Brexit ‘sabotage' warning as new proposals clear Commons
MPs voted 264 to 99, a majority of 165, to approve the Product Regulation and Metrology Bill at its third reading. The bill provides the government with new powers to regulate the marketing and use of goods in the UK post-Brexit.
However, TUV leader Jim Allister voiced concerns about specific references to " EU law" within the bill. He questioned whether this could allow ministers to act against the 2016 referendum result.
Critics fear the legislation would force UK regulations to automatically align with changes in European Union law, granting ministers "inappropriately wide" powers to rewrite regulations.
Mr Allister, the MP for North Antrim, told the Commons: 'There are aspects of this Bill which I think are democratically dangerous.
'Because this Bill gifts to government unbridled capacity to make regulations, with virtually no oversight from this elected House, on matters which touch not just upon the sanctity of our product production, but the sovereignty of this nation.
'This Bill, with little attempt at subtlety, is a vehicle which enables a Government, if so minded – and this one, I fear, might be – to sabotage Brexit in many ways.
'I stand to be corrected, but I don't think a single member of this Government voted for Brexit, and yet that is the settled and declared will of the people, greatest number of people who ever participated in a democratic vote in this nation.
'Yet in the Bill, we have the capacity, particularly through clause 2(7), to dynamically align all our regulations with those of the EU, and to do that without recourse to this House, at the whim of the executive. Whatever the subject matter, that surely is a most unhealthy situation.'
Shadow business minister Dame Harriett Baldwin also said: 'As an independent nation, the UK we believe should set its own product regulations to foster innovation, support domestic industry, and not automatically align with EU rules which we no longer have any influence or help to shape.'
Responding, business minister Justin Madders told the Commons: 'The powers in this Bill give the UK the flexibility to manage its own product regulatory framework.
'Part of this is of course making sure that the UK can respond to relevant developments in EU law, and this does not mean that the UK is beholden to EU changes, and all regulations will be subject to Parliament oversight.'
He added that 'the reason why the Bill explicitly references the EU rather than other jurisdictions is because most of our product regulation is of course inherited from EU law'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
4 minutes ago
- The Sun
Major UK high street bank quits UN-backed net zero alliance as it says body ‘not fit for purpose'
A MAJOR high street bank has become the latest British lender to quit the Net Zero Banking Alliance, the bank said on Friday. Barclays argued that the departure of several global lenders has left it no longer fit to support the bank's green transition. Barclays' decision to quit the foremost banking alliance focused on tackling climate change follows on from HSBC and several major US banks. It also raises questions about the ability of the group to influence change in the sector going forward. The bank said in a statement on its website: "After consideration, we have decided to withdraw from the Net Zero Banking Alliance." It added that its commitment to be net zero by 2050 remained unchanged and that it still saw a commercial opportunity for itself and its clients in the energy transition. Earlier this week Barclays published the first update on its sustainability strategy in several years. It said the bank made £500 million in revenue from sustainable and low-carbon transition finance in 2024. Jeanne Martin, co-director of corporate engagement at responsible investment NGO ShareAction called the decision to leave the Net Zero Banking Alliance "incredibly disappointing and a step in the wrong direction at a time when the dangers of climate change are rapidly mounting." Barclays said the alliance was no longer fit for its purpose: "With the departure of most of the global banks, the organisation no longer has the membership to support our transition." The Net Zero Banking Alliance, a global initiative launched by the United Nations Environment Programme Finance Initiative, lists more than 100 members on its website - including leading international financial institutions. A spokesperson for the alliance said it remains focused on "supporting its members to lead on climate by addressing the barriers preventing their clients from investing in the net-zero transition." It comes after it was announced that Barclays is slashing interest rates on its popular Rainy Day for the third time in less than seven months. From August 4, the interest rate for balances up to £5,000 will fall from 4.61% to 4.36%. The Rainy Day Saver account, which offers easy access to funds, has been a favourite among Barclays ' 20 million customers. It is designed for balances up to £5,000, with savers earning the higher rate on the first £5,000 – currently 4.61%. Savings above this threshold earn just 1% interest, but customers benefit from instant access to their money at any time. At the current rate, holding £5,000 in the account would earn you £230.50 in interest over 12 months. However, when the rate drops to 4.36%, this will fall to £218 - a loss of £12.50 per year. Once boasting a competitive 5.12% interest rate earlier this year, Barclays has steadily chipped away at its appeal. In February, the rate dropped to 4.87%, followed by another cut in April to 4.61%. In February, the bank reduced the rate to 4.87%, followed by another cut in April to 4.61%. Now, just months later, rates are set to drop again, leaving savers questioning whether to stick with the account or explore better options elsewhere. How Barclay Card Changes Could Affect You ANALYSIS by Consumer Reporter, James Flanders: Barclaycard's change to its credit card repayment structure sounds great if you don't dig into the details. After all, Barclaycard says it's "making the changes to give you greater flexibility each month". In practice, it means that if you can't afford to pay off your balance in full at the end of each statement period, you can repay much less under the minimum repayment option than you have done previously. If you only pay the minimum amounts on occasion, this is super useful. But if you rely on this type of repayment plan in the long term, it could will cost you hundreds of pounds extra in interest. It could also negatively affect your credit file as it'll take you much longer to clear your debt. More interest will be applied to your outstanding balance, too, as less is paid down each month. For example, if you have a balance of £5,000 on a Barclaycard at 24% interest, where you only make the minimum payments and don't spend on the card. Under the old "2.5% of the balance plus the interest charged" rule, it would take around 14 years to clear the balance. In total, you'd expect to pay about £3,500 in interest. But with the new "1% of the balance plus the interest charged" calculation, it will take over 30 years to clear the same balance. You'd then end up paying a whopping £8,500 in interest. Before taking out a new credit card or increasing the amount you borrow, it's vital to consider the consequences. You should only borrow money if you can afford to pay it back. It's always vital to ask yourself if you actually need to borrow before committing to a new credit card, personal loan or overdraft. If you use a credit card, I'd recommend that you always pay off your balance in full at the end of each statement period. Lenders have a responsibility to help customers who are in debt. If you're in a debt crisis, your first point of call should be your lender. They might help you out by offering you a reduced interest rate or a temporary payment holiday - so check in with your lender if you're struggling.
