Brexit reset and lead - Any thoughts - BASC?

[Jim xyz]

Good evening all,

I know that a lot of people are fed with the whole lead thing but reading the article below it made me wonder if anyone (BASC perhaps) had done any research into any implications for the use of lead now that we might find ourselves following European regulations again.

My general understanding was that Europe started working towards a lead ban, then along came Brexit and it seemed we might have dodged it, only to find that the UK gov wanted to push ahead while it seemed to be getting bogged down in Europe.

If it the gist of this article is anything to go by then we might find ourselves realigning with Europe on regulations that might include things like the use of lead.

Farmers face losing harvests under Starmer’s Brexit reset

The UK will have to ban many pesticides, hitting food production, with farmers already reeling from Rachel Reeves’s inheritance tax raid

www.telegraph.co.uk

 

[enfieldspares]

The reality is despite Johnson's BS (bull dung) about being a rule taker not a rule maker is this. Regardless of us being in the EU or out the EU if we wish to sell a product into the EU it has to comply with their rules.

If we want to sell a product into the USA it has to comply with their standards and those of us old enough to know will recall how it affected British cars. The rubber bumper MG Midget and MGB sports cars and later the Triumph TR7).

The exact very same as if China or India wants to sell into the EU or into the UK. It must comply with with either CE or BS (here British Standard) specification. Be it cars, 'phones, even toys for kiddies.

So whether in or out if you sell into marketplace X or marketplace Y you make your product to the legal standards requirement in that market or what is the common requirement there even if not legally specified. It is why US made cartridge tumblers sold into the UK are 240 volt not domestic American historic specification 11O volt.

 

[Heym SR20]

The reality is despite Johnson's BS (bull dung) about being a rule taker not a rule maker is this. Regardless of us being in the EU or out the EU if we wish to sell a product into the EU it has to comply with their rules.

If we want to sell a product into the USA it has to comply with their standards and those of us old enough to know will recall how it affected British cars. The rubber bumper MG Midget and MGB sports cars and later the Triumph TR7).

The exact very same as if China or India wants to sell into the EU or into the UK. It must comply with with either CE or BS (here British Standard) specification. Be it cars, 'phones, even toys for kiddies.

So whether in or out if you sell into marketplace X or marketplace Y you make your product to the legal standards requirement in that market or what is the common requirement there even if not legally specified. It is why US made cartridge tumblers sold into the UK are 240 volt not domestic American historic specification 11O volt.

I would totally concur with this. When we were within the EU we had a voice and had a seat at the table at the European Parliament when devisions were taken.

Unfortunately we as a nation never this responsibility seriously especially when to electing MEPs. We ended up with a bunch of baffoons, exemplified by Nigel Farage, representing our interests in Europe. No that we are out of the EU we simply have to abide by the rules that the EU set if we want to sell any of our goods and services into Europe.

The challenge and the blessing of Europe is that it is a collective of 27 member states who collectively have to agree to changes in EU legislation. It means that legislation has to collaborative in approach and get all 27 member states on board. This takes time. It does however mean that it’s not subjective to rapid change on a whim.

In the UK we now have to either agree to meet the standards or not sell in.

To be honest it is all rather academic and being whipped by the Tory press. Our standards were are totally aligned when we broke away in 2022, and very little has really changed since then. So in practice there shouldn’t be a huge amount to do to meet EU standards to allow for much greater freedoms in movement of goods and services.

This will hugely benefit UK businesses in much easier access to markets. This will mean more money flowing into those businesses resulting in growth, better wages and thus more money into HMRC.

 

[enfieldspares]

In the UK we now have to either agree to meet the standards or not sell in.

I also read, saw, that once Brexit and the transition period ended that British shellfish became "third party" shellfish and so lost the exemption on water clarity and water purity where harvested that applied to "(EU) Member state" shellfish. So our "dirty" mussels and the like now no longer can cross the English Channel exempt from meeting such "third party" water clarity and purity benchmarks.

Also as far as medicines go I believe that many drug makers are, or have, moved development to the EU as they get approval then to sell that drug into all the EU whereas, now, if they produce in the UK they only get approval to sell in the UK and have additional expense to sell into the EU. So they make a commercial decision to no longer bother with the UK as a manufacturing location?

