Tuesday, 30 June 2020

Why There is Nothing Wrong With American Food Standards

Food standards have become an incredibly hot topic as the 2019 General Election result becomes clear and Boris Johnson’s majority sinks in for his opponents. With Jeremy Corbyn having warned that the Conservatives will drop the UK’s food standards to those of the U.S.

  May 12, 2020 

Corbyn claimed that these standards would be “slashed’ to US levels where ‘acceptable levels’ of rat hairs in paprika and maggots in orange juice are allowed and they’ll put chlorinated chicken on our supermarket shelves.”
The notion that the USA has poor food standards is in truth inaccurate, with the USA’s Food Standards requiring actions to be taken, rather than for example, those of the European Union, which simply require manufacturers to ‘prove they have done their best.’ Moreover, we already receive and sell American goods (as consumers will see in any supermarket) across the UK, only at increased prices due to the EU tariffs placed on these goods; the premise of a trade deal is the removal of trade tariffs, not the ability to sell.
Claims of low food standards in the USA have also appeared in some news articles in the last few years, claiming that the FDA’s food standards can leave Americans ingesting an average of “one to two pounds of flies, maggots and mites each year”, and that the “FDA limits up to five fly eggs and one maggot per 100 grams” for tomato juice. Importantly in recent months, what does current Labour Leader Sir Keir Starmer believe when it comes to food standards – Jeremy Corbyn was clear, but what about Sir Keir?
These totally out of context claims appear to have been derived, totally out of context from readings of the FDA’s Food Defect Levels Handbook.
When pressed by Sky News’ Kay Burley in 2019 on whether the American food standards would leave Brits ingesting maggots and rat hairs as claimed by the UK Labour Party, Leader of the Opposition, Sir Keir Starmer, initially claimed that USA food standards are ‘inferior’ to those in the UK. When questioned on this however, he was embarrassingly forced to admit that having been to, worked in and travelled across the USA, this is not actually the case. This has done more than just expose lies from the Labour Party; it highlights what was quite clearly an election tactic of scaremongering.

What Are The U.S. Regulations on Harmful Food Products?

The U.S. food standards are monitored by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The FDA’s Food Defect Levels Handbook (found here) aims to “establish maximum levels of natural or unavoidable defects in foods for human use that present no health hazards.” And that “These ‘Food Defect Action Levels’ listed in this booklet are set on this premise – that they pose no inherent hazard to health.”
Important to note here is that in scientific terms, ‘contaminants’ do not refer to exclusively harmful substances. For example, in the production of orange juice, excessive water or another harmless juice that enters the production line, would be termed a ‘contaminant,’ as it disrupts the overall production and alters concentrations of the product for consumers. This is very important, as the current Labour Party line peddling the message that food from the USA is contaminated is disingenuous at best if not deceitful.
Tropicana Orange Juice for example, a household favourite, likely drunk by Labour MPs and members aplenty is found in UK supermarkets and under our current food standards, whilst aligned with the EU and it certainly does not contain any rat hairs or maggots.

tropicana-orange-juice
Tropicana Orange Juice, imported from the USA is already found throughout the UK and does not violate any food standards

According to the Food Defect Levels Handbook, the FDA set “action levels because it is economically impractical to grow, harvest or process raw products that are totally free of non-hazardous, naturally occurring, unavoidable defects.”
The handbook also claims that “Products harmful to consumers are subject to regulatory action whether or not they exceed the action levels.” This is contrary to the currently championed EU food standards which admittedly are good, but which fall short here. Whereas American food standards require ‘regulatory action,’ EU standards simply require ‘efforts’ to reduce defects, rather than regulated actions.
Aside from these clearly defined action levels, and the regulatory action that can be taken on products even when these levels are not crossed, the U.S. is ranked in the top 5 for numerous reputable studies on food safety levels, ranking up next to the likes of the UK, Australia, and the Netherlands.
Unanswered questions that are therefore being asked in relation to this are:
  • Are the Labour Party seriously suggesting that the likes of the United States of America and Australia have lower food standards than say Bulgaria?
  • Why would the UK, a champion of high food standards lower standards in a trade deal…this defeats the very purposes of a trade deal in any case?
The Liberal Democrats and the Green Party have made some unfounded statements and claims, but Labour’s claims on food standards really do take the [uncontaminated] biscuit. Does Sir Keir still believe that US food standards are so bad, now he is Labour Leader and apparently ‘not that pro-Remain’ anymore?

