EU drops olive oil jug ban after public outcry

[Old Codger]

According to the Daily Telegraph (http://preview.tinyurl.com/na2rsnf)
the public outcry over the provision of olive oil in unmarked jugs has
caused the EU dictators to have a rethink.

Power to the people.

--
Old Codger
e-mail use reply to field

What matters in politics is not what happens, but what you can make
people believe has happened. [Janet Daley 27/8/2003]

[Death To Terrorists]

On Thu, 23 May 2013 20:53:28 +0100, Old Codger <m...@privacy.net> wrote:

>According to the Daily Telegraph (http://preview.tinyurl.com/na2rsnf)
>the public outcry over the provision of olive oil in unmarked jugs has
>caused the EU dictators to have a rethink.
>
>Power to the people.

Freedom for Tooting


--

[Nightjar]

On 23/05/2013 20:53, Old Codger wrote:
> According to the Daily Telegraph (http://preview.tinyurl.com/na2rsnf)
> the public outcry over the provision of olive oil in unmarked jugs has
> caused the EU dictators to have a rethink.
>
> Power to the people.
>

I suppose the decision does have the advantage that, if you get olive
oil served in a jug, rather than a closed glass bottle, you know not to
expect to much of it, as it is almost certain to have oxidised.

Colin Bignell

[Old Codger]

Depends how long since it was decanted from its original container but
yes. However, that is how it has always? been so those who take it that
way are used to it.

[MM]

On Thu, 23 May 2013 20:53:28 +0100, Old Codger <m...@privacy.net>
wrote:

>Power to the people.

Power to the rip-off restaurateurs, more like. The people don't have
any power. They will continue to consume the unlabelled "olive oil"
provided. Some may be lucky and get the good stuff. Others may not. I
would suggest that judging by the squeals from the industry, the
latter category would be in the majority.

Therefore, this protest was mostly driven by the desire to carry on
ripping off the consumers and I'm saddened that the EU folded so
pathetically.

MM

[Mike P]

On Thu, 23 May 2013 20:53:28 +0100, Old Codger panted, in an erotic
manner:

> According to the Daily Telegraph (http://preview.tinyurl.com/na2rsnf)
> the public outcry over the provision of olive oil in unmarked jugs has
> caused the EU dictators to have a rethink.
>
> Power to the people.

Power to the rip-off restaraunters more like..

I don't know about you, but I like to know what I'm buying. The stuff in
the jugs is 90% shite olive oil.

My relatives in Athens (as well as owning a large cinema chain) also own
a massive olive oil plantation or 3. They know what tricks are used to
dilute olive oil in restaruants - and by bottlers. The practise is rife.
EU missed a trick here.

The timing, with the eurozone crisis, could obviously have been better,
but there you go..

--
Mike P

[Steve Firth]

MM <kyli...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
[snip]

>
> Therefore, this protest was mostly driven by the desire to carry on
> ripping off the consumers and I'm saddened that the EU folded so
> pathetically.

What a load of bollocks.

Good restaurants buy their olive oil direct from the farm. The move to
demand that it was only supplied in glass bottles bearing labels from a
company was a cynical move by big business to stop the direct farm trade
and force small farmers to supply through the big businesses.

That's the same big companies that routinely commit olive oil fraud. Like
this:

http://www.masdesbories.com/html/fraud_alert.html

Oh look it's those Germans defrauding the consumer.

Stick to talking about things you understand. The silence will be
refreshing.

--
<•DarWin><|
_/ _/

[tim......]

"Mike P" <n...@here.com> wrote in message news:knnkh4$rpe$2...@dont-email.me...

> On Thu, 23 May 2013 20:53:28 +0100, Old Codger panted, in an erotic
> manner:
>
>> According to the Daily Telegraph (http://preview.tinyurl.com/na2rsnf)
>> the public outcry over the provision of olive oil in unmarked jugs has
>> caused the EU dictators to have a rethink.
>>
>> Power to the people.
>
> Power to the rip-off restaraunters more like..
>
> I don't know about you, but I like to know what I'm buying. The stuff in
> the jugs is 90% shite olive oil.

so go to a restaurant where it isn't then

AISI it's a "free" condiment. Either it bothers you what the quality is so
you seek out a restaurant you can trust, or you don't car and if it's
rubbish you don't use it

tim

[MM]

Spot on. Let's hope Pardo et al will now tuck into some nice crow.
They can always drizzle over a little no-name "value" olive oil...

