Northern Ireland Secretary set to meet EU trade commissioner Maros Sefcovic
Mr Benn will travel to Brussels for the meeting with Maros Sefcovic which comes after the announcement of the proposed SPS (Sanitary and Phytosanitary) deal between the UK and EU last month.
The Government has said it will make a 'huge difference to consumers and businesses in Northern Ireland'.
Under the Windsor Framework, Northern Ireland remains aligned with EU single market rules for goods following the UK's departure from the EU.
A freight lorry travelling through the Port of Belfast (Mark Marlow/PA)
The new deal between the UK and EU has been described as aiming to facilitate the smooth flow of agrifood and plants from Great Britain to Northern Ireland, protecting the UK's internal market, reducing costs for businesses and improving consumer choice.
It is also aimed at saving businesses hours of time and money by removing swathes of paperwork and numerous health certificates, checks and processes – with those using the red lane expected to save close to £1 million per month.
Mr Benn said he will emphasise the UK Government's commitment to continue to deliver the Windsor Framework, in the meeting which the minister for EU relations Nick Thomas–Symonds will also attend.
'The agreement the UK Government recently reached with the EU will help us to deliver on our core mission to grow the economy, and shows the benefits of a closer partnership with our friends in Europe,' he said.
'I look forward to meeting with Commissioner Sefcovic today, to emphasise this Government's commitment to continuing to implement the Windsor Framework and to delivering the new SPS agreement as soon as possible.
'This will facilitate the smooth flow of agrifood and plants from Great Britain to Northern Ireland and protect the UK's internal market.'
Mr Benn added: 'Northern Ireland will, of course, continue to enjoy its unique access to the EU's single market, a key competitive advantage.
'All of this means that Northern Ireland is set to become an even more attractive destination for investment in the years ahead.'
Mr Benn is also to meet representatives from the EU diplomatic community and attend a roundtable of business stakeholders including the British Agriculture Bureau and the Confederation of British Industry.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Western Telegraph
32 minutes ago
- Western Telegraph
Trial date set for three men charged over fires at Keir Starmer properties
Ukrainian national Roman Lavrynovych, 21, and Romanian national Stanislav Carpiuc, 26, appeared together at the Old Bailey on Friday. Ukrainian national Petro Pochynok, 34, refused to attend the hearing. Two of the fires took place in Kentish Town, north London – one in the early hours of May 12 at the home where Sir Keir lived before he became Prime Minister and moved into Downing Street. The entrance to Sir Keir Starmer's house in Kentish Town (James Manning/PA) A car was set alight in the same street four days earlier on May 8. The other fire was on May 11 at the front door of a house converted into flats in Islington. Lavrynovych, of Lewisham, south-east London, has been charged with three counts of arson with intent to endanger life on May 8, May 11 and May 12. Carpiuc, from Romford, east London, and Pochynok, of Islington, north London, are each accused of one count of conspiracy to commit arson with intent to endanger life between April 17 and May 13. Lavrynovych and Carpiuc appeared at the hearing via videolink from HMP Belmarsh, and spoke only to confirm their identities and dates of birth via an interpreter. Ms Justice Cheema Grubb told the court that Pochynok had refused to leave his cell for the preliminary hearing. All three defendants were remanded in custody to next appear for a plea and trial preparation hearing at the same court on October 17. A provisional trial date was set for April 27 next year in front of a High Court judge. A fourth person, a 48-year-old man, was arrested by police at Stansted Airport on Monday on suspicion of conspiracy to commit arson with intent to endanger life in connection with the incidents. The Metropolitan Police said he had been released on bail until next month.
