FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Wow ..A brexit benefit
Wow ..A brexit benefit
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
" The independent .... The government has said it could use its new Brexit “freedoms” to ditch planned EU car safety rules. The UK was involved in drawing up the General Safety Regulations, which include higher standards for cars and lorries to make them less deadly for pedestrians. But ministers have now said they could “capitalise on our regulatory freedoms” and decide not to implement the safety measures after all. The regulations include requirements to build buses and lorries with better lines of sight so that they are less likely to accidentally crush pedestrians and cyclists – known as the “Direct Vision” standard. They also require cars and vans to have advanced emergency braking systems to help prevent collisions, go through more comprehensive crash tests, and include design changes to prevent head injuries for pedestrians and cyclists. The regulations were finalised while Britain was still in the EU but because they are being phased in they did not automatically apply to Britain. But asked whether the UK planned to go ahead with the regulations, transport minister Trudy Harrison said no decision had been made. Campaigners urged the government to keep the new rules and said they would save lives. Jason Wakeford, head of campaigns at Brake, a road safety charity, told The Independent: “The EU proposals, which the UK helped to shape prior to Brexit, provide the biggest leap forward for road safety this century - perhaps even since the introduction of the seat belt. “We urge the UK government to commit to adopting these lifesaving regulations, helping reduce needless deaths and serious injuries on British roads.” Stephen Edwards, interim chief executive of Living Streets, said: “Pedestrians cause the least amount of road danger but are often left paying the price on our roads, accounting for a quarter of all road deaths. We need the highest standards for vehicle safety to reduce the number of lives lost each year. “If we want people to choose cleaner and healthier ways to travel, then we need to improve safety. This means the highest standards for vehicle safety alongside measures that protect pedestrians, including lower speed limits, more effective crossings and better street maintenance.” Sarah Olney, the Liberal Democrats’ transport spokesperson, said: “I’m sure that when the Tories promised to take back control, people didn’t think it meant more dangerous roads and less safe cars.” The Direct Vision standards for lorries and buses included in the EU package were first developed by Transport for London – and then adopted by Brussels. Some Brexiteers in government and the Tory party have spoken out at what they see as foot-dragging by the government on ditching EU rules. Lord Frost, who negotiated the Brexit deal, articulated the view last year when he said that Britain would only make a success of Brexit if it pushed ahead with a low-tax economy that focused on deregulation. Last week ministers promised Brexit freedoms would “cut £1bn of red tape” for British businesses. In a written answer to a parliamentary question, Ms Harrison said: “The package of European measures known as the General Safety Regulations includes vehicle construction requirements covering pedestrian safety and a range of additional new technologies. "The Department for Transport was involved in developing these requirements, but as they apply from July 2022 it will be for the government to decide whether to mandate the same systems in GB. No decision has yet been taken. "The UK’s departure from the EU provides government with the platform to capitalise on our regulatory freedoms. The vehicle safety provisions included in the EU’s General Safety Regulation are currently under consideration. Government will implement requirements that are appropriate for GB and where they improve road safety.” " Reading the telegraph Dr Robert Smith of the LSE, who was working in conjunction with the Department of Transport Advised that vehicle safety regulation were to actually be relaxed due to vehicle weight of safety features which decrease fuel efficiency, plus the DFT were also looking at increasing limits on vehicle emissions to lower tax bills, very concerning indeed. | |||
" The independent .... The government has said it could use its new Brexit “freedoms” to ditch planned EU car safety rules. The UK was involved in drawing up the General Safety Regulations, which include higher standards for cars and lorries to make them less deadly for pedestrians. But ministers have now said they could “capitalise on our regulatory freedoms” and decide not to implement the safety measures after all. The regulations include requirements to build buses and lorries with better lines of sight so that they are less likely to accidentally crush pedestrians and cyclists – known as the “Direct Vision” standard. They also require cars and vans to have advanced emergency braking systems to help prevent collisions, go through more comprehensive crash tests, and include design changes to prevent head injuries for pedestrians and cyclists. The regulations were finalised while Britain was still in the EU but because they are being phased in they did not automatically apply to Britain. But asked whether the UK planned to go ahead with the regulations, transport minister Trudy Harrison said no decision had been made. Campaigners urged the government to keep the new rules and said they would save lives. Jason Wakeford, head of campaigns at Brake, a road safety charity, told The Independent: “The EU proposals, which the UK helped to shape prior to Brexit, provide the biggest leap forward for road safety this century - perhaps even since the introduction of the seat belt. “We urge the UK government to commit to adopting these lifesaving regulations, helping reduce needless deaths and serious injuries on British roads.” Stephen Edwards, interim chief executive of Living Streets, said: “Pedestrians cause the least amount of road danger but are often left paying the price on our roads, accounting for a quarter of all road deaths. We need the highest standards for vehicle safety to reduce the number of lives lost each year. “If we want people to choose cleaner and healthier ways to travel, then we need to improve safety. This means the highest standards for vehicle safety alongside measures that protect pedestrians, including lower speed limits, more effective crossings and better street maintenance.” Sarah Olney, the Liberal Democrats’ transport spokesperson, said: “I’m sure that when the Tories promised to take back control, people didn’t think it meant more dangerous roads and less safe cars.” The Direct Vision standards for lorries and buses included in the EU package were first developed by Transport for London – and then adopted by Brussels. Some Brexiteers in government and the Tory party have spoken out at what they see as foot-dragging by the government on ditching EU rules. Lord Frost, who negotiated the Brexit deal, articulated the view last year when he said that Britain would only make a success of Brexit if it pushed ahead with a low-tax economy that focused on deregulation. Last