MM

[MM]

On Fri, 24 May 2013 18:20:26 +0200, "tim......"
<tims_n...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>
>"Mike P" <n...@here.com> wrote in message news:knnkh4$rpe$2...@dont-email.me...
>> On Thu, 23 May 2013 20:53:28 +0100, Old Codger panted, in an erotic
>> manner:
>>
>>> According to the Daily Telegraph (http://preview.tinyurl.com/na2rsnf)
>>> the public outcry over the provision of olive oil in unmarked jugs has
>>> caused the EU dictators to have a rethink.
>>>
>>> Power to the people.
>>
>> Power to the rip-off restaraunters more like..
>>
>> I don't know about you, but I like to know what I'm buying. The stuff in
>> the jugs is 90% shite olive oil.
>
>so go to a restaurant where it isn't then

And you glean this through some magical process perhaps?

>AISI it's a "free" condiment. Either it bothers you what the quality is so
>you seek out a restaurant you can trust, or you don't car and if it's
>rubbish you don't use it

The British are loathe to complain. Maybe other nationalities are as
well. They suck it up and only moan later, after the restaurateur has
mis... sorry, used, their credit card. And we all know it's not really
free, is it? The meal is costed to include the extras.

MM

[tim......]

"MM" <kyli...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:8a6vp85ain7dm3iru...@4ax.com...

> On Fri, 24 May 2013 18:20:26 +0200, "tim......"
> <tims_n...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Mike P" <n...@here.com> wrote in message
>>news:knnkh4$rpe$2...@dont-email.me...
>>> On Thu, 23 May 2013 20:53:28 +0100, Old Codger panted, in an erotic
>>> manner:
>>>
>>>> According to the Daily Telegraph (http://preview.tinyurl.com/na2rsnf)
>>>> the public outcry over the provision of olive oil in unmarked jugs has
>>>> caused the EU dictators to have a rethink.
>>>>
>>>> Power to the people.
>>>
>>> Power to the rip-off restaraunters more like..
>>>
>>> I don't know about you, but I like to know what I'm buying. The stuff in
>>> the jugs is 90% shite olive oil.
>>
>>so go to a restaurant where it isn't then
>
> And you glean this through some magical process perhaps?

trial and error

>>AISI it's a "free" condiment. Either it bothers you what the quality is
>>so
>>you seek out a restaurant you can trust, or you don't car and if it's
>>rubbish you don't use it
>
> The British are loathe to complain.

I know, so you complain with your feet

> Maybe other nationalities are as
> well. They suck it up and only moan later, after the restaurateur has
> mis... sorry, used, their credit card. And we all know it's not really
> free, is it?

I hope that it is.

as someone who doesn't use it I see no reason why I should be paying for it

>The meal is costed to include the extras.

Hopefully it's only costed into those things it might reasonably be used on

tim

[Old Codger]

The Telegraph article includes the following:

'In a humiliating U-turn, Dacian Ciolos, the European commissioner for
agriculture, admitted that the proposed ban on traditional olive oil
jugs, had provoked popular loathing, or "misunderstanding", from the
people that he said wanted to protect for their own good.
"It was a measure intended to help consumers, to protect and inform them
but it is clear that it cannot attract consumer support," he said.'

It appears the European commissioner himself admits it was consumer
pressure. It appears they either don't care or they are not being
ripped off.

You have not yet provided the evidence, requested elsewhere, that
consumers are being ripped off.

[Old Codger]

:-)

[MM]

I'm quite sure it's not. A fish and chip shop has to buy the
non-brewed condiment, so when working out the cost of providing chips
and fish to consumers, because some of these will want salt and
vinegar, that is what will be costed. It's not as if you are charged
extra for the salt and/or vinegar, is it?

MM

[Cynic]

On Fri, 24 May 2013 17:50:42 +0100, MM <kyli...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>>> I don't know about you, but I like to know what I'm buying. The stuff in
>>> the jugs is 90% shite olive oil.

>>so go to a restaurant where it isn't then

>And you glean this through some magical process perhaps?

You glean it via the experience of yourself and others just like any
other food establishment. Some fish & chip places sell absolutely
terrible food, others serve really nice stuff.

