Brexit: tell us your consumer concerns

Devolved administrations, local authorities and businesses risk being overwhelmed by Brexit implementation on 1 January, unable to deal with it alongside the urgent demands of the second wave of Covid-19, an influential thinktank has said.

Local councils, trading standards officers and port health authorities are all part of the Brexit operation but may find themselves stretched because of the resurgence of the virus, the Institute for Government said.

“The pandemic will make these plans harder. For example, critical staff may fall ill or need to isolate and resources may well be redirected to the pandemic response.

Importing food and drink that we can produce in the UK makes no environmental sense. There is plenty of good beer produced in the UK and many areas are well served by microbreweries.

We joined the EEC in 1973 not 1993.

Beer is not necessarily a staple that most families will be concerned about.

As a non-drinker (not tea-total but extremely lightweight), the price of alcohol and beer is of little concern to me but simple economics should determine that locally produced products and produce should be cheaper and subject to better quality controls.

I too lived in Europe – Munich, in fact. Beer is bought by the crate for home use and I even enjoyed many an evening with friends at the Hofbräuhaus and even at the annual beer festival. Bottled beer was also available in vending machines at my place of work and could be purchased at any time of the day. What’s most noticeable is that there were no drunks littering the office or pavements.

I am hard-pushed to think of any way in which the British people have benefitted from the UK’s membership of the EEC/EU, perhaps not in taxes on beer and alcohol and certainly not in taxes on fuels.

Paying local tax , what is wrong with that?.

Derek, we joined the EU single market on 1st January 1993 (from its inception date), not in 1973.

You say that you are “hard-pushed to think of any way in which the British people have benefitted from the UK’s membership of the EEC/EU“, yet you previously said you lived in Germany. What about freedom of movement to live and work in other EU countries? That is a huge benefit for British citizens.

https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/evolutionofparliament/legislativescrutiny/parliament-and-europe/overview/britain-and-eec-to-single-european-act/
We didn’t really “join” the single market as it was a change made to the workings of the EEC that affected every member state. I think it is fair to regard the UK’s membership as being from when Ted Heath took us into the EEC in 1973.

Malcolm, I think you’re confusing two different related memberships.

The UK’s membership of the EU (including predecessors) ran from 01/01/1973 to 31/01/2020.

The UK’s membership of the EU’s single market runs from 01/01/1993 to 31/12/2020.

This conversation about the end of the transition period as well as this sub-thread (about the right to transport unlimited amounts of alcohol across borders) concerns the UK’s membership specifically of the EU’s single market. Therefore the latter two dates are relevant.

Vynor Hill – you are correct the terms are Australian/ Canadian are hogwash. The UK will be on WTO terms which don’t really offer any special favours at all. It does seem if you are lead by tow-headed New York City born “figures” then your have serious problems.

I am deeply depressed by the quality of government.

On sustainability, it might be a good idea for Which? to include some advice alongside some of its short [promotional?] reports on new products or models on not replacing existing goods if they still have a useful working life left, and on how to recycle or create new uses for goods that have been replaced by the latest version [sometimes for cosmetic reasons, like a change of colour]. If new products are significantly more energy efficient or more effective in saving running costs then that would be a good reason to change so long as the redundant article was not just scrapped.

I would look hard at the economics before scrapping a working product when a newer version saveds energy or water. First, the savings are likely to take a long time to recover the capital cost of the new product, if ever. But we must also remember that a good deal of energy and material resources go into the manufacture of a product; it is important to conserve such resources and not just think of energy savings.

Consumers face commercial pressure to replace electrical products with more efficient ones. Undoubtedly the efficiency of products has improved but the environmental costs of manufacture and subsequent disposal of products tend to be forgotten. Here is a report promoting more efficient appliances that fails to pay much attention to these factors: https://www.amdea.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Promoting_highly_efficient_electrical_appliances_Global_Action_Plan.pdf

Which? has been keeping us informed about smart products for some time now. Smart TVs that lose functionality after a few years shows where we are heading. How many smart products will be scrapped because convenient features stop working when they are no longer compatible with modern phones? Perhaps Which? should try to help us that the main function of smart products is to encourage consumerism.

This is not specifically related to Brexit, but now would be a good time for Which? to start a campaign against consumerism.

I think that Northern Ireland is the last part of the UK that will suffer food shortages. You can always pop over the border to an Irish supermarket, and bring back what you like, given that there are guaranteed (quite rightly) to be no physical checks at the border.

