Rishi Sunak’s Brexit deal is up and running. It’s ‘cataclysmic’ for UK food exports – POLITICO Europe

Press play to listen to this article

Voiced by artificial intelligence.

LONDON When Rishi Sunak signed his new Brexit deal in February, he boasted that it would deliver smooth flowing trade within the whole United Kingdom.

But just two months after the Windsor Framework came into effect, it's having huge unintended consequences for a key export sector, with hundreds of millions of pounds in trade now at risk.

Since October this year, all meat and some dairy products moving from Great Britain to be sold in Northern Ireland a part of the U.K. have been required to carry not for EU labels. It's meant to ensure goods aren't moved onward into the Republic of Ireland, an EU member country.

But the British government is going further.

From October 2024, all meat and dairy products sold right across the U.K. will also have to include the labels even if there is no intention to ever send the products to Northern Ireland.

The requirement will be applied to more U.K. food products from July 2025. And it applies whether the food is produced in the U.K. or imported.

Businesses say the plans for a U.K.-wide rollout go way beyond Brussels requirements as set out in the Windsor Framework and, crucially, could see EU exports plummet because of the costs and inefficiency of doing separate production runs for British and European markets.

Sean Ramsden, director of the Food and Drink Exporters Association and the CEO of food export business Ramsden International, described the new system as absolutely cataclysmic for food exporters.

Ramsden told POLITICO he fears that eventually all of the products he is supplied with by partner Co-op will be labeled not for EU, which means we cant export them to the EU."

While large manufacturers may find it easier to comply with the new rules, Ramsden says the changes could prove too costly for smaller operations.

A lot of manufacturers will probably just give up on the European market, he said. It seems an inconsequential thing to say put it onto the packaging, but in practice it means changing production runs. Manufacturers are saying this is crazy because they dont want to start doing additional production runs.

His concerns were echoed by Balwinder Dhoot, director of sustainability and growth at the Food and Drink Federation (FDF). He told British MPs recently that implementation costs of the labeling requirement would run into hundreds of millions of pounds a year across the industry.

It generates a risk for hundreds of millions, if not billions, of pounds worth of exports, he told MPs last month. That is an unnecessary domestic policy. You cannot have a trade policy that is trying to promote exports on one hand, and then undermine that with domestic policy on the other.

A spokesperson for the group, which represents food and drink manufacturers, said the labeling removes the flexibility that was agreed with the EU and will result in less choice for shoppers in both Northern Ireland and GB.

A more pragmatic approach would be to monitor supply before taking action, and work with the industry to find a practical solution.

Although the U.K.-wide labeling requirements do not come into force until October next year, some manufacturers appear to already be using the labeling system in preparation for the rollout.

As a result, Ramsden says his company is having to do manual checks on everything, take out the [labeled] products from the orders, return them to the supplier, credit them to the customer and take them off our list.

Another unintended consequence, Ramsden warns, is that non-EU consumers will be put off by the not for EU labels.

If we export to other markets, what are the consumers going to think when they see not for EU on the packaging? They are going to question whether its safe, he said.

For Ramsden, the labeling requirement is just the latest in a string of headaches resulting from the U.K. leaving the EU, which has already seen the companys sales with the bloc plummet from 25 million to 16 million as a result of Brexit.

This will finish it all because we are supplied by stock thats in circulation in the U.K. market.

A government spokesperson said: The Windsor Framework drastically reduces the paperwork and processes required compared to the old protocol. We continue to engage extensively with businesses to support them in adapting to these new arrangements.

The rest is here:

Rishi Sunak's Brexit deal is up and running. It's 'cataclysmic' for UK food exports - POLITICO Europe

Bid to cut through post-Brexit red tape tying up UK trade with Flanders – theloadstar.com

Charlieaja

Research for Flemish firms has found that 74% of UK companies said they had been forced to consider other markets, due to post-Brexit administration struggles.

But GatewayBritain has promised to make trade between Flanders and Britain as frictionless as possible.

GatewayBritain, described as an innovative digital application that will bring visibility and transparency for trading with Flanders into one place, derives from a partnership between Port of Antwerp-Bruges, Flanders Innovation & Entrepreneurship (VLAIO), Flanders Investment and Trade and Deloitte.

The initiative was announced in June and will allow traders to fill out just one dataset online, which is then automatically shared with all the relevant supply chain and logistics partners.

Earlier this month, the pilot product of the application was launched. Functionalities include shipment and transport management, data authorisation management, document management, communication management and notification management.

Dirk Verlee, trade and investment counsellor at Flanders Investment and Trade, said: Flanders is a key route in and out of the EU for British traders. This means that if GatewayBritain solves the challenges of Brexit in the Belgian region, supply issues that have affected the UK should also be solved.

Flanders is a popular route into the EU for UK companies, due to its proximity to both the UK and Europes major business centres. A market of 400 million consumers, or 60% of Europes purchasing power, is within six hours of the region.

Trade figures for 2022 revealed that the total value of exports from the UK to Flanders was 33.77bn ($37bn), and imports into the UK from Flanders totalled 27.95bn ($30.7bn). The UK is Flanders fourth-highest export market.

However, research conducted in May by Censuswide of more than 1,000 UK traders found that some 74% of UK companies said they had been forced to consider alternative markets, due to difficulties in trading with the EU post-Brexit. And 42% had seen trade with the EU decrease, while 48% of the respondents said they would trade more if the process was simplified.

Minister and president of the government of Flanders Jan Jambon said: Britain is an important trading partner for Flanders. We know from our research that British companies have been looking at alternative markets due to the bureaucracy involved post-Brexit. GatewayBritain signals the end of that bureaucracy.

After the pilot shipments, stakeholders will be invited to share their feedback.

Link:

Bid to cut through post-Brexit red tape tying up UK trade with Flanders - theloadstar.com

UK FCA rules out extension of post-Brexit licensing regime – Financial Times

UK FCA rules out extension of post-Brexit licensing regime

Keep abreast of significant corporate, financial and political developments around the world. Stay informed and spot emerging risks and opportunities with independent global reporting, expert commentary and analysis you can trust.

Find the plan that suits you best.

Premium access for businesses and educational institutions.

Check if your university or organisation offers FT membership to read for free.

See the original post:

UK FCA rules out extension of post-Brexit licensing regime - Financial Times

‘Get Brexit Done’ is now ‘Stop the Boats’: Is the Rwanda Bill the Conservatives’ Trojan Horse? Byline Times – Byline Times

Subscribe to our newsletter for exclusive editorial emails from the Byline Times Team.

One of the lines that stays with me from learning Latin at school is from Virgils epic poem, the Aeneid Timeo Danaos et Dona Ferrentes (I fear the Greeks, even when they bring gifts). This line was uttered by the Trojan priest, Laocoon, who was warning that the Trojan Horse apparently gifted to the city of Troy by the departing Greeks might actually be a trap.

In similar fashion, I cant help feeling that I cant Trust the Conservatives, even when they obey the Law.

A huge song and dance was made by the Government before last weeks first vote on its Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill that the legislation just stayed within the framework of the European Convention of Human Rights.

The Bill, if adopted, would allow government ministers to ignore temporary injunctions raised by the European Court of Human Rights to stop flights taking off at the last minute. However, it would still allow asylum seekers to launch legal appeals to argue that they should be spared deportation, if they can claim various special circumstances.

Supporters of the Governments approach argue that the Bill goes as far as it can, without breaching international law and that Rwanda itself would withdraw from the scheme if the UK went any further.

Conservative opponents of the bill, including 29 MPs from the right wing of the party, who abstained on the vote, argue that it does not go far enough and that the language should have explicitly ruled out the scope for any legal challenges to deportation, whether under domestic or international human rights law.

Former Immigration Minister Robert Jenrick, who resigned over his disagreement with Rishi Sunaks migration policy, was even quoted (ironically, on Human Rights Day) as saying that the Government must put the views of the British public above contested notions of international law and that MPs are not sent to Parliament to be concerned about our reputation on the gilded international circuit.

I feel a weary sense of dj vu. This is Brexit, on repeat.