--
Cynic

[MM]

But they usually sell non-brewed condiment with the understanding that
it's vinegar. Blatantly fraudulent therefore. When I could eat fish
and chips I *always* took my own salt cellar and vinegar bottle with
Sarson's genuine malt vinegar.

MM

[Old Codger]

So why don't you take your own olive oil?

[Steve Firth]

Old Codger <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
> On 28/05/2013 19:39, MM wrote:
>> On Tue, 28 May 2013 14:05:04 GMT, cyni...@yahoo.co.uk (Cynic) wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 24 May 2013 17:50:42 +0100, MM <kyli...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> I don't know about you, but I like to know what I'm buying. The stuff in
>>>>>> the jugs is 90% shite olive oil.
>>>
>>>>> so go to a restaurant where it isn't then
>>>
>>>> And you glean this through some magical process perhaps?
>>>
>>> You glean it via the experience of yourself and others just like any
>>> other food establishment. Some fish & chip places sell absolutely
>>> terrible food, others serve really nice stuff.
>>
>> But they usually sell non-brewed condiment with the understanding that
>> it's vinegar. Blatantly fraudulent therefore. When I could eat fish
>> and chips I *always* took my own salt cellar and vinegar bottle with
>> Sarson's genuine malt vinegar.
>
> So why don't you take your own olive oil?

He's afraid of the laughter when he pulls out a bottle of fraudulently
labelled German olive oil.

--
<•DarWin><|
_/ _/

[MM]

On Tue, 28 May 2013 21:27:01 +0100, Old Codger <m...@privacy.net>
wrote:

>On 28/05/2013 19:39, MM wrote:
>> On Tue, 28 May 2013 14:05:04 GMT, cyni...@yahoo.co.uk (Cynic) wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 24 May 2013 17:50:42 +0100, MM <kyli...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> I don't know about you, but I like to know what I'm buying. The stuff in
>>>>>> the jugs is 90% shite olive oil.
>>>
>>>>> so go to a restaurant where it isn't then
>>>
>>>> And you glean this through some magical process perhaps?
>>>
>>> You glean it via the experience of yourself and others just like any
>>> other food establishment. Some fish & chip places sell absolutely
>>> terrible food, others serve really nice stuff.
>>
>> But they usually sell non-brewed condiment with the understanding that
>> it's vinegar. Blatantly fraudulent therefore. When I could eat fish
>> and chips I *always* took my own salt cellar and vinegar bottle with
>> Sarson's genuine malt vinegar.
>
>So why don't you take your own olive oil?

I don't use olive oil apart from for cooking and in salad dressings.

MM

[Old Codger]

Is that an indication that you don't take it in restaurants either? If
so, what is your problem?

If you do take it in restaurants then you should be able to purchase
just what you want and take it to the restaurant.

[Old Codger]

He? I thought from the facetious arguments it was a she.

[Ophelia]

"Old Codger" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:51a6539c$0$1136$5b6a...@news.zen.co.uk...

> On 29/05/2013 12:01, Steve Firth wrote:
>> Old Codger <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>>> On 28/05/2013 19:39, MM wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 28 May 2013 14:05:04 GMT, cyni...@yahoo.co.uk (Cynic) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 24 May 2013 17:50:42 +0100, MM <kyli...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't know about you, but I like to know what I'm buying. The
>>>>>>>> stuff in
>>>>>>>> the jugs is 90% shite olive oil.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> so go to a restaurant where it isn't then
>>>>>
>>>>>> And you glean this through some magical process perhaps?
>>>>>
>>>>> You glean it via the experience of yourself and others just like any
>>>>> other food establishment. Some fish & chip places sell absolutely
>>>>> terrible food, others serve really nice stuff.
>>>>
>>>> But they usually sell non-brewed condiment with the understanding that
>>>> it's vinegar. Blatantly fraudulent therefore. When I could eat fish
>>>> and chips I *always* took my own salt cellar and vinegar bottle with
>>>> Sarson's genuine malt vinegar.
>>>
>>> So why don't you take your own olive oil?
>>
>> He's afraid of the laughter when he pulls out a bottle of fraudulently
>> labelled German olive oil.
>>
> He? I thought from the facetious arguments it was a she.

