Brexit reset and lead - Any thoughts - BASC?

[25 Sharps]

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

Because we sell venison into Europe.

 

[Jim xyz]

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.

Thanks for taking the time to answer Conor,

Much appreciated.

I guess we’re all playing wait and see.

 

[mickygism]

Because we sell venison into Europe.

Farmed venison?

 

[25 Sharps]

Farmed venison?

Shot venison

 

[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 don't want to sell a product into the EU, then there is no need. The claim that the lead ban is something the cartridge manufacturers or game meat exporters have requested is both implausible, not backed by evidence and only arose after this fiasco was well underway.

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).

In those cases, it is because the USA was by a very long way the largest market for the cars. That is not the case for British manufactured sporting ammunition and in any event legislation is unnecessary to induce manufacturers to act in their individual interests.

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.

 

[Apthorpe]

Because we sell venison into Europe.

Enough to outweigh the financial damage caused inside the UK by the lead ban?
How much venison do we sell into Europe? And how does that compare to the quantities of venison we import from abroad?

It's good sense to align regulations where there is a net benefit (financial and other) but nobody has ever produced any evidence that the lead ban is such a case. Rather the evidence is very strongly that it will be a net harm.

 

[25 Sharps]

Enough to outweigh the financial damage caused inside the UK by the lead ban?
How much venison do we sell into Europe? And how does that compare to the quantities of venison we import from abroad?

It's good sense to align regulations where there is a net benefit (financial and other) but nobody has ever produced any evidence that the lead ban is such a case. Rather the evidence is very strongly that it will be a net harm.

I don’t agree with it! Just pointing out that is part of the reason we (they) choose to comply .