IN A bid to distance himself from the partygate revelations, Boris Johnson is trying to reinvent the Brexit fervour that swept him to power.

He sees this as his trump card and one capable of disguising the disgust over Downing Street rule-breaking while others suffered, and the imposition of a National Insurance rise, despite the impact of inflation.

Practical options to tackle inflation, including rolling back green taxes on energy now we are free of EU rules, have been disregarded. Instead what is being promised is a bonfire of EU regulations to reduce red tape and release a mythical spirit of economic growth apparently held back by these regulations.

Read more:

This is very much a case of pass me more than a pinch of salt. In the first place sweeping away regulations must be matched by a commitment not to replace them with UK regulations. There are also concerns that this Downing Street-inspired commitment ignores the right of the UK's devolved administrations to be included in legislative decisions.

In this area it needs to be remembered that gold-plating of EU regulations was entirely a British concept. Those that did that remain involved in any new approach. If they do not change how they think, nothing will change. Beyond that a departure from adherence to EU standards means moving away from standards universally accepted for exporting to the EU and beyond. Relaxing standards also makes importing food from outside the EU easier. This is firmly on London's agenda as it knows cheap food is popular while a liberal approach to food imports is the key to securing speedy trade deals.

This is not to say that breaking away from EU dogma is a bad idea. The 'precautionary principle' of Brussels towards science in agriculture has been a dead weight on farming in Europe for many years. Breaking away from that is sound thinking, but if London wants to succeed it must be willing to confront the green lobby that remains in awe of this flawed anti-science principle.

Striking a new course on genetic editing is a good example of the UK putting clear blue water between itself and the more cautious EU. This is a perfect example of Brexit delivery, but it may not feature in the Johnson reinvention, since claiming this as a success would mean angering the green groups whose policies are now central to his political philosophy. It is however the right decision and one that should give the UK a competitive edge in farming and in the global market of selling agricultural technology.

This aggressive 'new' approach however does not sit well with the issue of red diesel and the draconian new regulations. This change by the UK was on the back of a European court decision, with the UK deciding to follow the EU regulation despite Brexit giving it the freedom to do otherwise. Other countries in Europe have gone down this road in different ways, including abandoning dye for fuel in favour of farmers claiming a tax rebate.

However the UK is determined to ignore common sense and pile regulation on regulation, undermining simple tasks like snow clearance and charity tractor runs to grab a few pence in tax. It has suggested that for any road use, diesel tanks need to be flushed and filled with regular diesel. If anything ever shouted the disconnect between civil servant and political thought processes and common sense this is it. If we are to break the Brexit thinking, it has to be root and branch and not the half-hearted approach now being adopted towards the use of rebated fuel.

Whether policy is being made in London or Brussels there is no escape from it being dominated by green issues around climate change. For agriculture this is a victory for perception over practical delivery and a truly joined up approach. But perception drives politics and a report from the European Commission suggests this is unlikely to change.

Across all member states, over 90% of those aged 15 to 24 thought climate change was the biggest issue facing the EU. Even for the more cynical 55 plus group, the figure was still 80% plus. Climate change was ranked even above health as a priority. This confirms that green is now mainstream and that no matter how sound the case from farmers for a more joined-up approach may be, it is unlikely to change the minds of politicians in full pursuit of public opinion.