Former British diplomat Alexandra Hall Hall reflects on the complexities involved in the conflict and why there are no easy answers if any

Alexandra Hall Hall

Yet again, we have some members of the Conservative Party arguing that the UK needs to abandon another European institution this time the European Court of Human Rights in order to take back control of immigration.

Yet again, they scapegoat others on this occasion lefty lawyers for thwarting the will of the people.

Yet again, they claim unique knowledge and possession of what that will of the people actually is though there has been no explicit vote put to the public as to whether they really do support the Rwanda scheme, even if it involves the UK derogating from some aspects of human rights law. Just as there never was any explicit indication in the EU Referendum that the British public wanted the most hardline break with Brussels, including departure from the Customs Union and Single Market.

Yet again, we have Conservative MPs misrepresenting the facts, to argue that the Rwanda scheme will brilliantly solve all of the UKs immigration problems despite the evidence that it will only ever be able to remove a few hundred migrants, at most, and only at vast expense; that it will do nothing to resolve the massive asylum claim backlog; and the fact that most immigrants to the UK come here legally, partly as a result of the Governments own migration policies.

But then, Conservative MPs never acknowledge inconsistencies in their arguments, whether over Brexit or now over immigration.

Just like during the Brexit debates, Conservative MPs now are also happy to gloss over inconvenient facts regarding migration such as that our health, care, agriculture and hospitality sectors are dependent on affordable immigrant labour, and that there are no safe, legal routes for asylum seekers to come to the UK.

Instead, they waffle on about this being yet another issue of sovereignty. Indeed, the Rwanda Bill goes one step further than Brexit, in deliberately overriding the Supreme Courts judgment on Rwanda, to assert that Rwanda actually is a safe country. So now, not just laws, but facts, are whatever the British Government says them to be.

Russian President Vladimir Putin or Chinese President Xi Jinping are no doubt delighted to see members of the British political establishment adopt their practices of disinformation and disdain for international law. How much easier it makes it for them to continue gulling their own citizens, and defying international conventions and treaties, when they can point to a country like the UK previously a stalwart defender of the international rules-based order doing the same.

And just as during Brexit, so now, we have different factions of the Conservative Party tearing themselves to shreds, while critical national and international problems go unaddressed.

The hapless Sunak is in the role of Theresa May, desperately trying to hold his party together and risking pleasing none. The same Goldilocks dilemma prevails his immigration policy risks being too hard for the One Nation group of MPs on the moderate wing of the party, but too soft for the so-called Five Families factions on the right wing of the party.

Receive the monthly Byline Times newspaper and help to support fearless, independent journalism that breaks stories, shapes the agenda and holds power to account.

Were not funded by a billionaire oligarch or an offshore hedge-fund. We rely on our readers to fund our journalism. If you like what we do, please subscribe.

Terrified of losing voters to Nigel Farage and the Reform Party, Sunak, like May, will keep trying to appease the migration hardliners, though they will never be satisfied until he has fully ruptured relations with the ECHR. Terrified of alienating traditional conservative voters in their constituencies, the centrist MPs will hold their noses and keep going along, putting party before principle, time and again.

The one advantage Sunak has over May is that it would be hard, even for this shameless party, to seek to replace him as party leader, without triggering a general election, in which on current polling many MPs would lose their seats.

But this is precisely why I sense a trap.

For now, Sunak can play the role of responsible statesman, doing his best to restrain the more extreme members of his party, and insisting that any British legislation should stay just on the right side of the law. If the legislation passes, and asylum seekers start being deported to Rwanda even if its only a few dozen he can make the case that his scheme works, and campaign in the general election for voters to back him, in order to allow it to continue.

But if the legislation falls, or squeaks through only to be defeated again in the courts, before any asylum seekers are deported, Sunak can switch tactics to campaign full bore in support of leaving the ECHR on the grounds that he has exhausted all options and that his hand has been forced into accepting the most extreme approach.

This ploy might not be enough to prevent Conservative defeat to the Labour Party, but it might be enough to save a few seats and to allow the party to keep posturing in hardline fashion on immigration, without ever having to suffer the embarrassment of the Rwanda scheme failing, or having to deal with the damaging wider consequences of leaving the ECHR, such as for the Good Friday Agreement, or our post-Brexit relationship with the EU.

Like the Trojan Horse, I believe the Rwanda bill is a set-up. Get Brexit Done is now Stop the Boats. But, unlike the good citizens of Troy, I believe British voters will not let themselves be suckered a second time.

Never trust the Conservatives, even when they bring gifts.

Originally posted here:

'Get Brexit Done' is now 'Stop the Boats': Is the Rwanda Bill the Conservatives' Trojan Horse? Byline Times - Byline Times

Brexit and Covid put these Beara cheesemakers on the brink after 48 years. Here’s how they survived and thrived – Irish Independent

Quinlan Steeles parents started making Milleens cheese in a saucepan in their kitchen in 1975, using milk from their dairy herd. They used to export all over the world but the pandemic nearly destroyed the business and they turned things round by focusing exclusively on the Irish market

Quinlan Steele inspecting some of the newly made Milleens cheese on his family farm on the Beara Peninsula before it is packaged and distributed. Photos: Don MacMonagle

Its almost half a century since the Steele family made their first batch of Milleens cheese in a pot on their kitchen stove on West Corks Beara Peninsula.

Norman and Veronica had been milking a small herd of dairy cows on their farm in Eyeries and found themselves with some excess milk.

Here is the original post:

Brexit and Covid put these Beara cheesemakers on the brink after 48 years. Here's how they survived and thrived - Irish Independent

Parthenon Marbles should be returned to Greece, says ex-Brexit minister – Yahoo News UK

Lord David Frost argued the ancient sculptures housed in the British Museum were 'a special situation' (Image: PA)

THE UK should hand back the disputed Parthenon Marbles to Greece in a grand gesture, former Brexit minister Lord Frost has said.

The Conservative peer argued the ancient sculptures housed in the British Museum were a special situation which required a special solution.

Cautioning against a loan to Athens which keeps the issue and the arguments alive, he pressed for a permanent settlement with the formation of a new Anglo-Greek cultural partnership to the benefit of both nations.

He was speaking during a debate in the House of Lords after Rishi Sunak sparked a diplomatic row with Greece by refusing to meet Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis, when he compared the artefacts removal with cutting the Mona Lisa in half.

READ MORE:Neal Ascherson: 'Elgin Marbles' and British Empire's racist history

Greece has long demanded the return of the historic works, which were removed by Lord Elgin from occupied Athens in the early 19th century when he was the British ambassador to the Ottoman Empire.

Part of friezes that adorned the 2500-year-old Parthenon temple on the Acropolis, the ParthenonMarbles have been displayed at the British Museum in London for more than 200 years.

Most of the remaining sculptures are in a purpose-built museum in Athens.

Lord Frost, who previously served as chief Brexit negotiator, told Parliament: I do think that Lord Elgins actions possibly were a little murky, but I do think nevertheless our legal case is good. I also think its not the point. The point is what we do now rather than what happened in the past.

I have never personally been so convinced by the moral, artistic and cultural arguments for the position we take. I think the Parthenon Marbles are a special situation and we should try and find a special solution.

They arent just random museum exhibits. For as long as they are not seen as a whole they are less than the sum of their parts.

Lord Frost, who learned Greek in Greece and has lived in Cyprus, said: For Greece they are part of the national identity, they are a national cultural cause.

Story continues

As we saw from the, I am afraid, slightly dismissive treatment of Prime Minister Mitsotakis the other week they do have the capacity to disrupt a relationship that really ought to be a lot better than it is.

READ MORE:Top SNP MSP calls out Scottish estate over its private 'Elgin Marbles'

I do also wonder whether a loan is the right way forward. I admit I am slightly unconvinced by it.

It seems like a solution that has been shaped by the existence of the 1963 Act which rightly prohibits the museum from alienating its collections, and I am afraid nowadays that is a very necessary protection against the tendencies of too many museum curators.

But the problem with a loan is that it keeps the issue and the arguments alive. I think we should try and settle this for good.

