chemical, ractopamine, is regularly fed to industrially farmed pigs in the US, despite making the animals collapse, turn aggressive, suffer liver and kidney dysfunction, and even die. But it probably affects humans too, which is why not just the EU but also Russia and China have banned this dangerous chemical, as well as US pork that contains it.

GM foods

The majority of US processed foods contain genetically modified ingredients, unlike British food. The US is demanding a “science-based” approach to food. This sounds good, but in trade deals “science-based” is a shorthand for more genetically modified food and more intensive chemical use. It contrasts with the EU’s precautionary principle, which takes a cautious approach to health risks and bans foods where there’s a credible risk to health. In the US, the balance of proof works the other way, and there is a high barrier that has to be passed before “harm” translates into regulation. Lead paint, banned in most of Europe before the second world war, was not prohibited in the US until 1978. Boris Johnson and his lead negotiator to the EU have talked about the need for the UK’s approach to food standards to be “governed by science”. GM is coming this way.

More pus, more pesticides

Dairy cows at a farm in New York
Dairy cows at a farm in New York. Photograph: Angela Weiss/AFP via Getty Images
US rules allow milk to have nearly double the level of somatic cells – white blood cells that fight bacterial infection – that the UK allows. In practice, this means more pus in our milk, and more infections going untreated in cows. Much US milk would be deemed unfit for human consumption in Britain. Vegans don’t escape unscathed, because the US allows far more pesticide residue on fruit and vegetables, and allows 72 chemicals banned in the EU, including some responsible for serious harm. That’s before we get to the truly horrific – the rat hair, insect fragments and excrement traces that the US allows in small amounts in food.

Unsafe baby food

Even baby food carries higher risks in the US. In Britain, baby food has special standards including a complete ban on artificial colours and E-numbers, very low maximum levels of pesticides and limits on added sugar. The US has no specific regulations for baby food. A recent test of baby foods in the US found that 95% contained toxic metals, with 73% containing traces of arsenic. While the amounts may be small, the lack of tight regulation on US baby foods, and the certainty that sugar is often added to toddler snack food, should cause deep disquiet.

All-American Stilton cheese and Cornish pasties

Cornish pasties being prepared in Bude, Cornwall
Cornish pasties being prepared in Bude, Cornwall. Photograph: Matt Cardy/Getty Images
Britain currently protects certain foods to ensure they’re made to specific standards and to promote local farming and industry. Think Cornish pasties, Melton Mowbray pork pies, Scottish wild salmon and Stilton blue cheese. In trade talks to date, the US has “pressed the UK to move away from current EU approach on generic terms”. American companies would be able to produce Cornish pasties on a massive scale and sell them back to us. The US also wants to “eliminate … unjustified labelling” saying it unfairly discriminates against American foods and, incredibly, the administration “view[s] the introduction of warning labels as harmful rather than as a step to public health”.

These are not marginal concerns for the US – food is not an aspect of a future deal that Britain will be able to simply opt out of. It is central to US objectives that call for “greater regulatory compatibility to reduce burdens associated with unnecessary differences in regulations and standards” including “a mechanism to remove expeditiously unwarranted barriers that block the export of US food and agricultural products”. The US trade deal is a threat to our food standards and our farmers, and the US will not sign a deal that doesn’t have food standards in it.

US food standards go something like "If it doesn't kill rats immediately, then it's fine for people."

Not something the UK wants to import.

The thing is that ordinary British people have a healthy interest in food standards. Johnson will have his work cut out trying to dumb regulations down. There are many other irritants in the ‘special relationship’ that will make negotiations more difficult, e.g. Huawei, the Sacoolas case, and a digital service tax.

….the White House's bust of Churchill...