Latest news with #governmentreforms
Times
23-07-2025
- Business
- Times
Government's plan for betting tax will kill racing, warn sport's chiefs
Racing's leaders have united to oppose government reforms on betting tax, claiming they pose an 'existential threat' to the sport. At a time when racing is split over how the sport will be governed in the future, the differing factions have come together to fight a proposal by the government to harmonise the tax paid by betting firms. Online betting on horse or dog races — or other sports for that matter — carries a 15 per cent rate of duty, compared with 21 per cent for online casinos. The Treasury is proposing that should be harmonised — with the expectation that the rate would be at least 21 per cent across the board. The British Horseracing Authority is planning to launch a campaign opposing this next week, on the eve of Glorious Goodwood, while other parts of the sport are also up in arms, claiming it will affect the already precarious health of racing. Jim Mullen, the chief executive of The Jockey Club, said an increase in the betting duty for gambling on racing would cost the sport tens of millions of pounds and hundreds of jobs. The consultation period for the proposal ended this week and the Treasury has been left in no doubt about the feelings of most involved in the sport. Mullen told The Times: 'This is one of the rare occasions where all the different parts of racing have come together — it impacts all of us and we are all saying the same thing. 'This could cost the industry £66million a year. It will be harder for bookmakers to invest in the sport via prize money and sponsorship, and it will affect the levy on gambling on racing that goes back into the sport. They are already running on low margins and once they cut their costs it will mean a minimum of 1,000 jobs leaving the industry. 'The Treasury needs to understand this is an existential threat to the second-most attended sport in the UK. We are saying to them, 'Please look at this and understand the details.' We don't believe we deserve this.' One person who has not been able to take a leading role in the campaign is Charles Allen, the businessman and peer who was due to take up the position as chairman of the BHA on June 1 but has delayed doing so while some factions in racing oppose his plans to make the organisation's board fully independent. Lord Allen, the chairman of Balfour Beatty who was previously on the board of the London 2012 Olympics, has proposed radical changes to make its governance fully independent of racecourses and participants, including the Racecourse Association, the Racehorse Owners Association, the Thoroughbred Breeders' Association and 'licensed personnel' — jockeys and trainers. Allen is understood to be still deciding whether to take up the role, but the Jockey Club has come out in full support of his proposals. Mullen added: 'Without a strong regulator it's not possible for any sport to thrive and that's why we are fully supportive of Lord Allen's proposals for a fully independent BHA board. 'There are still details on certain issues which will need to be thrashed out in time and to expect everyone to agree on everything would be unrealistic at best, a potential barrier to meaningful change at worst. 'We recognise that ownership of media rights and fixtures are extremely important to the profitably of racecourses and that's where we are aligned with small and large independent courses and RCA [Racecourse Association] members. 'However, we don't believe that those views are incompatible with our strongly held opinion that British racing requires a fully independent regulator which is empowered to drive change, not only to benefit the sport now but for generations to come. 'Ultimately, whether Lord Allen takes up his role or not, a process has started which we think has the very real potential to create a stronger regulatory body.'
Daily Mail
21-07-2025
- Business
- Daily Mail
Sacked and short-term ministers to be blocked from getting thousands in severance pay - but they can still take up well-paid jobs after leaving office
Ministers sacked or forced to quit the government in disgrace will be barred from claiming thousands in severance pay when they leave office under reforms unveiled today. Politicians will also have to spend at least six months in post to be eligible for a 'golden goodbye' after cash handouts were given to ministers who served for a matter of weeks under Liz Truss. The move is part of an overhaul aimed at restoring trust in standards in public life, which will see the launch of a new Ethics and Integrity Commission. The commission, created from the Committee on Standards in Public Life, will have a wider, stronger remit to oversee integrity across every part of the public sector. Ministers will also scrap the Advisory Committee for Business Appointments (Acoba), which has long been criticised as toothless. However questions remain over how well the 'revolving door' between government and the private sector will be closed by the changes. Under reforms to the business appointments rules, ex-ministers found to have breached them by taking on inappropriate jobs will now be asked to repay any severance pay they receive. The payment ranges between £5,594 for a junior minister to £16,876 for a Cabinet minister, which may pale into insignificance compared with the often six-figure salary they may be offered. Pat McFadden, the senior Cabinet Office minister overseeing the reforms, said: 'This overhaul will mean there are stronger rules, fewer quangos and clearer lines of accountability. 