Oi! Wot you got against women??
--
--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/shop/

[MM]

On Wed, 29 May 2013 20:13:30 +0100, Old Codger <m...@privacy.net>

wrote:

>On 29/05/2013 13:37, MM wrote:
>> On Tue, 28 May 2013 21:27:01 +0100, Old Codger <m...@privacy.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 28/05/2013 19:39, MM wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 28 May 2013 14:05:04 GMT, cyni...@yahoo.co.uk (Cynic) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 24 May 2013 17:50:42 +0100, MM <kyli...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't know about you, but I like to know what I'm buying. The stuff in
>>>>>>>> the jugs is 90% shite olive oil.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> so go to a restaurant where it isn't then
>>>>>
>>>>>> And you glean this through some magical process perhaps?
>>>>>
>>>>> You glean it via the experience of yourself and others just like any
>>>>> other food establishment. Some fish & chip places sell absolutely
>>>>> terrible food, others serve really nice stuff.
>>>>
>>>> But they usually sell non-brewed condiment with the understanding that
>>>> it's vinegar. Blatantly fraudulent therefore. When I could eat fish
>>>> and chips I *always* took my own salt cellar and vinegar bottle with
>>>> Sarson's genuine malt vinegar.
>>>
>>> So why don't you take your own olive oil?
>>
>> I don't use olive oil apart from for cooking and in salad dressings.
>
>Is that an indication that you don't take it in restaurants either? If
>so, what is your problem?

It's not MY problem! It is a problem throughout the restaurant
business which the EU tried to address but was stymied by the shysters
who still want to bulk-buy inferior product and pass it off as the
good stuff -- just like the horsemeat scandal in fact.

>If you do take it in restaurants then you should be able to purchase
>just what you want and take it to the restaurant.

Why are you so dead against having labelled bottles? Would you like
all tins of soup to have plain wrappers that just said "soup"? What
about all bread being sold as "bread", i.e. no Hovis, no Kingsmill, no
Warburtons? Just bread in plain packaging?

No, what your gripe is REALLY about is, this topic is yet another
excuse for you to whinge on and on about the "dastardly EU". When I'm
talking olive oil, you're thinking "EU", aren't you?

MM

[Old Codger]

a) You are still intimating that consumers are shysters. I repeat the
extract from the Daily Telegraph that I posted the other day

In a humiliating U-turn, Dacian Ciolos, the European commissioner for
agriculture, admitted that the proposed ban on traditional olive oil
jugs, had provoked popular loathing, or "misunderstanding", from the
people that he said wanted to protect for their own good.
"It was a measure intended to help consumers, to protect and inform them
but it is clear that it cannot attract consumer support," he said.'

Do note that it was the consumers who objected to the proposed ban.

b) If regulation did not prevent the "horsemeat scandal" why do you
think it would do anything for olive oil?

>> If you do take it in restaurants then you should be able to purchase
>> just what you want and take it to the restaurant.
>
> Why are you so dead against having labelled bottles?

I am not, just against the EU, or any government trying to impose
unnecessary regulation upon industry, perticularly when the consumers
most affected don't want it.

> Would you like all tins of soup to have plain wrappers that just said "soup"? What
> about all bread being sold as "bread", i.e. no Hovis, no Kingsmill, no
> Warburtons? Just bread in plain packaging?

When I have soup in a restaurant it has never been served in a tin, or a
sealed glass bottle. It is not unknown for the menu to state it is the
"soup of the day". I have never managed to find out whioch day is put
in it.

> No, what your gripe is REALLY about is, this topic is yet another
> excuse for you to whinge on and on about the "dastardly EU". When I'm
> talking olive oil, you're thinking "EU", aren't you?

No, I am thinking of politicians doing what they do best, passing
unnecessary laws just to fill their day. It just so happens that the EU
is especially good at that.

On the other hand of course, you are thinking we must protect the
consumer; even if it makes little sense, the consumer does not want it
and it will reduce competition by bankrupting the smaller suppliers.

[Steve Firth]

Fnaar, and I say again Fnaar.

--
<•DarWin><|
_/ _/

[Ophelia]

"Steve Firth" <%steve%@malloc.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1353390847391558288.203692%steve%-mallo...@news.eternal-september.org...

lol, behave! :)
--
--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/shop/

[Old Codger]

Nothing at all, I quite like them. However, they are not generally the
most logical and this is reflected in the way many of them argue.

A little story, much shortened.

Er in doors said this morning "When you get in the shower after me is
the base dry?"