Daily Mail
4 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
RICHARD TICE: Why ditching Miliband's Net Zero madness could save every family £1,000 a year
Labour is facing a make-or-break moment when it comes to its new cult, Net Stupid Zero. This week, Ed Miliband opens his latest renewable energy auction, which allows green developers to bid for lucrative taxpayer-funded contracts. The eco lobby says the auction, officially titled Allocation Round 7 (AR7), will be the centrepiece of Labour's plan to decarbonise the grid by 2030, and that this seventh round must be the biggest yet to 'keep the dream alive'. But it's a dream Britain cannot afford. Inflation is rising. Food prices are once again on the up. And families across the country are cutting back – not just on holidays or takeaways, but on essentials. According to research consultancy More In Common, 60 per cent of Britons list the cost of living as their top concern – and have done so consistently since January last year. And one of the biggest contributory factors to this crisis is an issue that almost no one in Westminster wants to talk about: Net Zero and the spiralling cost of Britain's green energy agenda. Expensive energy is the grenade exploding Britain's economic model. It is not just about switching on the lights and heating homes. It powers industry, transports goods, and underpins every job and price tag. When energy becomes expensive and unreliable, everything else does too. When you hear ministers blaming this crisis on Russian president Vladimir Putin and international fossil fuel markets, remember this: UK energy prices were already among the highest in the developed world before Russia invaded Ukraine. This emergency didn't start in Moscow. It was manufactured in Westminster. We blew up coal plants, messed up nuclear, banned fracking, deterred North Sea investment (which drove up gas imports) and prioritised unreliable green energy. From the other side of the Atlantic, even Donald Trump can see that, writing on his social media site Truth Social: 'North Sea Oil is a treasure chest for the United Kingdom. The taxes are so high, however, that it makes no sense... Incentivise the drillers, fast.' He rightly added that wind is 'the worst form of energy' and a con. When it comes to energy, Westminster has been Putin's most useful idiot. If the US is waking up to that fact, when will Labour? For nearly two decades, clueless politicians from Labour, the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats have clung to a fantasy: that we could eliminate all hydrocarbon use, build a national grid dominated by wind and solar power, and suffer no consequences. The result? At a time of rising demand we are reliant on an unreliable energy supply and lumbered with higher bills. Three-quarters of the rise in electricity bills over the past decade can be attributed to green energy policies and the multi-billion-pound subsidies paid to renewable investors, according to Net Zero Watch. Yet hundreds of thousands of jobs are being destroyed by high energy prices, while millions more are at risk. Now suppliers are warning that prices will rise again in 2026. Professor Gordon Hughes, a former energy adviser at the World Bank, has warned they could approach 40p per kilowatt hour by 2030 – up from 25p today, which is a catastrophic increase. That's why I took action. Last month, I wrote to major windfarm developers, warning them and their investors to stay away from the AR7 auction. I made it clear that if they press ahead, a Reform government will make them regret it. As Nigel Farage said a few weeks ago about the renegotiation of green subsidy contracts, investors will see 'some haircuts'. Naturally, activists, consultants and subsidy-hunters – the 'Green Blob' – erupted in outrage. But, if these windfarms go ahead, it will be an act of grave economic self-harm. By putting a spanner in the works of Miliband's mad plan, we can stop the 20-year rise in bills. By 2030, my letter alone might be saving households £1,000 a year. But this isn't just about price. It's about security. Much of our ageing fleet of gas-fired power stations is nearing retirement. Thanks to subsidised renewables, few developers are willing to invest in replacements. Why build a power station that often won't run to full capacity, especially when Miliband's plan would make the existing situation even worse? Meanwhile, demand for new gas-fired electricity generating units is exploding globally as countries race to power the AI boom. Lead times of gas infrastructure projects are now as long as eight years. Even if we ordered replacements today, they wouldn't arrive until 2033. That's years after the capacity crunch is expected to bite. If we don't act fast, we'll be forced to ration power. Renewables may also be making the grid dangerously unstable. That's not just an economic risk, it's a public safety threat. Look at Spain and Portugal, where a blackout triggered by solar farm switch-offs killed at least eight people in June. Iberian grid operators restored power in a day, but our system is just as vulnerable. No one knows if the 'smart' gizmos grid managers hope will stabilise the system will actually work when it is under stress. Clearly, they need only fail once – and the whole country goes dark. Worse still, under political pressure, resources have been poured into connecting new renewables to the grid, rather than maintaining what we already have. As a result, our electricity grid infrastructure is crumbling. Ageing transformers are already catching fire, most famously the one that routed power to Heathrow Airport, which went up in flames in March causing the airport to close for 16 hours and 1,000 flights to be cancelled. With demand for replacements sky-high in Europe, those