'The Committee on Standards in Public Life has played an important role in the past three decades. These changes give it a new mandate for the future.' The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster added: 'But whatever the institutional landscape, the public will in the end judge politicians and Government by how they do their jobs and how they fulfil the principles of public service.' Ministers are currently entitled to a severance payment equivalent to three months' salary when they leave office for any reason, and no matter how long they have been in the job. Under the changes being announced by the Government, ministers who leave office after a serious breach of the ministerial code or who have served less than six months will not get the payment. It will be up to the PM and his senior ethics advisor to decide if a breach of the code warrants a resignation. If they return to office within three months of leaving, they will also not receive their salary until the end of that three-month period. The reforms are aimed at preventing situations like that under the Truss governments, which saw some Conservative ministers who served for little more than a month receive payouts of thousands of pounds. Labour has said some £253,720 was paid out to 35 outgoing Tory ministers who were in post for less than six months during 2022, some of whom were in their jobs for 37 days. The new Ethics and Integrity Commission would be required to report annually to the prime minister on the health of the standards system. It would be chaired by Doug Chalmers, a retired lieutenant general who chairs the current Standards Committee. The committee was set up in 1994 by then-prime minister Sir John Major, after his government was mired in accusations of 'sleaze' following a series of parliamentary scandals. Sir John warned in a recent speech that a small group of politicians were increasingly breaking the rules, and suggested Acoba needed to be reformed. Ministers have instead decided to scrap it and split its functions between the Civil Service Commission and the Prime Minister's Independent Adviser on Ministerial Standards. Under reforms to the business appointments rules, ex-ministers found to have breached them by taking on inappropriate jobs will now be asked to repay any severance pay they receive.
RNZ News
16-07-2025
- Business
- RNZ News
Retail crime advisory group costs $500k in three months
Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith says he is confident the group has done what it was set up to do. Photo: RNZ / Mark Papalii The justice minister is defending the amount of money spent on the government's retail crime advisory group in 100 days, saying the group has come up with ideas the government will implement to better deal with retail crime. The Labour Party says the half-million dollar sum is hard to stomach, and that ideas the group came up had previously been dismissed as being too dangerous. But the group's chair says its budget is strictly managed and controlled, and he had robust checks and accountability measures in place. The government has announced a suite of law-and-order reforms designed to crack down on retail crime, including on-the-spot fines for shoplifters, citizen's arrest powers, and toughened trespass laws. The reforms were suggested by the ministerial advisory group, chaired by Sunny Kaushal. Answering a parliamentary question from Labour's police spokesperson Ginny Andersen, Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith said "The Ministerial Advisory Group for Victims of Retail Crime has spent $507,468.71 from 1 March 2025 to 10 June 2025." Those costs include personnel costs ($329,900.93), chair and member fees ($102,788.26), travel and accommodation ($9,605.71), and admin ($65,173.81). Member remuneration is in accordance with the Cabinet fees framework, with the Ministry of Justice reimbursing invoiced fees. On Tuesday, Goldsmith told media the MAG's budget was $1.8m a year, so it was under budget. "The point of the advisory group is to come up with well-thought-through, oven-ready legislation for us to get on with, and that's what they've done," he said. However, some of the policies still needed time to work through before the bill is introduced, or during the select committee process. When announcing the trespass law changes, Goldsmith said the government would explore how best to support retailers when distributing notices to those who refuse to engage. He also said the precise details on the use of facial recognition or CCTV to identify shoplifters would be "argued out" over the select committee process. Andersen said it was unclear why that amount of money had been spent by the group. She said when she was police minister, Kaushal had come to her suggesting a citizen's arrest policy, but it was dismissed as police had advised it was dangerous. "It does seem an exorbitant amount for ideas that were given to our government for free, and ideas that have been advised as dangerous," she said. Goldsmith, however, said he was confident the group had done what it was set up to do, and criticised Labour for not implementing such ideas. "A lot of them weren't taken up because their government was frankly soft on crime and they weren't actually listening and making the changes that needed to be made." Kaushal said the group operated under a clearly defined and stringently managed operating budget, controlled and overseen by the Ministry of Justice's finance team. "In line with public expectations around the responsible use of funds, I have robust checks and accountability measures in place across all areas of expenditure," he said. Kaushal said the group's "strict cost control and efficient operations" had already delivered a significant savings underspending from its allocated annual operating budget. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Arab News
