We should have a laser-like focus on reducing the tax burden, instead of relying on nannying to get us off of our bottoms.
I, for one, see this new Commission as further evidence that the Government will take expert advice that benefits farmers and consumers.
The transition is much-needed for sustainability. But it must begin with a manageable reduction in the payments. Or we could be plunged into crisis.
There is precedent for using tariffs to reward those who meet higher standards, and major American producers would be on board.
People cannot simply be viewed as consumers or producers – there are other dimensions to policy, including the stewardship of the countryside.
To kick off the restart debate on a practical level, here are five areas to consider for the first phase of any amendment to the current restrictions.
A supply-chain shock poses similar problems when it comes to feeding the nation, but it says something very different about the British people.
“I don’t think it is necessary or appropriate for the Government to dictate” to supermarkets, the Environment adds Secretary says. “We need people to calm down.”
Amidst all the regulatory muddle, there has indeed been “gold plating” of EU regulations. All the more reason to leave.
The irony is that the EU itself has declared there are no food safety grounds to ban the process.
In the absence of counter-arguments, we can’t really be sure what the public thinks about state action on unhealthy lifestyles.
As the Mayor tours TV studios to express his disapproval of Trump and Brexit, our capital city suffers.
Single Market rules forbade the UK from ending this practice, despite widespread public outcry.
Most of the sound and furore about making it happen is all about means, but there has been virtually no debate about the ends.
We are as ready as we are ever likely to be to leave the EU without an agreement. The only question is whether Parliament has what it takes to make the decision.