problems will not be fixed any time soon. This is not a functioning energy system. It's a slow-motion car crash. But Mad Miliband is determined to step on the accelerator. Labour cannot say they weren't warned. Just after the election, a YouGov poll found more than half of voters expected Labour to deliver real progress on the cost of living within two years. Twelve months in, and with Reform leading in the polls, we will be there every step of the way holding them to account. We must end the decline, not manage it. As an immediate first step that means trying to minimise the damage of AR7. It means cancelling the folly that is Net Stupid Zero. And it means restoring energy policies that prioritise affordability, reliability, and national security. This isn't just an economic battle. It's a democratic reckoning. The public, rightly, cares about the environment. But they never voted to be poorer, or to be saddled with unsustainable costs like green levies and hidden network charges that flow from Westminster's Net Zero agenda. That's why I won't apologise for going to war with the root causes of this crisis: green energy subsidies and their vested interests. The British people deserve leaders who will fight, not flinch, when livelihoods, families and the national interest are on the line. Let the battle begin.
Western Telegraph
23 minutes ago
- Western Telegraph
Social media ads for Channel crossings to be banned under new offence
Ministers are seeking to create a new offence that would also outlaw the promise of illegal working being promoted online and could carry a large fine. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper has also said she plans to introduce a fast-track scheme to tackle the asylum backlog, with the aim to turn around decisions within weeks. The Government is under pressure to speed up asylum processing and bring down small boat crossings, with arrivals passing more than 25,000 for 2025 so far on Wednesday – a record for this point in the year. Selling the false promise of a safe journey to the UK and a life in this country – whether on or offline – simply to make money, is nothing short of immoral Yvette Cooper, Home Secretary Assisting illegal immigration to the UK is already a crime, but officials believe a new offence will give more powers to police and other agencies to disrupt criminal gangs. Around 80% of migrants arriving to the UK by small boat told officials they used social media during their journey, including to contact agents linked to people smuggling gangs, according to analysis by the Home Office. 'Selling the false promise of a safe journey to the UK and a life in this country – whether on or offline – simply to make money, is nothing short of immoral,' the Home Secretary said. 'These criminals have no issue with leading migrants to life-threatening situations using brazen tactics on social media. We are determined to do everything we can to stop them, wherever they operate.' She told The Sunday Times that Labour was planning a 'major overhaul' of the asylum appeal process in the hope it would help to make a significant dent in the numbers. 'We need a major overhaul of the appeal [process] and that's what we are going to do in the autumn… If we speed up the decision-making appeal system and also then keep increasing returns, we hope to be able to make quite a big reduction in the overall numbers in the asylum system, because that is the best way to actually restore order and control,' Ms Cooper said. The aim would be to compress the process so decisions and returns could happen 'within weeks', the newspaper reported, citing a source familiar with the plans. Ms Cooper had previously said she wanted to put a 'fast-track' system for decisions and appeals in place so that people from countries considered safe would not sit in the asylum system for a long time. 'That would mean a fast-track system alongside the main asylum system, I think that would be really important in terms of making sure that the system is fair,' she told the Home Affairs committee in June. 'That will require legislation in order to be able to do that, as well as a new system design.' The plans to tackle the online promotion of Channel crossings would see a new offence created under the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill already going through Parliament. The National Crime Agency (NCA) already works with social media companies to remove posts promoting crossings, with more than 8,000 taken offline in 2024. Labour still has no clear plan to deter illegal entry, no effective enforcement and no strategy to speed up removals Chris Philp, shadow home secretary But the proposed new offence will give them more options of how to target gangs and their business models, NCA director general of operations Rob Jones said. The case of a Preston-based smuggler jailed for 17 years for posting videos of migrants thanking him for his help could have been targeted under the proposed offence. Albanian smugglers who used social media to promote £12,000 'package deals' for accommodation and a job in the UK on arrival would also be in scope. The Conservatives said it was 'too little, too late' and that only their proposal to automatically deport people who enter Britain via unauthorised routes can tackle small boat crossings. Shadow home secretary Chris Philp said: 'Labour still has no clear plan to deter illegal entry, no effective enforcement and no strategy to speed up removals. This is a panicked attempt to look tough after months of doing nothing. 'The only clear and enforceable plan is the Conservative Deportation Bill, a no-nonsense strategy that allows us to detain illegal arrivals immediately and remove them without delay. The British public deserve focused action, not more of Labour's dithering.'
