6 ms·

After years of rubbish in the UK press about the impact of regulations from the EU, they can add protecting fish, bird and most likely human health to the list

After years of rubbish in the UK press about the impact of regulations from the EU, they can add protecting fish, bird and most likely human health to the list of 'harm' done. I'm glad the EU still cares about the environment.

damal 9y ago
Different countries have different priorities. That's the good thing about sovereignty. Don't like your current government's ideas? Replace them at the next election. On the other hand, you don't like the EU's ideas? Um... good luck with that. Just be glad that the EU's been relatively benign so far.
- adrianN 9y ago
  I think my chances of changing my country's government if I don't like it are pretty much the same as changing the EU.
  - Moru 9y ago
    It's the difference of (1/country population) and (1/511,805,088). So slightly higher chance changing your countrys government. But you have the added bonus of having the same language, good luck with that in the EU... :-)
  - pbhjpbhj 9y ago
    In the UK, I think chances of getting workers rights, privacy, consumer rights, environmental issues, etc., passed in the EU is far far greater than getting any such thing passed by the Tories. That's entirely expected, the EU as a whole is more liberal, more green, and more socialist than the Tories.
- giobox 9y ago
  > Just be glad that the EU's been relatively benign so far. The creation of free movement of people, goods, services and capital across 28 States and creating a common currency used by many of them is arguably not “benign”. For avoidance of doubt I’m in no way expressing an opinion on the merits of these - simply that it is not benign in the sense of having done nothing.
  - kybernetikos 9y ago
    Those things sound fantastic.
  - pjc50 9y ago
    I wonder what your opinion is of the free movement of people, goods, services and capital across 48 states?
  - kybernetikos 9y ago
    > that it is not benign in the sense of having done nothing. I think that you're using the word in a pretty unusual way there, perhaps inspired by medical usage. 'benign' comes from the latin meaning 'good', and has the same root as 'benefactor', 'beneficial', 'benefit' or 'bonus'. In its nonmedical sense it almost always refers to something being good, not having negligible effect.
- titzer 9y ago
  Yeah! Don't like your country's air pollution controls? Just move next door! Problem solved. Sorry to mock you, but environmental concerns affect us all. Earth is one giant connected system; everything eventually influences everything else. It's just a matter of the latency of the connections. Pollution is something we need to tackle globally, because many types of pollutants don't break down naturally or necessarily become less dangerous. On the contrary, many continue to accumulate and are concentrated by natural processes into places where water drains--this is why we find these things in rivers and lakes first, and in the highest concentrations. They are everywhere, tho.
  - wav-part 9y ago
    Strawman. Anti-BigGovernment != Anti-Environment.
    - orf 9y ago
      Sure, but in reality those go hand in hand.
      - wav-part 9y ago
        Lets say I disagree with EU-enfoced regulation ? Do you count it as anti-environement ? What if agree to same regulation if enfoced by UK ? Point is, its about who enforcing it not what. If even that does not fix your observations, I would like to request some proof/citations.
        tolien 9y ago
        The EU doesn’t enforce the regulations anyway, member states do through their respective agencies. In this case, the Environment Agency and/or Scottish EPA will have responsibility.
- Scarblac 9y ago
  You personally can't change your government, you only have one vote. Many voters together can change it. That's not really different in the EU.
vixen99 9y ago
What regulation and what 'caring' (in this instance)? "No official limits exists in the EU for neonicotinoid pollution in freshwater".
- arm85 9y ago
  No but they did attempt to ban neonicotinoids across Europe, against stiff opposition from the UK government.
  - pbhjpbhj 9y ago
    I'm interested in which donor made them oppose it? Presumably one of those who is driving Brexit so they can pay off the Tories and get further protections (of people, environment) removed; aka "recover our sovereignty".
- Red_Tarsius 9y ago
  > In 2012, the European Commission asked the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) to study the safety of three neonicotinoids, in response to growing concerns about the impact of neonicotinoids on honey bees. The study was published in January 2013, stating that neonicotinoids pose an unacceptably high risk to bees... > In response to the study, the European Commission recommended a restriction of their use across the European Union. On 29 April 2013, 15 of the 27 EU member states voted to restrict the use of three neonicotinoids for two years starting 1 December 2013. > The UK, which voted against the bill, disagreed: "Having a healthy bee population is a top priority for us, but we did not support the proposal for a ban because our scientific evidence doesn’t support it." > The decision was up for review in 2016. In March 2017, The Guardian printed an article which claimed that they had obtained information that indicated that the European commission wants a complete ban and cite "high acute risks to bees". A ban could be in place this year (2017) if the proposals are approved by a majority of EU member states https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neonicotinoid#Europe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neonicotinoid#Europe