"Don't know" says I, "I always turn the water on first so it is wet when
I get in."

"Well I always dry it" says she.

"What the hell for?" says I.

"I don't like getting into a wet ..... oh so do I" says she.

[Ophelia]

"Old Codger" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message

news:51a68171$0$1097$5b6a...@news.zen.co.uk...

Duhhhhh!! We are not all like 'er indoors yannow ... ;)

--
--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/shop/

[MM]

On Wed, 29 May 2013 22:34:07 +0100, Old Codger <m...@privacy.net>

How can the addition of a mere label bankrupt smaller suppliers?
Something tells me your hatred of the EU is fuelling your excessive
hyperbole.

MM

[Old Codger]

Perhaps you are an exception. :-)

[Old Codger]

Something tells me you know absolutely nothing about anything.

The labels have a small cost which could well be the last straw for some
suppliers. In addition, of course, there is the acquisition of large
numbers of small bottles, replacing the large containers which are
presently used. There is also the cost of modifying machinery, or
purchasing new machinery to handle the filling and labelling of these
new, to the olive oil supplier, small bottles. That is likely to be a
significant cost which would send a few more to the wall. The real cost
however is the implementation of all the new rules and regulations
required by the politicians in order that they can "guarantee" the
origin and quality of the olive oil in each bottle. There is also, of
course, the cost of yet another quango tasked with ensuring the validity
of the labelling system, which won't work of course, see the horse meat
scandal. This cost will also be passed on to the olive oil suppliers.
The large producers can usually absorb quite a lot of red tape cost,
which they pass on to the customers when the smaller producers have been
forced out of business.

I note you have not even acknowledged you were posting crap about those
who objected to the proposed ban. I suppose that means you intend to
repeat the lie yet again.

[Ophelia]

"Old Codger" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message

news:51a7a10d$0$1104$5b6a...@news.zen.co.uk...

Indubitubububbly <g>
--
--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/shop/

[Steve Firth]

"Ophelia" <Oph...@elsinore.me.ku.invalid> wrote:
> "Steve Firth" <%steve%@malloc.co.uk> wrote
[snip]

>>> Oi! Wot you got against women??
>>
>> Fnaar, and I say again Fnaar.
>
> lol, behave! :)

I am reminded of the instruction that came with a Chinese manufactured hot
water cylinder.

"In order to be experiencing full satisfaction after fitting ensure gland
is stuffed properly within jacket of female part under blanket.

--
<•DarWin><|
_/ _/

[Ophelia]

"Steve Firth" <%steve%@malloc.co.uk> wrote in message

news:1960592159391614500.353195%steve%-mallo...@news.eternal-september.org...

*rolls eyes*
--
--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/shop/

[MM]

On Thu, 30 May 2013 20:16:18 +0100, Old Codger <m...@privacy.net>

1. The cost of putting a label on a refillable bottle on the
restaurant table is minimal and could well result in increased sales
for the small producer as consumers recogise the good quality and seek
out the supplier for purchasing more for their own use at home.

2. Large containers are NOT presently used on restaurant tables!

3. What is wrong in using existing machinery? Presumably those bottles
currently in use on restaurant tables have to be filled somehow?

4. Seems to me that the 'quango' responsible for ensuring meat quality
*has* worked, albeit belatedly, since the problem has come to light
and no doubt certain fraudsters will eventually be prosecuted.

5. If there is a cost associated with producing good quality food,
then it must be paid by someone. Else you'd still have bakers using
adulterated flour willy-nilly.

6. I only ever suggested that it was the shysters who objected, not
the punters, who only want to know what they're eating.

MM

[Old Codger]

Ah, so the restaurateur can put the oil he currently uses in a small
bottle and any old label he likes?

> 2. Large containers are NOT presently used on restaurant tables!

Of course they are not, whoever said they were?

> 3. What is wrong in using existing machinery?

Nothing at all if it will do the job. However, if it will do the job,
it will almost certainly need adaptation to cater for the new small
bottles and there will be a not insignificant cost associated with that.

> Presumably those bottles currently in use on restaurant tables have to be filled somehow?

By hand by the waiter prior to bringing it to the table. After all he
already does that with a glass of wine when it is ordered by the glass.
You trust he has used the wine you specified.

> 4. Seems to me that the 'quango' responsible for ensuring meat quality

> *has* worked, albeit belatedly, since the problem has come to light.