My personal view on this is that it is time for a grand gesture and only the Government can make it. It is to offer to return the marbles as a one-off gift to Greece from this country, but as part of and on condition of a new wider Anglo-Greek cultural partnership.

He added: Such a partnership would have to definitively set aside for good the rights and wrongs of the individual acquisition. It would also have to be clear it wasnt a precedent for restitution demands for any other museum exhibit.

But it would show that we actually mean it when we see these marbles as part of our common inheritance, that we can move beyond the what we have we hold approach we take on so many occasions.

Perhaps we could rise to the occasion this time.

See the article here:

Parthenon Marbles should be returned to Greece, says ex-Brexit minister - Yahoo News UK

The new UK short selling regime: another step away from the EU post-Brexit – Freshfields Transactions

HM Treasury published, on 22 November 2023, a draft of the Short Selling Regulations 2024 (SSR 2024), along with a policy note. The draft statutory instrument (SI) is intended to establish a new regulatory framework to replace the retained Short Selling Regulation (the UK SSR), which was based on Regulation (EU) 236/2012 (the EU SSR) and incorporated into UK law by the European Union (Withdrawal Act) 2018. This represents another step in the UK governments programme of financial services regulatory reform following the UKs exit of the European Union.

Short selling is the practice of selling a security that is borrowed or not owned by the seller with the intention of repurchasing it later at a lower price to make a profit. The EU SSR was introduced to respond to concerns regarding the short selling of shares in financial institutions and of euro area sovereign debt, as well as a lack of information and transparency to the market and authorities with regard to the effect of short selling on prices and ultimately, financial stability.

Pursuant to the Financial Services and Markets Act 2023 (FSMA 2023), the UK SSR will be repealed on a date yet to be determined. In December 2022, HM Treasury launched a call for evidence in which it sought views on the new regulatory framework to replace the UK SSR. The call for evidence closed in March 2023, and the government published its response in July 2023. HM Treasury ran a separate consultation in July 2023 on aspects of the UK SSR related to sovereign debt and credit default swaps (CDS), and published its response to that consultation alongside the draft SI.

The key highlights of the SI include provisions relating to:

1.Scope

The SI defines short selling as a designated activity, which will give the FCA a range of rulemaking, supervisory and enforcement powers with respect to short selling, including by firms that are not subject to FCA authorisation. Further, it requires the FCA to publish a list of shares to which certain rules apply and empowers the FCA to exempt shares from certain notification and other requirements.

2. FCA rule-making powers

The SI empowers the FCA to make rules requiring short sellers of shares to comply with certain conditions or requirements, such as imposing restrictions on uncovered short selling to protect against settlement risks.

3.Disclosure

The initial notification threshold for net short positions has been set at 0.2%. The SI empowers the FCA to set out certain elements of the net short position notification regime, such as detailing how to calculate a net short position and when a notification is required. It also requires the FCA to aggregate and publish net short positions notified on any working day in respect of the issued share capital of a company.

4. Market maker exemption

The SI provides the FCA with the power to exempt market making activities and stabilisation from certain short selling requirements. The exemption will be available to members of UK trading venues and trading venues in other jurisdictions for which HM Treasury has made a determination. The existing equivalence determination for the EEA will remain in place for a transitional period.

5. Emergency powers

The SI gives the FCA the power to intervene in exceptional circumstances, such as requiring notifications of short positions or lending fees, prohibiting or imposing conditions on short sales, or restricting short selling after a significant fall in the price of a financial instrument. The FCA can exercise these powers where it considers that there is a threat to financial stability or in order to prevent a disorderly decline in the price of a financial instrument, and the benefits of an intervention outweigh the detrimental impact of such an intervention on financial markets.

The FCA must publish a notice of any decision to exercise these emergency powers, and it must review any requirement, prohibition, condition or restriction on a regular basis. The SI also requires the FCA to publish a statement of policy on how it considers it will use these intervention powers.

Differences between the UK SSR and the SSR 2024

Generally,the overarching framework relating to short selling remains unchanged between the UK SSR and the SSR 2024. The core definitions and requirements remain largely the same.

The SSR 2024 will reinstate the original requirement for firms to notify the FCA of net short positions above 0.2% of issued share capital. This threshold was lowered to 0.1% in 2021 in response to market uncertainty caused by the Covid-19 pandemic. The government has laid a separate statutory instrument that will increase the threshold in the UK SSR to 0.2% from 5 February 2024.

In line with the wider changes introduced as part of the UKs post-Brexit strategy, the SSR 2024 aims to build on the governments approach to build a Smarter Regulatory Framework for financial services. Under the new regime, detailed rules will be set by the FCA in its Handbook within a legislative framework as opposed to the detailed rules being set out in legislation. These regulatory reforms are intended to achieve greater flexibility and adaptability.

Another difference between the two regimes is that the SSR 2024 provides for a broader scope of shares traded on a UK trading venue and related instruments to be covered by the FCAs rules, whereas the UK SSR exempts shares that are principally traded outside the UK from certain requirements. The FCA will have the power to exempt shares from requirements where appropriate and will be required to publish a list of all shares subject to its rules on short selling, which could ultimately result in a narrower set of shares being subject to the short selling rules.

In addition, whereas the UK SSR contains provisions relating to sovereign debt and sovereign CDS, the SSR 2024 will not impose restrictions on the uncovered short selling of UK sovereign debt and CDS, and it will remove reporting requirements with respect to sovereign debt and CDS positions. However, the FCAs emergency intervention powers with respect to these products are retained.

Furthermore, under the SSR 2024, the FCA will be required to publish aggregated net short positions based on individual position notifications it receives from short sellers, whereas the UK SSR requires the FCA to publish individual net short positions above 0.5% of issued share capital, including the identity of the short seller. The new approach will set out the overall net short position in a particular companys shares but avoids disclosure of the names of individual short sellers as is currently the case under the UK SSR.

Next steps

HM Treasury intends to lay the final SI before Parliament in 2024, subject to Parliamentary time. Whilst the policy approach on this area is settled, some drafting and technical aspects may change in the final SI. The deadline to provide any technical comments to HM Treasury is 10 January 2024.

The FCA has indicated that it will consult in 2024 on how it plans to exercise its rule-making powers under the new regime. The final SI will commence at the same time as the FCA makes new rules, alongside the repeal of the UK SSR.

The draft SI does not contain any supervision or enforcement provisions. Instead, these will be covered in a separate SI on the designated activities regime (DAR), which the government plans to publish in early 2024. The DAR SI will contain cross-cutting supervision and enforcement provisions that apply to all designated activities, including short selling.

Go here to see the original:

The new UK short selling regime: another step away from the EU post-Brexit - Freshfields Transactions

David Cameron’s U-turn on Brexit is truly embarrassing – The New European

It seems that seven years in a shepherds hut has somehow changed Lord Camerons mind.

Here was I thinking that he was still in favour of the UK being in the EU, that he must be deeply ashamed and contrite about the damage that his calling and losing of the Brexit referendum has caused to the country he loves, and that he would want to re-establish the closest possible ties with the EU as soon as possible.

But it turns out there is no zeal from Cameron to right the wrongs for which he is partially responsible. He is merely a humble public servant who answered the call to serve again. To serve a party that rejected him, to serve a PM whose policies he fought against, to serve a cause he knows is not in the national interest, and to serve a government that is willing to break international law. The former PM makes the Vicar of Bray look like a man of deep, unbending, moral principle.

Lord Camerons grilling by the House of Lords European Affairs Committee was always going to be a rather embarrassing event, where the former PM had to answer questions on why he was implementing a European policy which he previously called a threat to national security and to the economy.

Where he said as PM that the UKs membership of the EU maximised our influence in foreign affairs, now we just have to make the most of the situation we are in, he told their Lordships. Far from being a direct answer this is a disingenuous one. Apparently trying to bend the EU to the UKs way of thinking used to be frustrating and the new ad hoc arrangement is working well (although presumably nothing like as well as it used to when we were sitting round the table, you know being ad hoc and all that).