akhatri_aus 9y ago
The UK is still in the EU and yet the river is still polluted.
- fiftyacorn 9y ago
  I think he means it will get worse when we leave EU
  - akhatri_aus 9y ago
    That's speculative though isn't it? The rules could be better outside of the EU if equivalence is used (and judged from statements this week) and the EU standards would simply be the baseline. The EU hasn't been a panacea thus far, particularly with the environment. The strongest influence they've had is with personal rights & freedoms but there have consistently been lapses when it comes to the environment. They refuse to pound down on coal in Eastern Europe/Northern Greece & overlooking Diesel-gate are just more recent ones. The only thing that can help the environment is if green politicians get a sufficient vote in the country involved
    - tolien 9y ago
      You’re right that it’s speculative (the UK will retain the laws created by the directives into UK law as part of the “Great” Repeal Bill so nothing might change) but the UK could have higher standards already - the EU directive sets a minimum requirement, not a maximum. Diesel-gate is a different issue and highlights the weakness of recognising other countries’ testing standards without setting sufficiently stringent regulations to ensure that testing was valid. The problem was that member states weren’t required to do their own testing but to trust that whoever did it had done it correctly while incentivising the testing state to be lenient lest they lose the payments to perform tests.
    - toyg 9y ago
      I’m not sure you’re familiar with the UK situation. The country has no green tradition, it was dragged into modern practices kicking and screaming by German and Scandinavian-inspired EU regulations. Their rivers and beaches only started looking clean in the early ‘00s. The Cameron government promised to be “the greenest ever” and failed to deliver on all accounts, dropping the whole issue after less than a year in power; the current one doesn’t really have a green policy at all, unless you count “build on greenfields” as such. Because of the hardcore first-past-post electoral system, green parties in England are happy when they manage to elect 1 MP and maybe throw enough races against Labour that “reds” have to listen a bit; but in the meantime they get a Tory government that is naturally pro-business and anti-environment. The only real influence they can have is by winning seats in the proportionally-assigned EU Parliament, where they gang up with the more numerous Eurogreens and deeply influence actual regulations. Leaving the EU is a tragedy for UK greens, and it will kill any semblance of environmental policy in the country.
Nicholas7900 9y ago
Whenever I'm been hired as a Hacker i typically only take jobs that I find somehow original, challenging, or especially helpful to the community. I've never wanted to sit around defending some video game company's source code from network intruders - I prefer to help nonprofits, private investigators, Private Individuals, government contractors, and other traditionally underserved populations. And I'd rather match skills against the best in the field of state-sponsored hackers engaged in economic espionage than put some kid in prison for pranking the phone company. When a company tries to hire me, the first question I ask is: "Who is this going to help?" I know I'm well-known but i always try to avoid people thinking I'm proud or making Many individual think its only the big companies that can hire me, fine, here is my mail: """"compositehacks@gmail.com"""" You Can Reach Out To Me for Your Desired HACKING Services Ranging From: Penetration Testing Phishing Phone Hack: Giving you access to the Target's Call Log, messages, chats and all social media Apps . Retrieval Of Lost Files Location Tracking. Clearing Of Criminal Records. Hacking Of Server, Database And website e.g Facebook, twitter, Instagram Snapchat etc Hacking and sales Of Programmed credit cards , amazon , Walmart , PayPal , bank logs . And Other Cyber Attacks And Hijacking. YOU CAN ALSO CONTACT ME FOR MY SPECIAL CREDIT CARD TOP-UP PACKAGE : Its 100% LEGIT

damal 9y ago

Different countries have different priorities. That's the good thing about sovereignty. Don't like your current government's ideas? Replace them at the next election. On the other hand, you don't like the EU's ideas? Um... good luck with that. Just be glad that the EU's been relatively benign so far.