Belatedly is the right word.

However, I believe it was found by a consumer's regulator so the
regulation of the producer remains a failure

> and no doubt certain fraudsters will eventually be prosecuted.

Possibly.

> 5. If there is a cost associated with producing good quality food,
> then it must be paid by someone. Else you'd still have bakers using
> adulterated flour willy-nilly.

Of course, no argument. What I object to is the cost of totally
unnecessary and unwanted, by consumers, red tape.

> 6. I only ever suggested that it was the shysters who objected, not
> the punters, who only want to know what they're eating.

But it was the punters who objected so you were calling them shysters,
and repeating it even after you were informed that the consumers were
the objectors. Seems they thought they were quite able to tell good
from bad without the "help" of the EU bureaucracy.

[MM]

On Fri, 31 May 2013 20:08:39 +0100, Old Codger <m...@privacy.net>

Well, yes. But if the 'any old label' failed to correctly describe the
contents, he'd be engaging in fraudulent practices, yes? (You seem to
want to condone such behaviour.)

>
>> 2. Large containers are NOT presently used on restaurant tables!
>
>Of course they are not, whoever said they were?

See your "replacing the large containers which are
presently used" comment above..

>> 3. What is wrong in using existing machinery?
>
>Nothing at all if it will do the job. However, if it will do the job,
>it will almost certainly need adaptation to cater for the new small
>bottles and there will be a not insignificant cost associated with that.

How do you know this? Are you a manufacturer of bottling machinery?

>
>> Presumably those bottles currently in use on restaurant tables have to be filled somehow?
>
>By hand by the waiter prior to bringing it to the table.

But we've already seen that this is not always the case. Small
'artisan producers' will themselves ensure a constant supply of the
oil, topping up where necessary. It's probably like the girl who
brings in the cut flowers each day, or the baker's assistant who
delivers a job lot of rolls.

> After all he
>already does that with a glass of wine when it is ordered by the glass.
> You trust he has used the wine you specified.

Would you like to state hand on heart that the glass of wine you've
ordered by the glass in a pub or restaurant somewhere only ever
contains what you expect it to? Bit naive, aren't you!

>> 4. Seems to me that the 'quango' responsible for ensuring meat quality
>> *has* worked, albeit belatedly, since the problem has come to light.
>
>Belatedly is the right word.

No, "has worked" are the right words. Belatedly can never be right.

>However, I believe it was found by a consumer's regulator so the
>regulation of the producer remains a failure

But the regulator knew that horsemeat was not allowed! That seems to
me to be the regulation mechanism at work.

>
>> and no doubt certain fraudsters will eventually be prosecuted.
>
>Possibly.

You sound reluctant to condemn such shysters...

>
>> 5. If there is a cost associated with producing good quality food,
>> then it must be paid by someone. Else you'd still have bakers using
>> adulterated flour willy-nilly.
>
>Of course, no argument. What I object to is the cost of totally
>unnecessary and unwanted, by consumers, red tape.

So is it red tape to enforce the wearing of seat belts? Not many
consumers wanted those when they were first introduced. Now it's
second nature to clunk click, every trip.

>> 6. I only ever suggested that it was the shysters who objected, not
>> the punters, who only want to know what they're eating.
>
>But it was the punters who objected so you were calling them shysters,
>and repeating it even after you were informed that the consumers were
>the objectors. Seems they thought they were quite able to tell good
>from bad without the "help" of the EU bureaucracy.

Some may have been. But as we've already established that you a naive,
trusting consumer, some are not.

MM

[Steve Firth]

MM <kyli...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On Fri, 31 May 2013 20:08:39 +0100, Old Codger <m...@privacy.net>
> wrote:

[snip]

>> Ah, so the restaurateur can put the oil he currently uses in a small
>> bottle and any old label he likes?
>
> Well, yes. But if the 'any old label' failed to correctly describe the
> contents, he'd be engaging in fraudulent practices, yes?

How would anyone know? Oh yes there would have to be an enormous
bureaucracy surrounding registration, testing and enormous annual fees to
be paid by producers in order to get on and remain on the register.

And of course an endless line of corrupt ESu officials with their hands out
demanding payment or else ones registration would be mysteriously
cancelled. And the EU commission wouldn't give a fuck and would simply
ignore it just as it ignores the flagrant corruption within all EU
structures.