Which Countries Have the Highest Food Standards?

Various studies have been conducted into ranking the food standards of different countries, taking into account not only safety, but also quality, affordability and availability. A study conducted by the Global Food Security Index (GFSI) found the following 10 counties to have the top overall scores for affordability, availability and quality and safety:
  1. Singapore
  2. Ireland
  3. United States (tied with the UK)
  4. United Kingdom (tied with the US)
  5. Netherlands
  6. Australia
  7. Switzerland
  8. Finland
  9. Canada
  10. France
The study sets out to evaluate the “three core pillars of food security” throughout 113 different countries, these three pillars being the previously mentioned affordability, availability and quality and safety.
From these results, the United States scored 99.4/100 for food safety, 100/100 for presence of food safety net programmes, and 100/100 for nutritional standards. The US also shares joint third place in the studies’ rankings with the UK.
Whilst they share the same overall score, the UK scored 100/100 for food safety, 100/100 for presence of food safety net programmes, and 100/100 for nutritional standards. Hence, the UK and the USA both have some of the highest food standards anywhere in the world.
Ireland was another country ranked in the top 10 for food security, coming in 2nd out of 113 countries evaluated. Ireland scored 99.2/100 for food safety, 100/100 for presence of food safety net programmes, and 100/100 for nutritional standards.
Whilst these are the results of only one study, these countries also rank highly in other pieces of research on food safety.
A study conducted by the Conference Board of Canada (another country likely to be have a trade deal with the UK after Brexit) titled World Ranking: Food Safety Performance included Ireland (2nd place), France (3rd place), the UK (4th place) and the United States (5th place). This particular study focused on three major areas, these being:
  • Food safety risk management
  • Food safety risk assessment
  • Food safety risk communication
Whilst the list of fears surrounding Brexit are now extending to declines in the country’s food safety regulations, numerous objective studies have shown that the US, and other countries, hold similar standards when it comes to their food safety and security to those of the UK, who are one of the global trend setters and leaders in safety, hygiene and food standards.
All in all, the food standards of the USA and Australia amongst others, are very much on par than those of the UK…

 https://techround.co.uk/business/american-food-standards/


Read Related Articles



Posted by at
Labels: ,

Absurd for Boris to compare to FDR’s New Deal his spending plans

Why it’s absurd for Boris Johnson to compare his spending plans to FDR’s New Deal

Johnson’s “infrastructure revolution” represents just 0.2 per cent of UK GDP; Roosevelt’s plan was 200 times more ambitious.

ECONOMY

By George Eaton
30 JUNE 2020


Boris Johnson visits a science room under construction at Ealing Fields High School on June 29, 2020 in west London.

TOBY MELVILLE - WPA POOL/GETTY IMAGES.