adrianN 9y ago
I think my chances of changing my country's government if I don't like it are pretty much the same as changing the EU.
- Moru 9y ago
  It's the difference of (1/country population) and (1/511,805,088). So slightly higher chance changing your countrys government. But you have the added bonus of having the same language, good luck with that in the EU... :-)
- pbhjpbhj 9y ago
  In the UK, I think chances of getting workers rights, privacy, consumer rights, environmental issues, etc., passed in the EU is far far greater than getting any such thing passed by the Tories. That's entirely expected, the EU as a whole is more liberal, more green, and more socialist than the Tories.
giobox 9y ago
> Just be glad that the EU's been relatively benign so far. The creation of free movement of people, goods, services and capital across 28 States and creating a common currency used by many of them is arguably not “benign”. For avoidance of doubt I’m in no way expressing an opinion on the merits of these - simply that it is not benign in the sense of having done nothing.
- kybernetikos 9y ago
  Those things sound fantastic.
- pjc50 9y ago
  I wonder what your opinion is of the free movement of people, goods, services and capital across 48 states?
- kybernetikos 9y ago
  > that it is not benign in the sense of having done nothing. I think that you're using the word in a pretty unusual way there, perhaps inspired by medical usage. 'benign' comes from the latin meaning 'good', and has the same root as 'benefactor', 'beneficial', 'benefit' or 'bonus'. In its nonmedical sense it almost always refers to something being good, not having negligible effect.
titzer 9y ago
Yeah! Don't like your country's air pollution controls? Just move next door! Problem solved. Sorry to mock you, but environmental concerns affect us all. Earth is one giant connected system; everything eventually influences everything else. It's just a matter of the latency of the connections. Pollution is something we need to tackle globally, because many types of pollutants don't break down naturally or necessarily become less dangerous. On the contrary, many continue to accumulate and are concentrated by natural processes into places where water drains--this is why we find these things in rivers and lakes first, and in the highest concentrations. They are everywhere, tho.
- wav-part 9y ago
  Strawman. Anti-BigGovernment != Anti-Environment.
  - orf 9y ago
    Sure, but in reality those go hand in hand.
    - wav-part 9y ago
      Lets say I disagree with EU-enfoced regulation ? Do you count it as anti-environement ? What if agree to same regulation if enfoced by UK ? Point is, its about who enforcing it not what. If even that does not fix your observations, I would like to request some proof/citations.
      - tolien 9y ago
        The EU doesn’t enforce the regulations anyway, member states do through their respective agencies. In this case, the Environment Agency and/or Scottish EPA will have responsibility.
Scarblac 9y ago
You personally can't change your government, you only have one vote. Many voters together can change it. That's not really different in the EU.

vixen99 9y ago

What regulation and what 'caring' (in this instance)? "No official limits exists in the EU for neonicotinoid pollution in freshwater".

arm85 9y ago
No but they did attempt to ban neonicotinoids across Europe, against stiff opposition from the UK government.
- pbhjpbhj 9y ago
  I'm interested in which donor made them oppose it? Presumably one of those who is driving Brexit so they can pay off the Tories and get further protections (of people, environment) removed; aka "recover our sovereignty".
Red_Tarsius 9y ago
> In 2012, the European Commission asked the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) to study the safety of three neonicotinoids, in response to growing concerns about the impact of neonicotinoids on honey bees. The study was published in January 2013, stating that neonicotinoids pose an unacceptably high risk to bees... > In response to the study, the European Commission recommended a restriction of their use across the European Union. On 29 April 2013, 15 of the 27 EU member states voted to restrict the use of three neonicotinoids for two years starting 1 December 2013. > The UK, which voted against the bill, disagreed: "Having a healthy bee population is a top priority for us, but we did not support the proposal for a ban because our scientific evidence doesn’t support it." > The decision was up for review in 2016. In March 2017, The Guardian printed an article which claimed that they had obtained information that indicated that the European commission wants a complete ban and cite "high acute risks to bees". A ban could be in place this year (2017) if the proposals are approved by a majority of EU member states https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neonicotinoid#Europe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neonicotinoid#Europe

akhatri_aus 9y ago

The UK is still in the EU and yet the river is still polluted.