Good analogy. Brexit is trying to solve a problem that doesn’t exist. The best deal with the EU is the deal that we already have.

You mirror my own concerns in that deals will be brokered that do not necessarily benefit the British people but rather line the pockets of those making the deals. If the government can’t protect the quality of our food and livestock being imported, then we have to stop building on green land and start farming our own provisions.

I don’t believe that producing cheaper food is any excuse for condoning food that could seriously damage our health. It would be useful to see evidence of harm caused by growth promoters in countries that use them, the USA perhaps.

See: theguardian.com – The Dangers of Human Growth Hormones

Scientists will argue hormone growth promoters used in livestock are carefully controlled.

Cheaper food can be just as nutritious as expensive food. For example mackerel can provide as much Vitamin D as salmon.

Protracted and untreatable infections are perhaps the problem that the public can best relate to. Use of antibiotics as growth promoters and the enhanced need for treatment of sick animals caused by poor animal husbandry are not the only reasons for spread of antibiotic resistance but these are regarded as a major factor.

Other growth promoters such as hormones are closely related to the the natural biochemicals that regulate our bodies, so there is plenty of opportunity to cause mayhem. It is very difficult to study the effects of these growth promoters independently of other factors but perhaps we should rely on those with some expertise rather than relying on economics.

We should be looking to produce sufficient meat in this country then we wouldn’t have to resort to transporting it around the world that would be far better for the planet.

What is wrong with exported meat that makes it cost efficient?

I can see the benefit of an arrangement with New Zealand where we trade lamb out of season, but chickens?

Presumably those with expertise have produced peer-reviewed reports that help to quantify these problems. I am simply looking for more than generalisations. I do not believe that the routine use of “medication” should be used on animals to either promote growth or deter disease when good husbandry would suffice. So I’d like to see the extent of the problem and the degree to which it is harmful.

I agree alfa. I would like to see us much more self sufficient in foodstuffs, and wean us off demanding fresh out-of-season foods that require long-distance transport. I could live with tinned or frozen raspberries produced in Scotland and look forward to fresh ones next season. I don’t need to buy roses produced in Chile when I could buy flowers produced in the UK. Green beans from Kenya? However, the problem may always be one of price; can the UK producers compete and will consumers rally behind a support the home grown policy? I doubt it.

Since supermarkets started labelling the country of origin of food I have been buying food produced in the UK where possible, and ideally locally produced food. Hopefully Brexit might encourage more people to do the same but at present there is a risk that we could import lower quality food as Which? keeps reminding us.

Thanks for these examples Alfa. I do wish that manufacturers and retailer would not conflate provision of useful information and marketing.

It’s common for retailers to claim to be manufacturers. I doubt that the ASA would take action unless the claim appeared in advertising but that does not mean that we should not challenge this sort of claim. It’s probably easier to focus on products that claim to be organic because those who buy these products are more likely be interested in where their food comes from and how it is produced than the average consumer.

I agree with what you say about fewer pesticides in products claimed to be organic, though organic farming does allow the use of a limited number of chemicals. That will be the reason for the reference to ‘manufactured herbicides’.

I’m not taking the risk of venturing into a supermarket at present and am disappointed by the lack of information about the origin of food on the websites I am using. I will see if I can find some examples of good and unhelpful labelling.

I really hope that concerns about where our food comes from will not go away.

How on earth did we allow the use of growth promoters in the first place.

” Food manufacturer means a person who combines, purifies, processes, or packages food for sale through a wholesale outlet. The term also includes a retail outlet that packages or labels food before sale and a person that represents itself as responsible for the purity and proper labeling of an article of food by labeling the food with the person’s name and address.”. As many products are assembled from more than one source I assume the manufacturer is the final “assembler” and the entity that takes responsibility for the product.

I am looking at a packet of Tesco Organic Self-Raising Flour and that states ‘Produced in the UK for Tesco Stores Ltd.). That is more honest, in my view, than saying that it is manufactured by Tesco but I would like to which company has supplied the flour to Tesco. I’ve noticed that supermarkets sometimes provide this information, for example when saying which brewery produces their own-label bottled beers. Likewise, supermarket fruit and veg produced in the UK often shows the name of the grower.

The primary purpose is surely to know who is responsible for the product, in this case Tesco. Knowing which flour mill was the producer might be interesting to some but is secondary, as is the farmer that grew my carrots.