Lord Cameron also thinks the UKs relationship with the EU is positive and driving good results, is functioning well and that a lot of the heat and anger has subsided.

The stuff left unsaid and unanswered was: is the relationship as positive and good as it used to be, are the results as good, is the relationship functioning as well as it did pre-Brexit and how much heat and anger is left to undermine that relationship?

The foreign secretary, also said that UK/EU relations were now much more functional heaven knows how dysfunctional they got if this is an improvement and we just wanted to be the EUs friend, neighbour and partner, which does sound a bit like a pathetic Billy No Mates asking to join the playground games.

But perhaps the best bit is this; apparently the foreign secretary finds it interesting to come back and see how it is working. Yes, I suppose it must be interesting.

Having called a referendum purely to try to settle an ongoing Tory civil war that has continued virtually unabated for the last seven years, having risked his countrys economy and influence and security (his words) by calling and then incompetently losing that referendum, then having wandered off humming and spending seven years making money, David swans back to the Foreign Office to take a good look at how bad things have got.

If he had said to the Committee, It is far worse than even I feared, we are a laughing stock, our influence is diminished and we are less secure, poorer and permanently on the outside looking in, you might think more of the man.

But apparently it is nothing to do with Dave he is the impartial witness to someone elses crime. He just wishes to serve, to make the best of a bad job.

God, this noblesse oblige can be a right pain sometimes, but it can make life more interesting. Especially for those stuck sulking in a field, in a shepherds hut.

Read the rest here:

David Cameron's U-turn on Brexit is truly embarrassing - The New European

The Rwanda plan has become another Brexit for the Tories – The New Statesman

Nostalgia stalked Westminster yesterday: a nostalgia for Brexit. Why do I say this? Because both the media and Tory MPs seemed to be pretending that the vote on the second reading of the Rwanda bill was a reincarnation of the Brexit wars. Throughout the afternoon, Tory MPs burrowed into various committee rooms around Westminster Palace to fashion a response. Mark Francois a stout Tory MP who, after a stint as a coalition whip and minister, came into his own as a parliamentary Brexit pugilist grandiosely proclaimed outside Portcullis House that he and his colleagues on the partys right would abstain.

Over in the chamber, the shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper, pen in hand, hair slicked back like an Australian Open tennis player, chastised the parliamentarians sat opposite for slashing away at windmills. But Labour was not the main show. That was Robert Jenrick, the erstwhile immigration minister, who rose to declare that here he stood and he could do no other.

Except abstain on the bill in order to improve it at the committee stage. Priti Patel, who Jenrick doffed his hat to multiple times, was sitting a row back as a reminder of all those migration ministers who had failed before Jenrick. In truth, it seemed that his speech was delivered with one eye on the leadership contest that will follow electoral defeat. He was parading in front of his fellow Tory MPs.

Despite his words and his abstention the bill passed with a majority of 44. For all the rigamarole the breakfast meeting between Sunak and mutinous MPs, the photo ops, the hills climbed and marched down again the result was as predicted. The government is still wrestling with a despair-ridden parliamentary party that it can barely control. It is still running out of time to change course before the election. And its message is still incoherent.

Any success the Tories scrape from the Rwanda scheme will be blotted out in thick ink in the papers by vindictive, anonymous quotes speculating about the leadership. It feels like parliamentary Conservatives are trying to start a car while half of their MPs are deflating the tyres and the other half refuse to turn the ignition. The partys disunity precludes any success. Sunak held off a seismic defeat in the Commons but opposition to the bill will continue into the new year.

Select and enter your email address

Your email address

What rang true in Jenricks speech was this: illegal migration as an issue is not going away. If we assume that the Rwanda scheme fails and that Labour wins the election, then this will become a problem for Starmer a leader who pumped up expectations in his speech yesterday that he will reduce immigration. He claims to want to chart a new approach, but is he destined to follow the path of raising voters hopes only to be constrained by what that means in reality?

This piece first appeared in the Morning Call newsletter; receive it every morning by subscribing on Substackhere.

[See also: Labour is failing to build a new political consensus]

See the article here:

The Rwanda plan has become another Brexit for the Tories - The New Statesman

Brexit backer Dyson says hypocrisy claim over HQ move abroad ‘incredibly harmful’ – Yahoo News UK

By Paul Sandle

LONDON (Reuters) - James Dyson, the billionaire inventor of the bagless vacuum cleaner, told London's High Court a 2022 newspaper column that branded him a hypocrite who had "screwed" Britain was "not only wrong but incredibly harmful" to his reputation.

Dyson is suing Daily Mirror publisher MGN over print and online articles by Brian Reade that lambasted him for moving the global head office of his company from Britain to Singapore after championing the economic benefits of Brexit.

Under the headline: "Message to young folks today is that cheats do prosper", Reade included Dyson in a rogues' gallery of people whom it was alleged had acted illegally or dishonestly, the 76-year-old said in a witness statement published on Tuesday.

Dyson said that, as someone who had invested heavily in Britain and its young people, he found the criticism "particularly damaging and distressing".

MGN argued in its defence that an honest person could hold the opinion that Dyson was a hypocrite, given he had publicly supported the benefits of Britain leaving the European Union and then moved his company's global head office abroad after Brexit.

Dyson's approach to the lawsuit was "wholly disproportionate and abusive" and MGN would seek to have the case thrown out of court at the end of the trial, MGN's lawyer Adrienne Page said in court filings.

Dyson's company, which makes vacuum cleaners, air purifiers and other appliances, said in January 2019 it was moving its corporate office to Singapore to be closer to its Asian markets.

It said at the time the move was not driven by Brexit or by tax, with much of its product development remaining in south west England.

Dyson said on Tuesday that Asia was "logically" the right place for the company, giving its manufacturing and much of its sales were there.

"The decision to establish the global headquarters had nothing to do with Brexit at all, nor did it conflict with or render hypocritical my previous statements, let alone amount to me screwing the country or setting a poor moral example to young people," he said in his statement.

"It simply reflected the long-term commercial reality of Dyson's global business operations."

(Reporting by Paul Sandle; Additional reporting by Sam Tobin; Editing by Mark Potter)

See the rest here:

Brexit backer Dyson says hypocrisy claim over HQ move abroad 'incredibly harmful' - Yahoo News UK

Cliff Taylor: Post-Brexit, the UK’s different economic direction to Ireland’s is underlined – The Irish Times

The UK government put a political spin on its autumn statement on Wednesday, promising to lower the national insurance bill on employees and boost business investment. But after Brexit the UKs growth remains sluggish and its public finances are under pressure.

The reality is that despite the national insurance cut, the tax burden is set to rise to its highest level for many years while public spending forecasts point to real cuts in departmental spending which look near-impossible to achieve on the forecast scale and lower state investment.

The next UK government, likely to be Labour, will be left with some difficult decisions. And the divergence between Britain and the Republic where State investment and spending are on the rise will be underlined. The UK could change course under Labour, of course, but promising higher spending would mean raising taxes, too this is the political trap created by the Tories.

The UKs public finances were a bit better than expected in advance of the autumn statement, but remain under long-term pressure due to low growth and a relatively high national debt.

The impact of inflation, which has pushed up tax revenues as price and wage increases, gave the chancellor of the exchequer, Jeremy Hunt, some room for manoeuvre.

He chose to direct this almost exclusively to cutting taxes, meaning he had little additional cash to provide to government departments. Borrowing is forecast to fall from 5 per cent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) this year to 1.1 per cent by 2028-2029.

The UK spends more than 10 per cent of tax revenue on debt repayment while in the Republic it is less than 3 per cent

However, the Office of Budget Responsibility (OBR) Britains budget watchdog points out this is based on a 19 billion fall in the real value of government spending by 2027-2028. Previously, it says, spending has tended to be topped up by day-to-day spending as pressures emerge. If this happens, future borrowing levels will go higher, unless taxes rise to compensate.

Comparison with Ireland: Strong growth and surging corporate finance receipts have helped to push the Irish public finances into surplus. Irelands national debt is also less vulnerable to higher interest as the vast bulk of outstanding debt is at fixed interest rates, unlike the UK where a quarter of national debt is in index-linked bonds and so repayments have shot up due to higher inflation.

