Brexit Will DESTROY ‘Scotland the Brand’ and Turn Our Food to Poison!

Yesterday the Business Insider wrote a piece headlined

“Trump tells May to abandon ‘unjustified’ food standards for Brexit trade deal”

Scotland the brand is a well-known global brand associated with Quality.  Scotland as a nation produces some exceptional foods and has a huge global foot print for its food stuff, many of which are protected brands. 

Some of these protected brands that EU membership offers are:

Traditional Ayrshire Dunlop Cheese, Orkney Scottish Island Cheddar, Stornoway Black Pudding, Scottish Wild Salmon, Shetland Lamb, Orkney Beef, Orkney Lamb, Scotch Whisky, Scottish Farmed Salmon, Scotch Lamb, Scotch Beef, Arbroath Smokie, Native Shetland Wool, Teviotdale Cheese and Bonchester Cheese (Source 1).

Just 2 of the above, Scotch whisky and Scotch Salmon, account for a huge amount of revenue for Scotland, in fact it accounts for almost 25% of all UK exports.  To put this into perspective, Scotch whisky alone generates £139 every second, 39 bottles are exported internationally every second and more than 50,000 people are either directly or indirectly employed because of this industry alone (Source 2).

In numbers, Scotch whisky alone generates:

Scotch Whisky	Revenue
Every Second	£139
Every Second	£8,340
Every Hour	£500,400
Every Hour	£12,009,600
Every Week	£84,067,200
Last Year (2017)	£4,371,494,400

This means that every year, Scotch whisky generates £832 per head in Scotland, if this were an English industry on the same scale, it would generate over £45,000,000,000 per year for England and if it were an American industry on the same scale it would generate over £249,000,000,000 per year for Americans, or more than the entire GDP of Scotland.

Is it any wonder Trump wants his hands on it?

Scottish Salmon, as of February 2018 is reportedly worth £600,000,000 to the Scottish economy via international exports alone, its current top export destinations are the USA, France and China.  This value has increased 35% in 2 years.

According to the Scottish Salmon Producers Association (Source 3), they state,

“The demand for Scottish salmon continues to grow in recognition of its taste, quality and provenance and these are key drivers for growth in the USA, EU and Asian markets.

Today’s outstanding figures are a result of remarkable products and of sectors working together to create a national brand with a global reputation, underpinned by the Scotland Food and Drink Export Plan.

We will continue to do all we can to support and protect our food and drink sector, which faces growing uncertainty in the labour and export markets as a result of Brexit, which poses a direct threat to this success by removing Scotland from the world’s biggest single market, and its consumer base of almost half a billion people.”

The Scottish Salmon industry exports £600,000,000 internationally, but also £2,000,000,000 via the Single Market and it employs some 10,000 EU nationals.

In numbers, Scottish Salmon alone generates:

Scottish Salmon	Revenue
Every Second	£89
Every Second	£4,960
Every Hour	£297,619
Every Hour	£7,142,857
Every Week	£50,000,000
Last Year (2017)	£2,600,000,000

This means that every year, Scottish Salmon generates £495 per head in Scotland, if this were an English industry on the same scale, it would generate over £27,000,000,000 per year for England and if it were an American industry on the same scale it would generate over £148,000,000,000 per year for Americans, or almost the entire GDP of Scotland.

Is it any wonder Trump wants his hands on it?

Currently Scotland enjoys the benefits of these industries because they are protected brands.  A protected brand in the EU, known as a Trade Mark is a sign that distinguishes the goods and services from those of another and a Trade Mark can become one of the company’s most important assets (Source 4).  This is very true for Scottish Whisky and Salmon.

Out of the EU, this would not apply and it would be possible for any country, anywhere to rear Salmon and label it Scottish or make Whisky and label it Scottish.

Scotland being taken out of the EU against its democratic wishes is an abomination on the people and industry of Scotland.  Brexit highlights, yet again just what little equality exists in this United Kingdom and it proves unequivocally that it is NOT in Scotland’s best interests to remain in it anymore.

I am well aware that numbers don’t do it for everyone, sometimes its more than that to people, and I am one of those persons.