Boris Johnson visits a science room under construction at Ealing Fields High School on June 29, 2020 in 
west London.
Boris Johnson is far from the first UK prime minister to claim the mantle of Franklin D Roosevelt’s New Deal (Tony Blair and Gordon Brown also paid homage to the Democrat president). And judging by some of the coverage of Johnson’s announcement, one might assume such rhetoric is justified. 
The front page of today’s Times hails a “spending spree” that is “as bold as Franklin D Roosevelt’s New Deal”. But Johnson’s promise of £5bn of accelerated capital spending on hospitals, schools, roads, rail, prisons, courts and high streets is less impressive than the government’s spin suggests. 
The total announced by the Prime Minister amounts to just 0.2 per cent of the UK’s 2019 GDP (£2.2trn). By comparison, FDR’s 1933-39 economic stimulus, which supported the US economy through the Great Depression, is estimated by economists Price Fishback and Valentina Kachanovskaya to have represented 40 per cent of the US’s 1929 (pre-depression) GDP. As a share of the economy, Johnson's spending plan is 200 times less ambitious than the New Deal. It is also far outweighed by Germany’s recently-announced €130bn stimulus package, which accounts for nearly 4 per cent of the country’s GDP.
“It sounds positively Rooseveltian,” Johnson will declare of his programme in a speech in the West Midlands today. “It sounds like a New Deal. All I can say is that if so, then that is how it is meant to sound and to be, because that is what the times demand. A government that is powerful and determined and that puts its arms around people at a time of crisis.”
Yet despite UK GDP having fallen by 25 per cent since the Covd-19 crisis began, Johnson’s announcement includes no new money. The apparently heady sum of £5bn has merely been brought forward from the £600bn previously promised by Chancellor Rishi Sunak (a budget due to be spent between now and the middle of 2025). 
The government’s refusal to genuinely emulate Roosevelt’s boldness is a missed opportunity. Though the UK’s national debt now stands at 100.9 per cent of GDP, the highest level since 1963, borrowing has rarely been cheaper. Indeed, such is the appetite for UK debt from investors that the government has sold bonds at negative interest rates. Investors are paying the British state to borrow money from them.
Before Covid-19 struck, the government had already committed to borrowing for investment, repudiating George Osborne’s past pursuit of a budget surplus. But current plans will do little to compensate for years, and even decades, of underinvestment (even after recent increases, UK government investment remains 0.5 percentage points below the advanced economy average of 3.4 per cent of GDP). 
Johnson’s “infrastructure revolution”, then, is nothing of the sort. But even if it were, it would not be the sole test of whether the government has abandoned Hooverite austerity in favour of Rooseveltian stimulus. As well as total investment, the key number to watch is day-to-day spending on public services. Last year, the Institute for Fiscal Studies warned that even by 2023-24, current spending on services outside of health would be almost 15 per cent lower than at the start of the 2010s. 
Austerity has inflicted profound damage on the UK’s social fabric. Rough sleeping in England has increased by 165 per cent since 2010;  life expectancy has stalled for the first time in more than 100 years; and the number of people in poverty in working families has reached a record high. To truly reverse austerity, the government will need to spend far more on the services that have been so neglected over the last decade. 
George Eaton is senior online editor of the New Statesman.
Posted by at
Labels: , , ,

Boris gives EU three months to seal a Brexit trade deal

Boris Johnson gives the EU three months to seal a Brexit trade deal as face-to-face talks resume in Brussels
Boris Johnson set a three-month deadline for concluding Brexit trade deal talks yesterday, as face-to-face negotiations resumed in Brussels.
Downing Street said the Prime Minister would not allow the talks to run beyond September because it would leave businesses with too little time to prepare for the end of the transition period in December.
No 10 confirmed that the UK’s chief Brexit negotiator, David Frost, will start his new job as the PM’s national security adviser at the end of August.
Mr Frost will not be replaced, but indicated that the Brexit negotiations would remain his top priority ‘until those negotiations have concluded’.
The PM’s official spokesman said this could mean Mr Frost doing both jobs for a time, but stressed this would be for a very limited period at most.
‘Talks can’t go on into the autumn,’ he said. Asked how long negotiations could continue, the spokesman said the PM was clear about ‘not wanting to be continuing having talks in October’.
The move sets a tight timescale for concluding negotiations. The deadline for extending the transition period beyond the end of this year expires today, and the PM’s spokesman confirmed the mechanism would not be triggered.
David Frost wearing a suit and tie: Downing Street also confirmed today that the UK's chief Brexit negotiator, David Frost (pictured), will begin his new role as PM's national security advisor at the end of August© Provided by Daily Mail Downing Street also confirmed today that the UK's chief Brexit negotiator, David Frost (pictured), will begin his new role as PM's national security advisor at the end of August
This means that the UK will be fully out of the EU by January 1, with or without a trade deal. No deal would result in both sides levying tariffs on each other’s goods.
The PM had originally threatened to walk away from the talks at the end of this month unless a deal was in sight. 
But officials acknowledge that the original timetable has been affected by the pandemic. 
The new deadline emerged as Mr Frost travelled to Brussels for the first face-to-face negotiations with his EU counterpart Michel Barnier since the lockdown began.
Until now, talks have been held via video link – a process Mr Frost believes has hindered progress. He warned that ‘some of the EU’s unrealistic positions will have to change’.