And who negotiated this gimcrackery? Johnson and his crony Lord Frost. A buffoon, too busy being pussy struck by Carrie Antionette to concentrate on what he should have been attending to, with a minion overseeing what was to prove a team of incompetents.

 

[Apthorpe]

The reality is despite Johnson's BS (bull dung) about being a rule taker not a rule maker is this. Regardless of us being in the EU or out the EU if we wish to sell a product into the EU it has to comply with their rules.

If we want to sell a product into the USA it has to comply with their standards and those of us old enough to know will recall how it affected British cars. The rubber bumper MG Midget and MGB sports cars and later the Triumph TR7).

The exact very same as if China or India wants to sell into the EU or into the UK. It must comply with with either CE or BS (here British Standard) specification. Be it cars, 'phones, even toys for kiddies.

So whether in or out if you sell into marketplace X or marketplace Y you make your product to the legal standards requirement in that market or what is the common requirement there even if not legally specified. It is why US made cartridge tumblers sold into the UK are 240 volt not domestic American historic specification 11O volt.

The other reality is that we never exported significant amounts of ammunition anyway, so US and European regulations are of no value. The UK market for shotgun ammunition is a net importer, so diverging from an EU which wanted to regulate itself out of our market would have been beneficial. Banning lead from ammunition has never been about trade - there is zero real evidence for that claim. As you say, exporting businesses adapt to foreign regulation without needing domestic regulation. Were that the case for the UK, then no lead ban would be necessary

 

[triggertrix]

I also read, saw, that once Brexit and the transition period ended that British shellfish became "third party" shellfish and so lost the exemption on water clarity and water purity where harvested that applied to "(EU) Member state" shellfish. So our "dirty" mussels and the like now no longer can cross the English Channel exempt from meeting such "third party" water clarity and purity benchmarks.

Also as far as medicines go I believe that many drug makers are, or have, moved development to the EU as they get approval then to sell that drug into all the EU whereas, now, if they produce in the UK they only get approval to sell in the UK and have additional expense to sell into the EU. So they make a commercial decision to no longer bother with the UK as a manufacturing location?

And who negotiated this gimcrackery? Johnson and his crony Lord Frost. A buffoon, too busy being pussy struck by Carrie Antionette to concentrate on what he should have been attending to, with a minion overseeing what was to prove a team of incompetents.

And who voted for it? that’s almost the worst part., not only a governmental embarrassment, but the majority of the country took the hook line and sinker

 

[enfieldspares]

And who voted for it? that’s almost the worst part., not only a governmental embarrassment, but the majority of the country took the hook line and sinker

I think some people genuinely believed that they were voting for the best reasons. The fault is not with them but with the failure of the "Remain" campaign to effectively rebuff what was being said in the "Leave" publicity. I think those that did vote for Brexit did so with the most genuine and heartfelt sincerity.

And long before that with Cameron for not doing as Johnson would do with his "rebels" (such as Christopher Soames MP) by removing the whip from them (and threatening once done to the call a General Election. But rather Cameron appeased his Eurosceptic wing by promising a referendum he thought he'd then win if he had to make good on that commitment.

Last of course Cameron by putting in place the proposed deal that if the UK voted "Remain" that it would then have a near immediate change in EU Law so as opt out from allowing British citizens and British residents to exercise full free movement and economic rights for themselves and their family members shot himself in the foot. For that meant that in order to prevent that such people had to vote "Leave" so as to kill that deal and leave the law unchanged and left as it was.

You have to be pretty stupid (even by Old Etonian standards) to create a situation where those that wanted not to lose the ability to avail the advantages for themselves or their family members of remaining in the EU had to vote for the "Leave" camp in order to safeguard such. As the deal was that if the "Leave" vote won Cameron's proposed deal would fall. As indeed it then did.

Yes they then would with the final Brexit lose those rights. But by their voting "Leave" not in 2016 but much later (although not known at the time that would be in fact some three years later on 31 January 2020 when the transition period ended). The choice was clear. That if Cameron won you got hanged tomorrow. If Cameron lost you still got hanged. But just not quite so soon. Or maybe never.

 

[cjm1066]

A lot of good points being made.

The chlorinated chicken issuse is often raised, it would be so easy to have a processing facility working to UK requirements.

