In this case, with UK consumer law, it works both ways.
Either party can back out, and / or get reimbursed if the other side fails to deliver or there was genuine error
For example, a customer who orders online can just change their mind and get a refund weeks after placing the order.
I expect that’s entirely the point.
This is about boosting a specific industry for political ends, and little to do with nutrition.
That’s my guess
Can we take collective responsibility for our society without taking any collective blame?
Need to split it out. Take out the blame and punishment, and see it from a grown up point of view.
Coz I hear you, I’m not taking the blame for stuff I had no control over. That makes no sense. I owe nobody anything for that stuff.
I am over okay with taxes, or other measures, which address society’s needs even if they aversely affect me. Ws we have a shared responsibility to make society a better place.
Does this have to be mutually exclusive?
My impression is that Westminster is a bunch of people putting on a show, wilst the unaccountable beaurocrates were actually passing laws that mattered and benefited the people.
Its like a division of labour. If Westminster isn’t interested in governing, only grandstanding, why not rejoin?