I do prefer to buy UK produced food (although I understand other countries, like Canada, are better suited to producing the hard wheat for bread flour.

We produce a lot of our own lamb but then also import from New Zealand, particularly when ours is out of season, in frozen form . We also export lamb. Would it be better if we froze it for use out of season and reduced the imports?

You would need to measure the carbon footprint of freezing the UK-reared lamb and compare it to the carbon footprint of transporting frozen New Zealand lamb halfway round the world.

A factor in those calculations will be the carbon footprint of any return shipping opportunity and the implications of sending a vacant vessel back to New Zealand.

Most UK lamb exports go to other countries in Europe and not necessarily in frozen form. The added value of such exports might exceed the savings from freezing and storing UK lamb for home consumption.

The more we drill down into these considerations the more difficult it becomes to produce reliable decisions. Uneconomical decisions in one area could limit or cancel out the opportunity to improve ecological sustainability in another. I feel we should still try to evaluate all options, and their consequences, in both economic and environmental sustainability terms.

Malcolm – We know that the retailer is responsible for the product but like Alfa I want to know more about where it was grown or produced. Those who are not interested can ignore this information.

The local Lidl already does that Wavechange with special Union Jack emblems and ‘Produced in Great Britain’ clearly displayed on quite a number of their packaging.

Unfortunately they don’t do online ordering, Beryl. At present I’m not going to take the risk of venturing into supermarkets. I have seen the prominent signs you mention.

I don’t blame you Wavechange, like you I have been using click and collect and mostly Ocado online deliveries when available. I haven’t visited Lidl since before the first lockdown, but again like you was a little reluctant to enter the foyer of Waitrose to pick up click and collect. Since you contacted Waitrose HO re this have been fortunate enough to receive delivery from Ocado.

I’m glad to hear about Lidl, Beryl. I do hope that post-Brexit we feel freer to promote UK products. It needs producers and manufacturers to invest more to satisfy increased demand that hopefully would occur, and government to provide encouragement to increase worthwhile employment, particularly in the more deprived parts of the UK. We will need to boost the economy post-COVID so being a bit more home-focussed in what we buy should help.

John, looking at it environmentally is certainly one approach. Supporting the UK economy is another, providing our producers meet the challenge and don’t live off subsidies. I hope the proposed changes to they way we reward farmers who actually improve the environment rather than just own a lot of acres will help as well.

The problem with supermarket own brand products is the real manufacturer can change at any time.

My husband is allergic to cows milk but can eat goat and sheep cheese. He had an allergic reaction to one brand of sheep cheese so will never touch it again. They didn’t even acknowledge our email when we brought it to their attention and suggested there might be cross-contamination. An apology, a thank you for bringing it to their attention and a promise to look into it would have sufficed as a reply. Now if that brand hides behind a supermarket own brand, we wouldn’t know we were buying it.

We haven’t seen it yet, but a goat butter we use is likely to be rebranded M&S. That means we won’t be able to trust it again and he will be back to dairy-free spreads full of chemicals.

Beryl – Our local Waitrose has responded to our complaints about having to go into their store for a click & collect order. You now phone when you arrive and they bring out your groceries. A friend has just tried the new system and brought round some groceries.

I agree and think we need to check both the environmental and the economic approach; as I said, it might work out better for the UK economy to export UK lamb to other countries in Europe as a premium product [subject to tariffs!] and import frozen lamb from New Zealand – it helps international trade if it is two-way so if we buy more from NZ they might buy more from us. We shall be needing amicable trading partners shortly I feel.

That’s very useful to know Wavechange. I am about to reorder so will check with my 2 local Waitrose branches for click and collect as it gets me out of the house and keeps the car battery charged up 🙂

If Waitrose operates the same system as our local Morrisons there is the opportunity to hand back any items that are damaged for replacement. Not all supermarkets offer click & collect services and I have a 20 mile round trip to the Tesco I shopped in before I moved.

Alfa – I presume that you make use of the FSA’s food alerts. For anyone who is not familiar with them, here is the website: https://www.food.gov.uk/news-alerts/search/alerts?keywords=&page=0 FSA produces plenty of alerts relating to foods with undeclared allergens and it might be worth finding out if they will accept reports of problems from the public.

I can relate to food allergies because I had a problem with moulds in blue cheeses (obvious) and tiny amounts in muesli and other foods containing nuts (no way of knowing). Fortunately the problem disappeared within a couple of years and I no longer need to carry emergency treatment.