And all completely unnecessary because the consumers have told the EU to
fuck right off. And blowhards like you who want to micromanage other
people's lives, you can fuck right off too.

> (You seem to want to condone such behaviour.)

No that would be you and your support for the fraudulent German
supermarkets.

BTW. Why are you arguing about olive oil? Your comments here have made it
clear that you have never tasted olive oil supplied direct from a farm.
Your concept of olive oil us that it gets mixed with vinegar. You clearly
have a cloth palate and wouldn't be able to tell the difference between
EVOO and Castrol. Yet you feel yourself qualified to tell consumers who do
know what they are eating what they must eat and how it should be presented
to them.

A bit like your desire to tell parents how to raise their children when
it's clear that you never managed to get yours up anything but your own
palm. Hence you have never raised a child and if you had it would have been
raised as a psychopath by a violent bully.

--
<•DarWin><|
_/ _/

[Old Codger]

You seem to be an idiot who is incapable of understanding plain English.

>>> 2. Large containers are NOT presently used on restaurant tables!
>>
>> Of course they are not, whoever said they were?
>
> See your "replacing the large containers which are
> presently used" comment above..

AS I said above, you seem to be an idiot incapable of understanding
plain English.

>>> 3. What is wrong in using existing machinery?
>>
>> Nothing at all if it will do the job. However, if it will do the job,
>> it will almost certainly need adaptation to cater for the new small
>> bottles and there will be a not insignificant cost associated with that.
>
> How do you know this? Are you a manufacturer of bottling machinery?

I am, or was, an engineer.

>>> Presumably those bottles currently in use on restaurant tables have to be filled somehow?
>>
>> By hand by the waiter prior to bringing it to the table.
>
> But we've already seen that this is not always the case. Small
> 'artisan producers' will themselves ensure a constant supply of the
> oil, topping up where necessary. It's probably like the girl who
> brings in the cut flowers each day, or the baker's assistant who
> delivers a job lot of rolls.

Evidence?

>> After all he
>> already does that with a glass of wine when it is ordered by the glass.
>> You trust he has used the wine you specified.
>
> Would you like to state hand on heart that the glass of wine you've
> ordered by the glass in a pub or restaurant somewhere only ever
> contains what you expect it to? Bit naive, aren't you!

As I said above, you seem to be an idiot incapable of understanding
plain english

>>> 4. Seems to me that the 'quango' responsible for ensuring meat quality
>>> *has* worked, albeit belatedly, since the problem has come to light.
>>
>> Belatedly is the right word.
>
> No, "has worked" are the right words. Belatedly can never be right.

But it had not, as I explained.

>> However, I believe it was found by a consumer's regulator so the
>> regulation of the producer remains a failure
>
> But the regulator knew that horsemeat was not allowed! That seems to
> me to be the regulation mechanism at work.

So how did the horse-meat get into the burgers then and out to consumers
without the EU regulators spotting it?

>>> and no doubt certain fraudsters will eventually be prosecuted.
>>
>> Possibly.
>
> You sound reluctant to condemn such shysters...

You sound like an idiot who is incapable of understanding plain English.

>>> 5. If there is a cost associated with producing good quality food,
>>> then it must be paid by someone. Else you'd still have bakers using
>>> adulterated flour willy-nilly.
>>
>> Of course, no argument. What I object to is the cost of totally
>> unnecessary and unwanted, by consumers, red tape.
>
> So is it red tape to enforce the wearing of seat belts? Not many
> consumers wanted those when they were first introduced. Now it's
> second nature to clunk click, every trip.

Do read what was written, all the words, or are you really an idiot,
rather than apparently, incapable of understanding plain English.

>>> 6. I only ever suggested that it was the shysters who objected, not
>>> the punters, who only want to know what they're eating.
>>
>> But it was the punters who objected so you were calling them shysters,
>> and repeating it even after you were informed that the consumers were
>> the objectors. Seems they thought they were quite able to tell good
>>from bad without the "help" of the EU bureaucracy.
>
> Some may have been. But as we've already established that you a naive,
> trusting consumer, some are not.

So the EU commissioner lied did he?

You are an extreme socialist who always knows what is best for everybody
else and, given the chance, would legislate accordingly.

Of course you could just be an ignorant troll.

The evidence suggests both.