What was the ‘Remain-style’ use of words to try to get voters to vote to remain in the EU? Did it extol the virtues of the EU? No it did not. Nor have I seen anything at all the press or elsewhere which described the virtues of the EU. What we saw was fear-mongering. If we leave this ‘virtue-free’ organisation, then we will suffer.
In the recent Finance Act from Cameron and Osborne, The Zealots levered in a clause which required that ‘the free movement of goods’, a pillar of the EU, must be compromised. That clause requires that anyone who wants to import ‘Raw Tobacco’ must register and justify the import, and it also requires that the importer must be a ‘suitable person’.
What follows is not a splitting of hairs. It is important.
Hundreds of years ago, a substance was derived from the leaves of a plant. That substance was called ‘Tobacco’. It could have been called ‘ice’ or ‘water’ or anything, but those words were already in use. The substance consisted of the dried leaves of that plant. Someone invented a word to identify the plant. That word was ‘Nicotiana’. Later, it was discovered that the plant called ‘Nicotiana’ (after the name of the discoverer) came in various forms, and so sub-divisions arose – ‘tobaccum, rustica, silvestris, etc.
Do readers know that ‘nicotiana rustica’ contains about twice as much nicotine as ‘nicotiana tobaccum’?
Whatever name the plants had, the simple fact was that the cured and dried leaves were simply described as ‘TOBACCO’. They could have been called ‘lettuce’ or ‘cabbage’. My point is that there is no such thing as ‘RAW’ tobacco. Either the leaves are tobacco or they are not.
So we see immediately, simply by the misuse of words, that there is an intent to create an illusion, which is that there is a substance which is more than dried leaves (tobacco) – there is a substance which is different, and it is called ‘RAW’ tobacco. Carrots are not just carrots, they are ‘RAW’ carrots.
Thus we see that there is no difference between tobacco and raw tobacco. The use of the word ‘raw’ is propaganda, pure and simple.
The fact is, as far as I can see, is that Andrew Black, the Aussie witch-finder General, has somehow engineered a form of words in the Finance Act which creates a new criminal class – those who import ‘raw’ tobacco, aka tobacco, without permission. How does that accord with ‘the free movement of goods (tobacco is an agricultural product – only ‘tobacco products’ are regulated)?
So I see ‘resistance’ as refusal to comply with ‘registration’. If a shop appeared in Magalluf which sold ‘leaves’ of various kinds, I would risk filling my suitcase with those leaves.
It is only the fact that Britain is a group of islands that the witch-finder General can operate. He could not do so on the landmass of Europe.
Having said all that, there might be some leverage in flooding the Revenue department with demands for ‘licences’. “I want to import leaf so that I can experiment with blends without additives, and nothing will leave my home”. If you want to muddy the waters, even if you have no intention of importing leaf, then you could avail yourself of the ‘proforma’ here:
I see that, but that idea means acquiescing. The EU LAW is ‘free movement of goods’, which means that no impediment to the free movement of those goods in acceptable.
There are extremely wealthy smokers who could contest these aberrations. Where are they?
I must to bed.