When I contact a retailer about a problem I am looking for a solution, not a financial sweetener.

I used to get email alerts from them wavechange, but something went wrong with their system and I haven’t received them for a while. But you mentioning it has prompted me to try again and their system now works, so I should get updates again.

I don’t look for financial compensation either. In the days of writing snail-mail letters of complaint, you would sometimes receive a few vouchers for taking the trouble to let them know or refund your product, but emails have put a stop to that.

I hope so, Alfa. I used to get recall information from Electrical Safety First but despite re-registering I no longer receive their emails.

The FSA alerts sometimes provide an insight into the suppliers being used by supermarkets.

I subscribe to the FSA email service largely out of interest; I don’t have any allergies but it is useful to see recalls and warnings. I see them as a well-focused and proactive organisation and approachable.

I wonder if the OPSS would offer a similar service on unsafe manufactured products? You can look for recalls on their website https://productrecall.campaign.gov.uk/ but I wonder how many know, or bother, to check. There are not that many so if they did email them they would not flood your inbox. Equally, I doubt many would sign up to an email service. We need a proactive approach where all potentially hazardous products are registered at the point of sale so, if a problem arises, all owners can be contacted directly.

Most products are purchased using a credit or debit card. These have contact details associated. Is it possible for sellers to link the sale of a recalled item to the card purchaser so they can be directly contacted, presumably via the card issuer? Maybe GDPR gets in the way?

A different list of recalled products and safety notices can be found on the CTSI website: https://www.tradingstandards.uk/consumers/product-recalls-and-safety-notices

For product recalls, the EC Safety Gate website (previously RAPEX) provides the most comprehensive list: https://ec.europa.eu/consumers/consumers_safety/safety_products/rapex/alerts/?event=main.listNotifications&lng=en

The number of recalls is not large and I’ve suggested that Which? could help by publishing a weekly list, which might then be taken over by the OPSS.

” You would need to measure the carbon footprint……..”. https://conversation.which.co.uk/community/brexit-consumer-concerns/#comment-1613116

Indeed John. I saw an article online in The Times yesterday that said the extra CO2 used to make an electric car, largely the batteries, over a petrol car would take 50 000 miles to recover. That’s around 6 or 7 years. I wonder when batteries will need replacing? That ignores the harmful emissions of course that blight our towns and cities. For those who live in the sticks and can use the electric range of a petrol hybrid when in town, and petrol when in open country, maybe we should be focussing on those for now. It would avoid the plight of an electric Porsche owner who took 9 hours (from memory, but a long time) to get from Bournemouth back to London due to charge points being occupied, out of order, or extremely slow.

Apart from not yet having enough energy storage to take advantage of the availability of renewable energy overnight for recharging electric vehicles [although storing ‘green’ hydrogen might assist here in due course], we are nowhere near enough yet in providing on-the-road recharging capacity. Most car parks I have seen with any facilities at all have just one or two units and with an occupation time of, say, 30 minutes will not support many vehicles. I see batteries as only an interim technology; petrol/electric hybrids are more flexible albeit more polluting. As well as adding considerable weight [disproportionately as a percentage of the total load] and thus a higher fuel demand, batteries are not an environmentally acceptable or sustainable solution.

We are constantly striving to find ways of giving ourselves the kind of motoring to which we have become accustomed, but that can only be at a very high environmental and financial cost. We need a fundamental rethink about why we are travelling, how we can do it with less impact on the environment, and whether there are other less harmful ways of achieving our objectives, even if they take longer or are less convenient. We are living longer, therefore we have more time at our disposal, so why don’t we just slow down and take our time to do things that are essential and stop doing the things that aren’t?

My car has just passed his MOT and has done just 37 miles in the last year and that is mostly to give him a bit of excercise. 🙃 Not a high environmental cost, but quite a high cost per mile. 🙄

I’m glad he did not fail because of cobwebs in the suspension. It might be useful to add a dose of fuel stabiliser in the tank. Petrol deteriorates during prolonged storage and the ethanol content of fuel can cause more problems.

A fuel additive has been added to the tank already.

That’s good. I’m far from convinced that adding ethanol to petrol and FAME to diesel are wise because there is now enough evidence of the problems they can cause in engines.

So it doesn’t mean German Bauernhof then? I bet there were plenty of German autos in the car park 😀

Not sure but parking was always free 🙂