I have a 1 year old child who is allergic to Cows Milk and Soya.  It is a nightmare because every item my wife and I buy must be checked for Milk and Soya.  For those of you with children in the same position, you will feel our pain, for those of you who aren’t, maybe the next time you go shopping just check the ingredients of some of the common items you buy and take for granted for Milk and Soya to see the extent of the issue we and 1 in 50 other parents have to cope with.

The current state of affairs between the US food standards and the EU food standards is stark.  Below is a comparison on 13 areas ONLY (Source 5):

Standard	Examples	USA	EU
Drug residue tested in seafood imports	Farmed Shrimp	Checks for 16 drugs	Checks for 50 drugs
Cultivation of genetically engineered crops	Breakfast cereals	Widely grown – Corn, Soy, Canola, Sugar Beet	Two Crops
Labelling for genetically engineered food	NA	None	Required
Bisphenol-A (BPA) in baby bottles	NA	Banned in 2012	Banned in 2011
Bisphenol-A (BPA) in canned goods	Canned vegetables	Widely used	Permitted, but banned in France 2015
Gestation crates (confining cages for breeding sows)	Ham, Bacon	Widely used, banned in some states	Banned
Antiseptic washes on meat	Chicken	Widely used on poultry	Ban on use or import
Antibiotics used to promote growth of meat in animals	All	Widely used	Banned
Beef hormones	Beef	Permitted	Banned
rBGH (biotech hormone used on dairy cattle)	Milk, Cheese, Yoghurt	Permitted	Banned
Atrazine (herbicide, potential endocrine disrupter)	Fruits, Soy, Corn, Sugar	Widely used	Banned
Neonicotinoids (pesticides suspected in Bee colony collapse disorder)	Corn, Soy, Cotton	Permitted	Banned 3 types in 2013
Use of antibiotics in organic farming	Organic Pears, Apples etc.	Banned for animals, allowed for fruit trees	Allowed for animals, banned for fruit trees

It doesn’t just stop here though, there is far more where that came from.  Here are some quotes from Organic Germinal (Source 6).

ADDITIVES

European regulations against additives in food products are generally stricter than in the U.S. This difference is due mostly to the fact that Europe has chosen a precautionary approach in regulating, while the U.S. governing bodies tend to be more reactive. In other words, in the United States, food additives are innocent until proven guilty, while in Europe, only those additives proven not to be harmful are approved for use.

As a result, there many petrochemical-based food colourings and other artificial ingredients like brominated vegetable oil (BVO) and rBHG that are banned in Europe, but these and other additives are approved for use in the USA.

ALLERGENS

According to FDA policy, food packaging must disclose the presence of the following eight common allergens: milk, egg, fish, shellfish, tree nuts, wheat, peanuts, and soybeans. The EU FIC guidelines require the mandatory listing of 14 allergens. Moreover, these allergens must be listed directly in the ingredients section, rather than in a separate box.

The EU also has new rules for allergenic ingredient disclosures outside of traditional retail food labels; restaurants, for example, must list all allergens in a specific place, such as the ingredient list. Establishments serving food in America are still not required by law to list allergens and other ingredients, but this could change as health-conscious restaurants and chains are already changing the trends.

LABELLING

FDA food labeling requirements have only changed twice since the early 1990s, once in 2006 and again in 2014. Conversely, European food labeling rules were not strictly fixed until relatively recently. The most recent provision outlines “minimum font size for mandatory information, a standard presentation of allergens and required nutritional information.”

Overall, US and EU policy for food labels are rather similar. The major differences involve the labelling of additives and GMOs. The FDA mandates that additives are listed by their common name, rather than with a European e-number; if a product label contains an e-number, it will not be allowed into the country. When it comes to GMOs, on the other hand, European regulations are quite strict, while the FDA does not even require a label to indicate their presence.

People should really start looking at the writing on the wall, nostalgia of Empire and “they’d be speaking German if it wasn’t for us” needs to be cast aside.  This is your future and your children’s future that’s at stake.  Don’t give it away so freely without first fighting to retain it!

Follow @BlogAlba

Sources

Source 1

Source 2

Source 3

Source 4

Source 5

Source 6