The UK spends more than 10 per cent of tax revenue on debt repayment while in the Republic it is less than 3 per cent.

The States budget surplus was forecast in the recent budget to be 2.7 per cent of GNI* (the aggregate which excluded the distortions caused by multinationals) and 4.4 per cent in 2025 and 2026.

However, the recent shortfalls in corporation tax and pressures on health spending are likely to reduce these forecasts and it is worth noting the Department of Finance estimates that were all the excess corporation tax to disappear, the exchequer would be in deficit.

The UK tax burden will rise towards 37.7 per cent of GDP over the coming years. Photograph: Getty Images

The headline-grabbing part of the autumn statement for the public was a cut in the main national insurance rate by 2 percentage points from January to 10 per cent.

This will benefit taxpayers. However, it will be more than offset by the impact of the classic budget stealth tax the impact of non-indexation of tax bands and credits which will increase the tax burden on those in work.

If these are not adjusted for inflation, then the tax take rises as wages increase in response to inflation. Economists call this fiscal drag. The impact varies across different income levels.

But taxes on income are set to rise with 4 million additional workers paying income tax by 2028/29 and 3 million more moving to the higher rate. So despite the national insurance cut, the tax burden is set to rise to a post-war high of 37.7 per cent of GDP by 2029-29.

The Resolution Foundation, a think tank, has worked out that because of the interplay of the social insurance and tax systems, the only groups who will be better off will be those earning between 11,000 and 13,000 and between 42,000 and 52,000.

Comparison with the Republic: The Irish income tax system is not adjusted automatically for inflation either, so taxpayers are reliant on ministers for finance increasing them each year if they are not to move into higher tax brackets and see the real value of credits eroded. This year credits and the standard band were increased and the USC was cut.

But this stealth tax has also acted as a quiet collector for Ireland over the years and a key question for parties in the forthcoming general election campaign is whether they would index the income tax system for inflation each year. Meanwhile, some modest PRSI increases have been flagged here to keep the social insurance fund in surplus.

The OBR calculates that the UK tax burden will rise towards 37.7 per cent of GDP over the coming years. From having a significantly lower tax burden over the years, this would move it up towards Irish-style overall tax levels. However, bodies such as the fiscal council have warned that the Irish tax take will have to rise in the years ahead to pay for the costs of ageing and the climate transition.

[Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier: The EU is not the same one the UK left]

An interesting point is that Irelands tax take is boosted by corporation tax, much of it based on activity outside the country. Excluding corporation tax, the overall taxation burden in the UK has now, on some calculations, edged above Ireland.

Spending in the UK is forecast to fall as a share of the economy from 44.8 per cent to 42.7 per cent of GDP, but to remain around 3 per cent of GDP above its pre-pandemic level.

However, serious questions have been raised about the likelihood of achieving planned reductions in spending by government departments and local authorities, many already squeezed for cash.

The OBR says that if service levels to the public are not to decline, then big and unlikely increases in public sector productivity are going to be needed. The likelihood is that services will remain under pressure.

Meanwhile, capital spending is to remain where it is in cash terms, implying a real decline. Instead, the government is trying to encourage private sector investment through an extension of a tax write-off for investment spending beyond its previous end date of 2026 the other costly measure in addition to the national insurance cut.

The key question for Irish policymakers is whether spending can keep heading higher if tax revenue growth slows.

This will have some impact on investment and growth and on the long-term potential of the economy to expand but the OBR judges it will be marginal enough.

Comparison with the Republic: Government spending is expected to continue heading higher in Ireland and forecasts for this year and next are already under pressure due to higher health expenditure.

State capital spending is also budgeted to keep rising from 17 billion this year to over 23 billion by 2026. The key question for Irish policymakers is whether spending can keep heading higher if tax revenue growth slows.

One figure stands out in the OBR assessment. It is that living standards as measured by real household disposable income per capita are forecast to be 3.5 per cent lower in 2024-25 than their pre-pandemic level. This would be the largest fall since records began in the 1950s.

It would be 2027/2028 when living standards per capita get back to their pre-pandemic level. So despite the headline measures in the autumn statement, slow growth and a rising tax burden will hold down British living standards. The next government will also face an almost-immediate choice between cutting spending or hiking taxes, given the unrealistic spending figures in the latest document. This could be a more difficult job if corporation tax growth stalls.

Overall UK growth is sluggish, with GDP forecast by the OBR to rise by just 0.7 per cent next year and 1.4 per cent in 2025. The Irish domestic economy is expected to grow by 2.2 per cent next year, according to the Department of Finance.

[DUP will not get all it wants in post-Brexit trade talks, says former leader]

Here, household living standards have been rising, but mainly due to the fact that more people are at work, as inflation has eaten into the spending power of workers.

The prospects for the next Irish government look better than their UK counterparts, but it may see the forecast budget surpluses from 2025 on reduce sharply if the corporation tax fall-off evident in recent months continues. The UK experience shows how difficult a negative public finance cycle can be to break.

A key goal for Irish policymakers is to make sure that the current positive position of the public finances is maintained.

Read the original here:

Cliff Taylor: Post-Brexit, the UK's different economic direction to Ireland's is underlined - The Irish Times

Cognitive Skills Linked to Brexit Votes – Neuroscience News

Summary: A new study suggests a correlation between higher cognitive abilities and voting Remain in the 2016 Brexit referendum.

Analyzing data from 3,183 UK couples, the study found that individuals with higher cognitive skills, as well as those with spouses possessing higher cognitive abilities, were more likely to vote Remain.

The research, which controlled for various socioeconomic and personality traits, adds to the evidence that higher cognitive abilities may help in recognizing and resisting misinformation.

This study highlights the potential impact of cognitive skills on political decisions and susceptibility to misinformation.

Key Facts:

Source: PLOS

A new analysis suggests that a person with higher cognitive ability may have been more likely to vote Remain in the 2016 Brexit referendum, and that a spouses cognitive skills may also be linked to Brexit voting decisions.

Chris Dawson and Paul Baker of the University of Bath, UK, present these findings in the open-access journalPLOS ONEon November 22, 2023.

Having higher cognitive ability has previously been associated with a greater tendency to recognize and resist misinformation. Studies have also shown that the UK public received a large volume of misinformation about the referendum prior to voting for the UK to withdraw from the EU (Brexit).

However, while a growing body of research has investigated potential links between peoples Brexit votes and socioeconomic, sociodemographic, and psychological factors, less research has addressed the potential role of cognitive ability in their decisions.

Dawson and Baker analyzed data on 3,183 heterosexual UK couples collected as part of a large survey study called Understanding Society. They examined whether there were any links between participants reporting that they had voted Leave or Remain and their cognitive abilityas measured by their performance on a variety of tasks.

The researchers statistically accounted for other factors that could also be linked to voting decisions, such as socioeconomic and sociodemographic traits, political preferences, and a widely studied set of personality traits known as the Big Five.

The analysis revealed a strong statistical link between higher cognitive ability and having voted Remain. In addition, people whose spouse had higher cognitive ability were significantly more likely to vote Remain. In cases where one spouse voted Remain and the other Leave, having significantly higher cognitive ability than ones spouse was associated with an even higher chance of voting to Remain.

The researchers note possible underlying explanations for their findings. For instance, misinformation about the referendum could have complicated decision making for people with low cognitive ability. They also suggest the need for ways to avoid such complications in the face of increasing amounts of misinformation.

The authors add: This study adds to existing academic evidence showing that low cognitive ability makes people more susceptible to misinformation and disinformation. People with lower cognitive ability and analytical thinking skills find it harder to detect and discount this type of information.

Author: Hanna Abdallah Source: PLOS Contact: Hanna Abdallah PLOS Image: The image is credited to Neuroscience News

Original Research: Open access. Cognitive ability and voting behaviour in the 2016 UK referendum on European Union membership by Chris Dawson et al. PLOS ONE

Abstract

Cognitive ability and voting behaviour in the 2016 UK referendum on European Union membership

On June 23rd2016 the UK voted to leave the European Union. The period leading up to the referendum was characterized by a significant volume of misinformation and disinformation.