He added: ‘UK sovereignty, over our laws, courts, or our fishing waters, is not up for discussion.’ 
The talks are stalled over the EU’s refusal to recognise the UK’s right to control its waters and set its own laws.
a person standing posing for the camera: Mr Frost (pictured left) travelled to Brussels today to have face-to-face talks with his EU counterpart Michel Barnier (right)© Provided by Daily Mail Mr Frost (pictured left) travelled to Brussels today to have face-to-face talks with his EU counterpart Michel Barnier (right)
Brussels wants EU trawlers to be guaranteed their current fishing rights in perpetuity, while the Government is insisting we should determine access on an annual basis. 
The EU also wants a ‘level playing field’, in which the UK would not cut red tape imposed by Brussels.
Mr Frost made clear he was not interested in a ‘compromise’ plan, which would give Brussels the right to impose tariffs if the UK departed from EU regulations after Brexit.
He added: ‘The Government will not agree to ideas like the one currently circulating.’
The UK has tabled a separate compromise which would allow the EU to levy tariffs on a small number of ‘sensitive’ agricultural products in return for dropping its ‘level playing field’ demands.
Weekly talks will now take place throughout July, with the venue alternating between Brussels and London.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/brexit/boris-johnson-gives-the-eu-three-months-to-seal-a-brexit-trade-deal-as-face-to-face-talks-resume-in-brussels/ar-BB167EEf
Posted by at
Labels: , , , , ,

REUTERS BREXIT HEADLINES - 01 Jun - 30 Jun 2020




BREXIT HEADLINES




UK must reveal state-aid plan to unblock Brexit talks, EU warns - FT


EU's negotiator Michel Barnier has earlier said Britain had so far not engaged with tentative openings floated by the EU side on state aid and fisheries in the previous negotiating rounds, which have mostly been held on video calls due to coronavirus safety restrictions.

'The ball is in the UK's court,' EU's Brexit negotiator says


Britain must send "clear signals" that it wants to seal a deal with the European Union on their relationship after Brexit, the bloc's chief negotiator said ahead of more talks with London, adding a deal was still possible before the end of the year.

AIM underdogs beat FTSE blue chips in Brexit twist


When the UK voted to leave the European Union in June 2016, rushing into the exporter-heavy FTSE 100 stocks index for a currency hedge and international exposure made sense for investors alarmed by a falling pound and dire economic forecasts.

Brexit deadline looms over day of Anglo-French solidarity


Prime Minister Boris Johnson told France's President Emmanuel Macron that talks on a post Brexit deal cannot drag on into the autumn, as the French leader visited London to mark the 80th anniversary of General de Gaulle's call for wartime resistance,



British PM, top EU officials to hold talks on June 15


British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, the chairman of European Union leaders Charles Michel and the head of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen will hold talks on June 15 to revive stalled talks on a future EU-UK relationship.



Britain asks too much of EU in Brexit talks, Barnier says


Britain is seeking a trading relationship with the European Union that is too close to that of an EU member, the EU's Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier said on Wednesday, urging London to adjust its demands in the four months left to reach a deal.

OECD warns of UK jobs hit with no EU deal or transition delay


Britain risks a big hit to trade and jobs if it cannot strike a post-Brexit deal with the European Union by the end of 2020 or fails to extend its current Brexit transition, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development said on Wednesday.

EU says UK trade talks will shape bloc's stock market


The European Union will only decide how to reform its share trading rules once it knows whether exchanges in Britain will have access to the bloc after a post-Brexit transition period ends in December, a senior EU official said on Tuesday.



https://uk.reuters.com/news/archive/RCOMUK_Brexit


Posted by at
Labels: ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)