18-06-2025
- Business
- Arab News
Saudi Arabia ranks 17th globally in competitiveness index as it outshines economic heavyweights
JEDDAH: Saudi Arabia has maintained its spot in the top 20 of the World Competitiveness Ranking, ahead of global heavyweights the UK, Germany and France. The Kingdom secured 17th position on the list, driven by strong governance, infrastructure upgrades, diversification, and regulatory reforms. Issued by the International Institute for Management Development's World Competitiveness Center, the ranking is widely recognized as a benchmark for evaluating how effectively countries utilize their resources to drive long-term economic growth. Saudi Arabia was placed just behind China in 16th and ahead of Australia in 18th place. Although this marks a slight drop from 16th in 2024, Saudi Arabia's 2025 ranking represents a significant improvement from 32nd in 2023 and 24th in 2022, underscoring its rising economic stature. As part of Vision 2030, Saudi Arabia launched the National Competitiveness Center in 2019, with the organization now working with 65 government bodies to drive reforms centered on productivity, sustainability, inclusiveness, and resilience. According to the World Competitiveness Center, the Kingdom needs to 'continue efforts to promote renewable energy and reduce carbon emissions' and 'carry on enhancing overall competitiveness across multiple pillars.' Improvement will also come if Saudi Arabia continues to 'invest even more in human capital development across all economic sectors' and push ahead with 'ongoing government endeavors to achieve the targets in the Saudi 2030 vision.' The IMD report is one of the world's most comprehensive competitiveness benchmarks, evaluating 69 countries across four pillars: economic performance, government efficiency, business efficiency, and infrastructure. The ranking shows that GCC countries continue to demonstrate their growing economic strength and regional importance, with the UAE leading the group, securing fifth place globally, reflecting its diversified economy and strategic initiatives to attract investment. Qatar follows in ninth place, supported by substantial infrastructure development and robust financial resources. Bahrain was ranked 22, Oman came in at 28, and Kuwait was placed at 36, showing steady progress through structural reforms and sectoral investment despite ongoing challenges. These rankings underscore the GCC's ambition to strengthen global economic resilience and competitiveness. Switzerland, Singapore, and Hong Kong lead the ranking, while Canada, Germany, and Luxembourg saw the most notable improvements among the top 20 economies. Saudi focus According to the IMD, Saudi Arabia has made progress in several key economic areas, although some aspects still require improvement. On the economic performance indicator, the Kingdom ranks 17th globally with a score of 62.3. Its domestic economy scored 59.2, placing it 25th worldwide, an improvement of six positions from the previous year. International trade advanced three places to 29th with a score of 56.0, while global investment climbed four spots to 16th with a score of 57.8, signaling increased investor confidence. However, the employment sector declined slightly, dropping three positions to 29th with a score of 55.6. Inflationary pressures impacted the prices indicator, which fell eight places to 19th despite maintaining a relatively strong score of 60.7. These mixed results reflect Saudi Arabia's ongoing efforts to strike a balance between growth and economic stability amid global and domestic challenges. Public finance indicators remain solid, with a score of 69.5, placing the Kingdom 13th globally, despite a modest three-position drop. Tax policy holds steady at 67.6 points and 12th place, with a similar three-rank decline. The institutional framework experienced a more pronounced decline, dropping seven places to 27th with a score of 58.6, indicating potential areas for reform. In contrast, business legislation improved, rising two places to 13th with a score of 67.6, indicating regulatory progress. The societal framework remains a key challenge, ranking 55th with a score of 44.2, representing a nine-position decline, which highlights the need for continued social and structural development to support economic goals. Saudi Arabia ranked 12th globally in business efficiency with a strong score of 81.4. Productivity and efficiency showed further strength, scoring 66 and placing the Kingdom 15th, up six spots. The labor market remains a key strength, ranking 9th despite a four-place drop, with a score of 64.2. The finance sector gained three ranks to 19th with 63.4 points, while management practices rose to 17th with a score of 64. Attitudes and values remain a significant national asset, ranking third globally with a score of 81.6, reflecting a strong culture of resilience and ambition. Infrastructure continues to show marked improvement. Basic infrastructure ranks seventh globally with a score of 67.6, up two positions. Technological infrastructure rose 10 places to 23rd with a score of 59.5, and scientific infrastructure improved nine spots to 29th with a score of 52.1. Health and environment indicators gained slightly, moving up one place to 47th with a score of 47.5. Education declined marginally, down one position to 39th with a score of 55.4, signaling an area for continued focus.
NHK
11-06-2025
- Politics
- NHK
Argentina's radical reforms cut both ways
Argentina's "shock therapy" government reforms are attracting global attention, but the cost to public services and ordinary citizens is beginning to be felt.