Daily Mail
42 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
How much money Elon Musk lost because of feud with Donald Trump
The controversial former-head of DOGE Elon Musk has reportedly lost more than $34billion from his personal net worth after his fall from grace at the White House and very online break up with the US President. Shares in Musk's Tesla also dropped more than 14 per cent at the end of yesterday, losing about $150billion in market value - the largest single-day decline in the company's history. It is the second largest loss of personal net worth, beaten only by Musk's own wipe out again in November 2021, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index of the 500 wealthiest people on the planet. He remains the richest man in the world, with a huge $334.5 billion fortune. Musk, who officially left the White House last week, reached a peak of nearly $500 billion in the months after Trump's election success. The valuation of his companies had surged thanks to the belief they would profit from his close relationship with Trump and his role as head of the Department of Government Efficiency, it was reported. But his government contracts with the US were on the line last night as he continued to take part in a savage war with words against Donald Trump, with their partnership breaking down over a tax-cut and spending bill. 'The easiest way to save money in our Budget, Billions and Billions of Dollars, is to terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts," Trump posted on Truth Social. The withdrawal would have potentially huge consequences for his Tesla and SpaceX revenue. SpaceX has been awarded over $17 billion in government contracts since 2015, according to ABC news. Much of that money comes from NASA and the Department of Defence. One of Trump's oldest advisors, Steve Bannon, went further and suggested the government seize SpaceX under the Defense Production Act - a move that would undoubtedly trigger challenges. Musk, who had threatened to decommission the SpaceX Dragon capsule - a critical lifeline for transporting American astronauts and supplies to the International Space Station - ultimately retreated. After a user on X suggested he 'cool off and take a step back for a couple of days', Musk abruptly posted: 'Good advice. Ok, we won't decommission Dragon.' It was not before he claimed that Trump is 'in the Epstein files', suggested that he should be impeached and replaced with 40-year-old Vice President J.D. Vance. Moments before the Epstein charge, Trump had taken to Truth Social and said he had asked Musk to leave his administration and said the billionaire went 'CRAZY!' With that, Musk announced that it was 'time to drop a really big bomb.' This 2014 image shows Elon Musk (right) alongside Ghislaine Maxwell (left) who facilitated Jeffrey Epstein's sex trafficking ring. She's currently serving time in federal prison '@RealDonaldTrump is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public,' Musk wrote. 'Have a nice day, DJT!' Jeffrey Epstein is a serial child sex offender who died in prison in 2019. Trump pledged to release the files related to Epstein, with Attorney General Pam Bondi releasing some pages in February, but most of that information was already in the public domain. 'Mark this post for the future. The truth will come out,' Musk added. Asked for comment, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told the Daily Mail in a statement: 'This is an unfortunate episode from Elon, who is unhappy with the One Big Beautiful Bill because it does not include the policies he wanted.' The brawl started when the X-owner had originally campaigned to stop the 'disgusting abomination' of the x bill which he believed would contribute too much to the country's $36.2 trillion debt. Trump's big, beautiful bill' called for getting rid off electric vehicle tax credits - the cause of Musk's frustration, according to Trump. Analysts at JPMorgan Chase & Co. estimated that the bill would cut about $1.2 billion from Tesla's full-year profit. Despite staying quiet at first, Trump then told reporters he was 'very disappointed' in Musk and they 'had a great relationship. I don't know if we will anymore'. Musk immediately responded via tweet, saying: 'Without me, Trump would have lost the election'. He had spent nearly $300 million backing Trump's campaign among other other Republicans in last year's election. However, the drastic drop in net worth might not reveal the true impact on Musk who increasingly relies on his private enterprises as a source, it was reported in Bloomberg.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Illegal immigration is turning us into a lockdown society
The mild weather has, we are told, exacerbated the problem of small boats crossing the English Channel. The pledge to 'smash the gangs' is no longer being repeated endlessly by Labour spokespeople (perhaps the recent sunny weather distracted Border Force?) But fear not. The Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, has a plan. She thinks a gigantic governmental IT project is what is now needed to get a grip on the explosion in immigration. Whenever politicians run out of road in trying to solve a problem, it's never long before the introduction of ID cards rears its ugly head. One might say this is an exercise using a sledgehammer to crack a nut, but that would be unfair. The issues at stake tend to be rather bigger than nuts – terrorism, mass uncontrolled immigration, widespread welfare fraud and the like. No, it's more like wildly swinging a sledgehammer in an idiotic attempt to repair a window. The way ID schemes work is to split the population into two cohorts – one which is entitled to something and one which isn't. You want to visit your local GP? You'd better whip out your digital ID card to do so. A police officer doesn't like the cut of your jib and wonders if you should be in the UK at all? You'd be advised to have data on hand to prove your citizenship. Three problems immediately emerge. First, the law-abiding majority are obliged to undertake an ever-increasing number of checks and tests to go about their ordinary lives. Second, it assumes that the people you want to collar are not adept at melting into the black market economy. How many employers are hiring large numbers of illegal immigrants unknowingly and were genuinely just about to get round to making sure they all had the right to work here? None. Third, it relies on the state actually operating a complex IT system successfully. We have surely learnt over recent years that in the vast number of ways the government is able to waste huge tranches of taxpayers' money, botched IT projects are probably top of the list. You can bank on a new digital ID system to break, be littered with errors or both. Ronald Reagan's old dictum – 'there are no easy solutions, but there are simple solutions' – is typically honoured in the breach. The Home Secretary is overreaching for a solution which is difficult and complex but – she is hoping – avoids being especially controversial. Instead, to tackle the immigration disaster, we need to get back to basics. The vast numbers of people coming to our shores are doing so because enforcement is weak, the legal system is soft and the incentives to come here are too great. If you are unwilling or unable to deal with those root causes, there is no database – however magical you may imagine it to be – that will be of much assistance. The reason we have failed to deport many undesirables is not because we are sitting across a desk from them and can't identify who they are or what they are entitled to. Rather it's because our asylum system works at a snail's pace, allows fatuous appeals under human rights legislation, and the package of goodies you receive while you are here is too good to resist. We need to speed up the system so claims take eighteen days (or, ideally, eighteen hours) to process rather than eighteen months. We must ensure that your child's preference for British-made chicken nuggets is not an admissible basis for resisting deportation. We have to find a more robust way of policing the English Channel. None of these are easy to achieve, but they are simple to grasp. Instead, the political elite – this time in the form of Yvette Cooper – prefers to rush down the rabbit hole of believing a flashy computerised system is the answer to our prayers. It probably won't happen. It certainly won't work.