week ministers promised Brexit freedoms would “cut £1bn of red tape” for British businesses. In a written answer to a parliamentary question, Ms Harrison said: “The package of European measures known as the General Safety Regulations includes vehicle construction requirements covering pedestrian safety and a range of additional new technologies. "The Department for Transport was involved in developing these requirements, but as they apply from July 2022 it will be for the government to decide whether to mandate the same systems in GB. No decision has yet been taken. "The UK’s departure from the EU provides government with the platform to capitalise on our regulatory freedoms. The vehicle safety provisions included in the EU’s General Safety Regulation are currently under consideration. Government will implement requirements that are appropriate for GB and where they improve road safety.” Reading the telegraph Dr Robert Smith of the LSE, who was working in conjunction with the Department of Transport Advised that vehicle safety regulation were to actually be relaxed due to vehicle weight of safety features which decrease fuel efficiency, plus the DFT were also looking at increasing limits on vehicle emissions to lower tax bills, very concerning indeed." Ah but.... We left the controlling EU, can make our own decisions, have lower costs for fuels, energy and food and we have sovereignty. Now we can move forward with an elected Gov't who we trust, a governing body (House of Lords) that keeps them right when needed and we have pint glasses and imperial measures. The future looks bright indeed. | |||
| |||
" The independent .... The government has said it could use its new Brexit “freedoms” to ditch planned EU car safety rules. The UK was involved in drawing up the General Safety Regulations, which include higher standards for cars and lorries to make them less deadly for pedestrians. But ministers have now said they could “capitalise on our regulatory freedoms” and decide not to implement the safety measures after all. The regulations include requirements to build buses and lorries with better lines of sight so that they are less likely to accidentally crush pedestrians and cyclists – known as the “Direct Vision” standard. They also require cars and vans to have advanced emergency braking systems to help prevent collisions, go through more comprehensive crash tests, and include design changes to prevent head injuries for pedestrians and cyclists. The regulations were finalised while Britain was still in the EU but because they are being phased in they did not automatically apply to Britain. But asked whether the UK planned to go ahead with the regulations, transport minister Trudy Harrison said no decision had been made. Campaigners urged the government to keep the new rules and said they would save lives. Jason Wakeford, head of campaigns at Brake, a road safety charity, told The Independent: “The EU proposals, which the UK helped to shape prior to Brexit, provide the biggest leap forward for road safety this century - perhaps even since the introduction of the seat belt. “We urge the UK government to commit to adopting these lifesaving regulations, helping reduce needless deaths and serious injuries on British roads.” Stephen Edwards, interim chief executive of Living Streets, said: “Pedestrians cause the least amount of road danger but are often left paying the price on our roads, accounting for a quarter of all road deaths. We need the highest standards for vehicle safety to reduce the number of lives lost each year. “If we want people to choose cleaner and healthier ways to travel, then we need to improve safety. This means the highest standards for vehicle safety alongside measures that protect pedestrians, including lower speed limits, more effective crossings and better street maintenance.” Sarah Olney, the Liberal Democrats’ transport spokesperson, said: “I’m sure that when the Tories promised to take back control, people didn’t think it meant more dangerous roads and less safe cars.” The Direct Vision standards for lorries and buses included in the EU package were first developed by Transport for London – and then adopted by Brussels. Some Brexiteers in government and the Tory party have spoken out at what they see as foot-dragging by the government on ditching EU rules. Lord Frost, who negotiated the Brexit deal, articulated the view last year when he said that Britain would only make a success of Brexit if it pushed ahead with a low-tax economy that focused on deregulation. Last week ministers promised Brexit freedoms would “cut £1bn of red tape” for British businesses. In a written answer to a parliamentary question, Ms Harrison said: “The package of European measures known as the General Safety Regulations includes vehicle construction requirements covering pedestrian safety and a range of additional new technologies. "The Department for Transport was involved in developing these requirements, but as they apply from July 2022 it will be for the government to decide whether to mandate the same systems in GB. No decision has yet been taken. "The UK’s departure from the EU provides government with the platform to capitalise on our regulatory freedoms. The vehicle safety provisions included in the EU’s General Safety Regulation are currently under consideration. Government will implement requirements that are appropriate for GB and where they improve road safety.” Reading the telegraph Dr Robert Smith of the LSE, who was working in conjunction with the Department of Transport Advised that vehicle safety regulation were to actually be relaxed due to vehicle weight of safety features which decrease fuel efficiency, plus the DFT were also looking at increasing limits on vehicle emissions to lower tax bills, very concerning indeed. Ah but.... We left the controlling EU, can make our own decisions, have lower costs for fuels, energy and food and we have sovereignty. Now we can move forward with an elected Gov't who we trust, a governing body (House of Lords) that keeps them right when needed and we have pint glasses and imperial measures. The future looks bright indeed." Wrong again…sorry! According to Professor Michael Langdon of the Right wing think tank Deliverance, full divergence from individual agreements with EU countries, would increase prices on food and fuel, he mentioned, because of our current agreements with our neighbours, sovereignty would be certain, however it would affect our relationships in areas such as trade or defence because those basic necessities would be deemed as a security threat to the sovereignty of the UK. In terms of imperial measurements, Ian Nesbitt of The British Capital Group, a leading body of conservative business interests, indicated the change from metric to imperial measurements would cost the food and drinks industry 634 billion pounds in adjustment of equipment to meet changes, with an increase material costs due to planned changes, with would damage those industries for the next 25 years. It would require an increases of 19% in food and drinks bills which would be passed directly to the consumer. It’s is a bit of a pain, but higher costs need to land somewhere, we can’t just expect everything for free, well except freedom of course. | |||
