Remainers are using chicken to stoke fear about a trade deal with the US despite millions of Brits eating it every year

MILLIONS of Brits a year visit America, wolfing down chicken without a moment’s thought beyond how tasty and cheap it is.

But the Remain propaganda circus is now stoking up fear about a trade deal with the States because, horror of ­horrors, we would import their chicken.

3

This, they claim, would be a disaster because the US uses a very dilute and entirely safe chlorine solution to clean its birds, resulting in far fewer infected with salmonella than in the UK or EU.

To diehard Europhiles, even procedures that make US chickens safer than ours are inherently inferior because they are not Brussels-approved.

Indeed Brussels has banned American birds on “health grounds” even though they are approved by the European Food Safety Authority. The truth, of course, is that the EU fears competition.

This confected outrage is the latest excuse to undermine any potentially successful future outside the Brussels club.

When Trade Secretary Liam Fox was asked if he would dare eat chlorine-cleaned chicken he rightly said it was a footling irrelevance against the huge opportunities of a UK-US deal.

What he should have added was: “Of course I bloody would.” As should the rest of Britain.

MOST READ IN OPINION

BRIDGET PHILLIPSON

We’re backing young people with apprenticeships to get Britain growing

THE SUN SAYS

The 'non-crime hate incident' is both sinister & absurd - it must be scrapped

JULIA HARTLEY-BREWER

Jaguar's woke rebrand looks like a miserable box of Quality Street

THE SUN SAYS

Captain Tom Moore would be ashamed of his daughter’s obscene greed

Web anarchy

THE attack by top cop Mike Barton on the anarchy of social media is significant.

When The Sun criticises Facebook and YouTube we are accused of having a vested interest, given the threat they pose to the Press.

Now Durham’s chief constable has said the same. That these web giants are enablers of terrorism and child sex abuse and do far too little to purge their sites of appalling material.

3

Their defence is that they are not publishers, merely free speech platforms — and too vast to police anyway.

But by any definition they ARE now publishers and should be subject to the same rules. And the world’s richest ­corporations cannot complain they lack resources to remove more content.

It requires extra staff and, as Mr Barton says, better technology. We would not seek to ape China’s record on free speech, but it does manage to prevent web searches for certain phrases.

So the technology exists to find this filth. The web firms must use it.

Charlie tragedy

OUR hearts go out to Charlie Gard and his parents.

3

The rights and wrongs of this tragic case aside, Chris and Connie fought with limitless love and awe-inspiring determination. We salute their courage in letting Charlie go.

Well-wishers raised £1.3million to have the little boy treated abroad.

Let us hope it can now be used to give hope to others born with his condition.