Existing literature has established the importance of cognitive ability in processing and discounting (mis/dis) information in decision making.

We use a dataset of couples within households from a nationally representative UK survey to investigate the relationship between cognitive ability and the propensity to vote Leave / Remain in the 2016 UK referendum on European Union membership.

We find that a one standard deviation increase in cognitive ability, all else being equal, increases the likelihood of a Remain vote by 9.7%. Similarly, we find that an increase in partners cognitive ability further increases the respondents likelihood of a Remain vote (7.6%).

In a final test, restricting our analysis to couples who voted in a conflicting manner, we find that having a cognitive ability advantage over ones partner increases the likelihood of voting Remain (10.9%).

An important question then becomes how to improve individual and household decision making in the face of increasing amounts of (mis/dis) information.

Read more here:

Cognitive Skills Linked to Brexit Votes - Neuroscience News

Higher Cognitive Ability Linked to Voting Against Brexit, Study Finds – Technology Networks

Register for free to listen to this article

Thank you. Listen to this article using the player above.

Want to listen to this article for FREE?

Complete the form below to unlock access to ALL audio articles.

People with higher cognitive ability may have been more likely to vote to Remain during the Brexit referendum a vote that decided whether the United Kingdom (UK) should leave or remain a member of the European Union according to a new study published in PLOS.

In June 2016, the UK held a referendum on whether it should remain in or leave the European Union, culminating in a close vote in which 51.9% of voters opted to leave, with 48.1% voting to remain.

The referendum campaign was fraught with controversy and was incredibly polarizing among the British public. The results were a shock to the economy, causing one of the largest single-day losses in the FTSE markets and the value of the British Pound Sterling.

Since the vote, academic studies have been trying to understand the results by studying voters socioeconomic, sociodemographic and psychological characteristics, seeking to draw associations between voting either Leave or Remain. However, the potential role of voters cognitive abilities has not been thoroughly explored.

The link between cognitive ability and voting behavior in the referendum has always featured in an anecdotal type of way in the UK, mainly on social media platforms, said Dr. Chris Dawson, lead author of the study and associate professor of management, marketing, business and society at the University of Bath, in an interview with PLOS. Given this narrative, we thought it would be interesting to see if there was any empirical evidence to support it.

The researchers analyzed data from Understanding Society a large survey of over 3,000 heterosexual couples from the UK. This is a nationally representative sample so it can speak to these sorts of sensitive research questions with validity, said Dawson.

In one part of Understanding Society, cognitive function was measured using five tasks that assessed factors such as working memory, verbal fluency and fluid reasoning. In another part, respondents were asked to record whether they voted Leave or Remain in the EU referendum.

Subscribe to Technology Networks daily newsletter, delivering breaking science news straight to your inbox every day.

The teams analysis revealed a strong link between higher cognitive ability test results and voting Remain. Our main finding is that for those lowest on cognitive ability, only 40% voted Remain, whereas 73% of those highest on cognitive ability voted Remain, Dawson explained.

We also showed that this difference, while smaller, still emerged when we controlled for individual differences in income, personality, age, gender, education, political views, newspaper readership and a variety of other socioeconomic and sociodemographic factors, he continued.

Additionally, they found that couples within households were highly interdependent; respondents whose spouses had higher cognitive ability were significantly more likely to have voted Remain. Meanwhile, for couples in which one partner voted Remain and the other voted Leave, having a higher cognitive ability than ones spouse was linked to an even higher likelihood of voting Remain.

Nonetheless, Dawson acknowledges that there are possible underlying explanations for their findings, such as dis- and misinformation: We hope people take note of our research findings. Media outlets have always circulated some misleading information, but the rise of social media and the internet has sharply increased the scale and accessibility of misinformation and disinformation and of increasingly divisive messages.

It is important to understand that our findings are based on average differences: there exists a huge amount of overlap between the distributions of Remain and Leave cognitive abilities. We calculated that approximately 36% of Leave voters had higher cognitive ability than the average (mean) Remain voter, Dawson explained. But what our results do imply is that misinformation about the referendum could have complicated decision-making, especially for people with low cognitive ability.

Reference: Dawson C, Baker PL. Cognitive ability and voting behavior in the 2016 UK referendum on European Union membership. PLOS. 2023. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0289312

This article is a rework of a press release issued by PLOS. Material has been edited for length and content.

Read this article:

Higher Cognitive Ability Linked to Voting Against Brexit, Study Finds - Technology Networks

The British businesses being strangled by Brexit red tape – The New European

Brexiteers pledged that leaving the bloc would cut unnecessary bureaucracy for British businesses. But, according to a new report commissioned by the European Movement UK, companies are now getting strangled by red tape.

Nearly three-quarters of respondents to the Business Impact Report 74% said that leaving the EU had affected their business very negatively and more than half stated that new red tape had made trading with the EU increasingly difficult, arguing that it had become the single biggest obstacle to doing business with Europe. Meanwhile, 40% highlighted issues with finding staff since losing freedom of movement

The research by European Movement UK shows just how much ongoing damage is still being done by Brexit. Devastating barriers to trading with the EU have forced some companies out of business. Red tape, lack of workers, huge hikes in overheads Britains small and medium enterprises have sustained a disproportionate amount of the damage, said Sir Vince Cable, the former Lib Dem leader who is now president of European Movement UK.

Almost 2000 businesses responded to the survey, out of which a staggering 94% said leaving the single market and customs union had harmed their operations. To tackle this, hundreds of companies said that they were forced to reduce their workforce hours or even make staff redundant. In some cases, they were forced to close entirely and a woman named in the report only as Carol was one of them.

She owned a bespoke lingerie business in the South West but had to shut it down because of red tape. She said in the report: I did everything I could to prepare for Brexit. The reality of sending garments to the EU was a nightmare. I had goods that spent ages in transit and were then returned for incorrect customs information. The business was losing money, so I decided to close. Brexit was the final nail in the coffin.

The damage has been felt across all sectors, including engineering, agriculture, hospitality and finance with owners also reporting that they had lost business in the EU and new red tape had made them uncompetitive.

Hugh Chapman, who runs Long Mynd Cider in Bishops Castle, Shropshire, was another respondent damaged by Brexit. Chapman said a Europe-wide organisation was interested in buying and distributing his products, however, the life-changing deal then fell through. The administration around Brexit meant they were no longer interested. Its economically impossible to trade with Europe at present, he said.

Darren Farrell, who runs DARJAC Engineering in Essex and specialises in servicing high-end cars, said trade had vanished for his business because of Brexit. Within nine months of the UK government signing the Trade and Co-operation Agreement with the EU, seven out of ten EU suppliers said that they could no longer support third country shipping & warranty, he said. We cant move our customers vehicles to race events on the EU mainland without huge cost, including temporary export permits that take many hours. Two years on, we could no longer support the losses. Our business is finished.

Go here to see the original:

The British businesses being strangled by Brexit red tape - The New European

Changes to data protection laws to unlock post-Brexit opportunity – GOV.UK

A raft of common-sense changes to the Data Protection and Digital Information Bill will build an innovative data protection regime in the UK, crack down on benefit fraud cheats, and allow the country to realise new post-Brexit freedoms while delivering new economic opportunities to the tune of 5.9 billion.

The changes include new powers to require data from third parties, particularly banks and financial organisations, to help the UK government reduce benefit fraud and save the taxpayer up to 600 million over the next five years. Currently, Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) can only undertake fraud checks on a claimant on an individual basis, where there is already a suspicion of fraud.

The new proposals would allow regular checks to be carried out on the bank accounts held by benefit claimants to spot increases in their savings which push them over the benefit eligibility threshold, or when people send more time overseas than the benefit rules allow for. This will help identify fraud take action more quickly. To make sure that privacy concerns are at the heart of these new measures, only a minimum amount of data will be accessed and only in instances which show a potential risk of fraud and error.