fiftyacorn 9y ago
I think he means it will get worse when we leave EU
- akhatri_aus 9y ago
  That's speculative though isn't it? The rules could be better outside of the EU if equivalence is used (and judged from statements this week) and the EU standards would simply be the baseline. The EU hasn't been a panacea thus far, particularly with the environment. The strongest influence they've had is with personal rights & freedoms but there have consistently been lapses when it comes to the environment. They refuse to pound down on coal in Eastern Europe/Northern Greece & overlooking Diesel-gate are just more recent ones. The only thing that can help the environment is if green politicians get a sufficient vote in the country involved
  - tolien 9y ago
    You’re right that it’s speculative (the UK will retain the laws created by the directives into UK law as part of the “Great” Repeal Bill so nothing might change) but the UK could have higher standards already - the EU directive sets a minimum requirement, not a maximum. Diesel-gate is a different issue and highlights the weakness of recognising other countries’ testing standards without setting sufficiently stringent regulations to ensure that testing was valid. The problem was that member states weren’t required to do their own testing but to trust that whoever did it had done it correctly while incentivising the testing state to be lenient lest they lose the payments to perform tests.
  - toyg 9y ago
    I’m not sure you’re familiar with the UK situation. The country has no green tradition, it was dragged into modern practices kicking and screaming by German and Scandinavian-inspired EU regulations. Their rivers and beaches only started looking clean in the early ‘00s. The Cameron government promised to be “the greenest ever” and failed to deliver on all accounts, dropping the whole issue after less than a year in power; the current one doesn’t really have a green policy at all, unless you count “build on greenfields” as such. Because of the hardcore first-past-post electoral system, green parties in England are happy when they manage to elect 1 MP and maybe throw enough races against Labour that “reds” have to listen a bit; but in the meantime they get a Tory government that is naturally pro-business and anti-environment. The only real influence they can have is by winning seats in the proportionally-assigned EU Parliament, where they gang up with the more numerous Eurogreens and deeply influence actual regulations. Leaving the EU is a tragedy for UK greens, and it will kill any semblance of environmental policy in the country.

Nicholas7900 9y ago

Whenever I'm been hired as a Hacker i typically only take jobs that I find somehow original, challenging, or especially helpful to the community. I've never wanted to sit around defending some video game company's source code from network intruders - I prefer to help nonprofits, private investigators, Private Individuals, government contractors, and other traditionally underserved populations. And I'd rather match skills against the best in the field of state-sponsored hackers engaged in economic espionage than put some kid in prison for pranking the phone company. When a company tries to hire me, the first question I ask is: "Who is this going to help?" I know I'm well-known but i always try to avoid people thinking I'm proud or making Many individual think its only the big companies that can hire me, fine, here is my mail: """"compositehacks@gmail.com"""" You Can Reach Out To Me for Your Desired HACKING Services Ranging From: Penetration Testing Phishing Phone Hack: Giving you access to the Target's Call Log, messages, chats and all social media Apps . Retrieval Of Lost Files Location Tracking. Clearing Of Criminal Records. Hacking Of Server, Database And website e.g Facebook, twitter, Instagram Snapchat etc Hacking and sales Of Programmed credit cards , amazon , Walmart , PayPal , bank logs . And Other Cyber Attacks And Hijacking. YOU CAN ALSO CONTACT ME FOR MY SPECIAL CREDIT CARD TOP-UP PACKAGE : Its 100% LEGIT