How many lefthand drive Mustangs did Ford sell, they made them righthand drive to suit our market.

 

[nun_hunter]

A lot of good points being made.

The chlorinated chicken issuse is often raised, it would be so easy to have a processing facility working to UK requirements.

How many lefthand drive Mustangs did Ford sell, they made them righthand drive to suit our market.

But would it be worth it? For chicken at least which would cost them more to produce and ship it over here and would it sell enough?

The Mustang makes a bit more sense as it's a novelty car that costs pretty much twice to buy here as it does in the USA. It's a gimmick as it isn't very well made or specced, terribly inefficient (even worse when you look at power/engine volume).

Do we export any shot game meat (other than venison) that would then need to comply with a no lead EU regulation?

It seems that even without the EU, British consumers and retailers are self regulating that they don't want to eat meat that may contain lead. Logic and science aside, the biggest potential (and actual) consumers of game meat don't want lead to be in it and those who want to keep lead are those who want to shoot it, or at least a proportion of those who shoot it.

 

[Conor O'Gorman]

Good evening all,

I know that a lot of people are fed with the whole lead thing but reading the article below it made me wonder if anyone (BASC perhaps) had done any research into any implications for the use of lead now that we might find ourselves following European regulations again.

My general understanding was that Europe started working towards a lead ban, then along came Brexit and it seemed we might have dodged it, only to find that the UK gov wanted to push ahead while it seemed to be getting bogged down in Europe.

If it the gist of this article is anything to go by then we might find ourselves realigning with Europe on regulations that might include things like the use of lead.

Farmers face losing harvests under Starmer’s Brexit reset

The UK will have to ban many pesticides, hitting food production, with farmers already reeling from Rachel Reeves’s inheritance tax raid

www.telegraph.co.uk

Post Brexit the government tasked the HSE with implementing new UK regulations that mirrored EU ones on chemicals. The principle was to allow for continued trade generally. Lead in ammo and hazardous substances in tattoos were first to be reviewed mirroring similar reviews in EU.

As things stand it is possible that we will see a decision in June or July on further lead restrictions in GB. Meanwhile draft regulations on further restrictions on lead ammunition in EU (which would include NI due to the protocol) were published earlier this year and are going through the various complicated stages of EU review.

I don't know if the latest Brexit policy developments as per article will have any impact on decision making but I imagine Defra and devolved administrations for Wales and Scotland will have already been considering the draft EU regs in coming to their own joint decision hence the delay in a decision that was expected in March.

 

[timbrayford]

Actually UK REACH merely replacd EU REACH, same unaccountable bureaucrats following the same EU dictate, just a change of title. The Tories wimped out of repealing all the Brussels red tape so in effect the UK is still saddled with EU rules

 

[PeterHenry]

Actually UK REACH merely replacd EU REACH, same unaccountable bureaucrats following the same EU dictate, just a change of title. The Tories wimped out of repealing all the Brussels red tape so in effect the UK is still saddled with EU rules

It wasn't wimping out as such - more to do with competition. Part of the deal with the EU was that we couldn't give ourselves a competitive advantage by lowering environmental protection, and therefore undercutting them....

 

[timbrayford]

It wasn't wimping out as such - more to do with competition. Part of the deal with the EU was that we couldn't give ourselves a competitive advantage by lowering environmental protection, and therefore undercutting them...

As far as I'm concerned that is wimping out

 

[nun_hunter]

As far as I'm concerned that is wimping out

If lowering standards to make more money by most likely putting people at increased risk is "wimping out" then I'm glad we did.

 

[timbrayford]

If lowering standards to make more money by most likely putting people at increased risk is "wimping out" then I'm glad we did.

Oh, that all depends on what weight you give all this woke eco-bull****, personally I'm pro choice, let the consumer decide rather than over bearing public servants

 

[nun_hunter]

Oh, that all depends on what weight you give all this woke eco-bull****, personally I'm pro choice, let the consumer decide rather than over bearing public servants

They pretty much are anyway when given the choice of shot with lead Vs non lead alternatives.