Another measure offers vital reassurance and support to families as they grieve the loss of a child. In cases where a child has died through suicide, a proposed data preservation process would require social media companies to keep any relevant personal data which could then be used in subsequent investigations or inquests.

Current rules mean that social media companies arent obliged to hold onto this data for longer than is needed, meaning that data which could prove vital to coroner investigations could be deleted as part of a platforms routine maintenance. The change tabled today represents an important step for families coming to terms with the loss of a loved one, and takes further steps to help ensure harmful content has no place online.

The use of biometric data, such as fingerprints, to strengthen national security is also covered by the amendments, with the ability of Counter Terrorism Police to hold onto the biometrics of individuals who pose a potential threat, and which are supplied by organisations such as Interpol, being bolstered.

This would see officers being able to retain biometric data for as long as an INTERPOL notice is in force, matching this process up with INTERPOLs own retention rules. The amendments will also ensure that where an individual has a foreign conviction, their biometrics will be able to be retained indefinitely in the same way as is already possible for individuals with UK convictions this is particularly important where foreign nationals may have existing convictions for serious offences, including terrorist offences.

Maintaining the UKs high standards of data protection is central to both the wider Bill and the proposed amendments which have been laid today.

Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, Michelle Donelan, said:

Britain has seized a key Brexit opportunity boosting small businesses, protecting consumers and cracking down on criminal enterprises like nuisance calling and benefit fraud.

These changes protect our privacy and data while also injecting common sense into the system - whether it is cracking down on cookies, scrapping pointless paperwork which stifles productivity, tackling benefit fraud or making it easier to protect our citizens from criminals.

These changes help to establish the UK as a world-leading data economy; one that puts consumers and businesses at the centre and removes the one-size-fits-all barriers that have held many British businesses back.

The Bills focus is to create an innovative and flexible data protection regime which will maintain the UKs high standards of data protection, streamline processes for companies, strengthen national security, and support grieving families. Making it easier to use personal data which will improve efficiency, lead to better public services, and enable new innovations across science, innovation, and technology.

Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, Mel Stride MP, said:

These new powers send a very clear message to benefit fraudsters we wont stand for it. These people are taking the taxpayer for a ride and it is right that we do all we can to bring them to justice.

These powers will be used proportionately, ensuring claimants data is safely protected while rooting out fraudsters at the earliest possible opportunity.

Home Secretary, James Cleverly, said:

My priority is to continue cutting crime and ensuring the public is protected from security threats. Law enforcement and our security partners must have access to the best possible tools and data, including biometrics, to continue to keep us safe.

This Bill will improve the efficiency of data protection for our security and policing partnersencouraging better use of personal information and ensuring appropriate safeguards for privacy.

The amendments tabled today show the practical steps being taken by the UK government to improve how the nation uses and accesses personal data, capitalising on the UKs departure from the European Union to introduce measures which will protect the public purse, strengthen national security, and offer important support to grieving families.

These amendments will also help the Bill realise its ambition of bulldozing burdens for businesses and removing restrictions for researchers, ensuring new advances in science, innovation, and technology can be fuelled by more practical ways to access data.

Full list of amendments tabled can be found here.

These amendments will be considered by the House of Commons at Report next Wednesday (29 November).

Further information on the Data Protection and Digital Information Bill can be found here.

See the rest here:

Changes to data protection laws to unlock post-Brexit opportunity - GOV.UK

Brexit backer Dyson says hypocrisy claim over HQ move abroad … – Reuters

James Dyson arrives at the High Court in London, Britain, November 21, 2023. REUTERS/Hollie Adams Acquire Licensing Rights

LONDON, Nov 21 (Reuters) - James Dyson, the billionaire inventor of the bagless vacuum cleaner, told London's High Court a 2022 newspaper column that branded him a hypocrite who had "screwed" Britain was "not only wrong but incredibly harmful" to his reputation.

Dyson is suing Daily Mirror publisher MGN over print and online articles by Brian Reade that lambasted him for moving the global head office of his company from Britain to Singapore after championing the economic benefits of Brexit.

Under the headline: "Message to young folks today is that cheats do prosper", Reade included Dyson in a rogues' gallery of people whom it was alleged had acted illegally or dishonestly, the 76-year-old said in a witness statement published on Tuesday.

Dyson said that, as someone who had invested heavily in Britain and its young people, he found the criticism "particularly damaging and distressing".

MGN argued in its defence that an honest person could hold the opinion that Dyson was a hypocrite, given he had publicly supported the benefits of Britain leaving the European Union and then moved his company's global head office abroad after Brexit.

Dyson's approach to the lawsuit was "wholly disproportionate and abusive" and MGN would seek to have the case thrown out of court at the end of the trial, MGN's lawyer Adrienne Page said in court filings.

Dyson's company, which makes vacuum cleaners, air purifiers and other appliances, said in January 2019 it was moving its corporate office to Singapore to be closer to its Asian markets.

It said at the time the move was not driven by Brexit or by tax, with much of its product development remaining in south west England.

Dyson said on Tuesday that Asia was "logically" the right place for the company, giving its manufacturing and much of its sales were there.

"The decision to establish the global headquarters had nothing to do with Brexit at all, nor did it conflict with or render hypocritical my previous statements, let alone amount to me screwing the country or setting a poor moral example to young people," he said in his statement.

"It simply reflected the long-term commercial reality of Dyson's global business operations."

Reporting by Paul Sandle Additional reporting by Sam Tobin Editing by Mark Potter

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Read the original:

Brexit backer Dyson says hypocrisy claim over HQ move abroad ... - Reuters

Confidence in UK economy lower than at Brexit referendum – Proactive Investors UK

About Jessica Davies

Jessica has spent 15 years covering private and public markets, business, law and investment in the transition to cleaner energy.She spent several years as an editor at Dow Jones, covering private equity and private markets, where she led the team that broke the news of alleged misuse of funds at Abraaj Group. During her time at the company, she sat on the Women @ Dow Jones committee.She also spent four years as an editor and journalist at Centaur Media PLC covering investment in... Read more

Proactive financial news and online broadcast teams provide fast, accessible, informative and actionable business and finance news content to a global investment audience. All our content is produced independently by our experienced and qualified teams of news journalists.

Proactive news team spans the worlds key finance and investing hubs with bureaus and studios in London, New York, Toronto, Vancouver, Sydney and Perth.

We are experts in medium and small-cap markets, we also keep our community up to date with blue-chip companies, commodities and broader investment stories. This is content that excites and engages motivated private investors.

The team delivers news and unique insights across the market including but not confined to: biotech and pharma, mining and natural resources, battery metals, oil and gas, crypto and emerging digital and EV technologies.

Proactive has always been a forward looking and enthusiastic technology adopter.

Our human content creators are equipped with many decades of valuable expertise and experience. The team also has access to and use technologies to assist and enhance workflows.

Proactive will on occasion use automation and software tools, including generative AI. Nevertheless, all content published by Proactive is edited and authored by humans, in line with best practice in regard to content production and search engine optimisation.

More here:

Confidence in UK economy lower than at Brexit referendum - Proactive Investors UK

Brexit-hating Manfred Weber launches WAR of words on Spain as … – Montana Right Now

Europhile and Brexit hating Manfred Weber has hit out at Spain and its dealing with Catalan separatists for power. Wading into the domestic policies of the country, Weber raged: "When corruption, violence and even terrorism go unpunished, it breaks the rule of law. "When people in Spain are no longer equal before the law, it breaks Rule of Law. We will not be silent about what is happening in Spain."Spain is currently in the throes of political turmoil which is threatening to spill into the EU. Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez has been attacked by European conservatives, including Weber accusing him of undermining the rule of law of the EU by offering an amnesty to Catalan separatists for political support. Following months of a political statement since a chaotic July election, Sanchez announced a deal with the Catalan separatists. Sanchez is seeking to form a minority government with their backing. But the deal has not gone down well in the EU with some suggesting that the deal would set a dangerous precedent. Weber said: "Spanish civil society, lawyers organizations, the highest court, they are all worried about the breakdown of the rule of law in Spain following the government agreement. "This is not a party issue, it's a rule of law issue. The left is silent in this House, but Europe is not."The EU has been accused of meddling in domestic politics by socialist allies of the Prime Minister. Socialist lawmaker Iratxe Garca, who leads the Socialists group in the Parliament, told reporters over the weekend during a party gathering in Mlaga, Spain. Citizens voted and the majority in Spain say that they dont want a government between conservatives and the far-right.Yesterday, the new cabinet of Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez take office and attend first meeting after forming new government. Sanchez, who won a vote in parliament to clinch another term last week after months of negotiations, added nine new faces to the 22-person cabinet.Spain's King Felipe swore in the new cabinet in which most of the senior ministers retain their positions.

See original here:

Brexit-hating Manfred Weber launches WAR of words on Spain as ... - Montana Right Now

The autumn statement shows Britain can’t afford Brexit – The New European

After weeks of leaks, Jeremy Hunts autumn statement held few surprises. Nor is it particularly shocking that the chancellor will attempt to keep Brexits impact on the UK economy out of the debate in the days to come.

No amount of personal or business tax cuts will undo the damage that Brexit has done and continues to do to our economy, said the European Movement UK after Hunts speech. The true extent of the economic damage of Brexit will take 15 years to fully materialise. The National Institute of Economic and Social Research predicts that by 2035 the economy will be between 5-6% smaller than it would be if we had not left the European Union. This means that if it were not for Brexit our economy would be much stronger than the economic picture presented by the chancellor in the autumn statement.

According to the group, Brexit is already costing each person in the UK about 850 a year and the situation is only going to worsen. The cost is set to reach 2300 per person, per year over the next decade. In a report released last week, the National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) estimated that this will increase to 5 to 6% of GDP a year (around 115-135 billion at todays prices) by 2035.

Britain cannot afford Brexit. Budget tinkering cannot hide that elephant in the room, said Sir Nick Harvey, CEO of European Movement UK. He added: If Jeremy Hunt wants to set the UK back on a path to growth and put more money in British pockets, he should announce a clear medium-term plan to get the UK back in the single market and invite other parties to sign up to it. That plan would take time to deliver. But it would start to restore investor confidence overnight.

Last week, the European Movement UK published its Business Impact Report detailing the post-Brexit experiences of over 1700 businesses. Just over 93% of businesses surveyed said that Brexit has affected them negatively, while 95.5% said that they would benefit from regaining access to the EU Single Market.

According to the EM UK, if the UK was still a member of the European Union todays autumn statement could have addressed the cost-of-living crisis, the impact of Covid on our economy and the inflation crisis. Instead, there was a Brexit-shaped elephant in the room.

Read more:

The autumn statement shows Britain can't afford Brexit - The New European

Brexit is not the problem, Europe’s lack of liquidity is – The TRADE – The TRADE News

The UK and the European Union must stop focusing on post-Brexit divergence and convergence and re-align their interests to tackle stagnant flows in Europe in comparison with the US and Asia.

That was the key takeaway from the FIX conference that took place in Paris earlier this week. Since their split at the start of 2020, Europe and the UK have been focused on emerging as the victor of Brexit with home of the European financial hub to be in either the City of London or Paris.

However, at what cost? As noted by panellists and audience members on Tuesday, the more important conversation to be had is how to boost volumes and liquidity in Europe. In a live poll asking whether regulatory change could devastate Paris or favour London in the coming years, around 72% of the audience voted no. In other words, its not a zero-sum game to be won.

The thing that will likely devastate Europe if not taken in hand is the level of fragmentation in the region made worse by Brexit and the stunted growth it has seen in the last few years. Unlike the US and Asia, Europe has produced stagnant volumes year on year, driven by several macroeconomic factors and a suffering IPO market.

Contributing to this lack of liquidity is the fact that a growing list of firms are now competing for a portion of a pie that itself is not growing alongside said list. Market structure in the US and Europe is starkly different. Europe has three times the number of exchanges, 10 times the number of listing venues and 20 times as many post-trade providers.

Speaking to this, Simon Dove, managing director, head of liquidity at Instinet, said: The challenge in Europe is that while competition has been positive it has also driven fragmentation which can make us less attractive versus the US and Asia. At the moment were all talking about volume how do we get more volume?

Brexit has created additional frictional cost for a market that is already struggling. And the EU and UK firms must create a game plan as to how to grow the region together as opposed to continue fighting over the remaining scraps.

Its a big world, Simon Gallagher, head of global sales at Euronext and chief executive of Euronext London, told The TRADE. There is interest in the UK and Europe as neighbours as we compete against the US and Asia. Its a realisation on both sides that we need each other and need to get creative with a symbiotic relationship. Its the last thing Europe needs, putting extra frictional cost into the system.

Brexit the good and the bad

The UKs departure from the European Union, while costly thanks to the need for duplicated services to support European clients, has also had some relatively positive impacts on the way that firms on either side of the channel operate. The conclusion its not been as bad as everyone thought it was going to be from a trading perspective.

From a trading perspective, the markets were well equipped [for Brexit], said one individual who wished to remain anonymous. The situation is less drastic than we expected. Not much has changed, apart from perhaps the way some firms communicate with the sell-side.

While many predicted the impacts of Brexit could have been catastrophic, the reality is that financial services in Europe were previously skewed too heavily towards the City. Many participants have subsequently suggested that the spreading of volumes to new centres such as Paris and Amsterdam have in fact future-proofed the resilience of the markets.

The benefit for the overall industry is that were more resilient. We have two financial centres instead of one, said one panellist.

Also noted during the Paris FIX conference, was the suggestion that many European firms were appreciative of the increased on the ground and local coverage that Brexit had enforced. Some individuals called it the natural next step for markets.

Financial services were over-centred in London. Clients appreciate that firms have more local coverage, said another panellist. Having an extra step between Paris and London is another link in the chain. The way the desk is set up you have the same methods of communication whether youre in a different room or different city. Nothing has really changed; there hasnt been a duplication of roles.

That is not to say of course that Brexit has been all roses. Thanks to the requirement for European firms to be serviced by European entities, institutions have been forced to duplicate their operations on the either side of the channel. While this hasnt necessarily resulted in the duplication of personnel and roles it has meant a duplication of implementation costs, a moving of infrastructure into the Bloc and increased cost around connectivity and compliance with regulation.

This unsurprisingly has proved to be an expensive and arduous process and has created an environment where larger firms that can shoulder the cost more easily have thrived, perhaps even sparking some of the consolidation seen in the last few years.

It is also likely to encourage further outsourcing. Noted during a panel exploring consolidation and competition during FIX Paris, was a recent piece of research that found that 20% of firms in Europe had outsourced part of their dealing activities and a further 20-25% were exploring doing so.

Brexit created unnecessary costs for end investors. There is a cost attached to implementation decisions made post-Brexit and this favours larger players, said one individual.

Read more Carrot or stick? How the EU plans to reduce reliance on UK CCPs for derivatives clearing

One part of the post-Brexit tussle that does have the potential to hamper institutions is the proposed active clearing account mandates suggested by EU regulators at the end of 2022. In December, the European Commission published a proposal as part of Emir 3.0 regulation that would require all participants to hold active accounts at European CCPs for clearing at least a portion of certain derivative contracts.

The decision has been argued against by many institutions and trading associations who claim the move will hamper competition in Euro-denominated products by encouraging participants to take certain uncompetitive prices just to meet a minimum threshold of activity.

The mandate to clear on EU houses will bifurcate liquidity in cleared swaps, said one individual at FIX Paris on Tuesday. Thats an attention point for us and we will be watching it carefully. It could increase costs and decrease liquidity.

This is certainly true and something to watch. However, FIX panellists and speakers were united in their stance that further splitting liquidity between the two regions is not the answer to the problem. Brexit is not, and should not, be the problem. The issue is adding new growth and liquidity to the region. And as close neighbours, the UK and the European Union should be facing issues around global volumes as one.

See the rest here:

Brexit is not the problem, Europe's lack of liquidity is - The TRADE - The TRADE News