The same goes for chemicals, cleaning products, food additives etc, people will sacrifice a bit of performance over a reduction in harmful or potentially harmful side effects. The issue is when people blindly refuse to move with the times and so some changes are forced upon people for the greater benefit of others, such as smoking indoors, or in cars with children etc

 

[enfieldspares]

Oh, that all depends on what weight you give all this woke eco-bull****, personally I'm pro choice, let the consumer decide rather than over bearing public servants

The problem is that manufacturers are masters at mislabelling products such that you then think they are made in the UK or that they are "made by hand" when in fact they are not quite exactly what you the consumer then think they are. Remember the Red Tractor scandals?

So from sticking the union flag on a box, or giving it a British sounding name (remember Japanese and Chinese binoculars with German sounding names) or calling a thing "barn eggs" to conjure up an image of an old farmyard rustic style barn and etc., etc.. How many people still think that having the label "Hardy" on a rod or reel means that it is totally made in the UK? And not all air rifles branded BSA are made in Birmingham just as Remington USA sold rebranded Baikal side by side rifles or somesuch.

The same as fabric once used "genuine silk" vs "real silk" vs "100% silk" vs "all silk" vs "pure silk" as labels. Note that AI on the internet gets this very wrong. Once upon a time 100% silk meant that any silk used in the cloth was truly silk so even if only half the composition of each thread was silk threads that was still 100% silk as the silk itself used in that thread was 100%. Whereas all silk meant that the cloth had to be just that. All of the threads being silk.

Nowadays this:

 

[Hunter 6.5]

The reality is despite Johnson's BS (bull dung) about being a rule taker not a rule maker is this. Regardless of us being in the EU or out the EU if we wish to sell a product into the EU it has to comply with their rules.

If we want to sell a product into the USA it has to comply with their standards and those of us old enough to know will recall how it affected British cars. The rubber bumper MG Midget and MGB sports cars and later the Triumph TR7).

The exact very same as if China or India wants to sell into the EU or into the UK. It must comply with with either CE or BS (here British Standard) specification. Be it cars, 'phones, even toys for kiddies.

So whether in or out if you sell into marketplace X or marketplace Y you make your product to the legal standards requirement in that market or what is the common requirement there even if not legally specified. It is why US made cartridge tumblers sold into the UK are 240 volt not domestic American historic specification 11O volt.

Do apologise if I missed something (haven't read the article) but OP is about lead ban not about treading between UK and EU. Don't think we make enough bullets or ammo to export in EU even more to make impact in their regulations anyway. If I got it right I share the same thoughts as Jim xyz, why we should follow the lead ban initiated by EU

 

[enfieldspares]

Do apologise if I missed something (haven't read the article) but OP is about lead ban not about treading between UK and EU. Don't think we make enough bullets or ammo to export in EU even more to make impact in their regulations anyway. If I got it right I share the same thoughts as Jim xyz, why we should follow the lead ban initiated by EU

This in the OP's post:

If it the gist of this article is anything to go by then we might find ourselves realigning with Europe on regulations that might include things like the use of lead.

It maybe is useful to read the article before commenting on a thread that links to said article.

But that aside do we export loaded cartridges to the EU? Yes. Eley .22" Rimfire is a quality brand very very widely sold on the continent and Eley shotgun cartridges are also still seen in mainland Europe as that company is Spanish owned by Maxam.

Eley specialist in 22 LR Force, Match, Tenex cartridges

europarm.fr

Tous nos produits de la marque Eley | Armurerie Fantin | St Laurent du var

armurerie-fantin.fr

Eley

Eley: ELEY Select Trap 12/67 - 7,5 24 gr Schrotpatronen - 25 Stück - Eley Sport 50 Schuß - ELEY Olympic Blues 12/70 - 25 Schuss - Eley German Match 50 Schuß

buinger.com

ELEY German Match .22lr - Rimfire ammunition - AKAH

www.akah.eu

And it would be that if we wished to export shot game to the EU then it would have to be shot with something other than lead. But I also agree that since Brexit why should we simply transcribe EU Reach legislation into UK Reach legislation.

And vice versa how will an EU lead ban then affect still aligned Northern Ireland and that aside the European makers of quality air pellets such as JSB and RWS both brands widely sold in the UK?

 

[cjm1066]

An update Eley were purchased by the French Sofisport_Maxman in 2021, they are a French finance group. Thy are now in negotiations with FN Browning FN Browning Group and Sofisport enter into exclusive negotiations - FN HERSTAL to create a World Class company.