Ian Murray accused of 'hypocrisy' after UK Government keeps 'damaging' post-Brexit law
Ian Murray has been accused of "hypocrisy" after the UK Government said it was keeping a post-Brexit law which he had previously said should be removed.
Labour's Scottish Secretary said in 2020 that the Internal Market Act was "bad and damaging" and undermined devolution. He also voted against it while in opposition.
The law was introduced to create a single market across the UK after Brexit. But it has since allowed UK ministers to override the Scottish Parliament.
This happened with the Deposit Return Scheme, where the Tory Government refused to exclude it from the act.
SNP MP Stephen Gethins has written to Murray asking him to "repeal and replace" the law.
The Arbroath and Broughty Ferry MP said: "The Internal Market Act has stripped powers from the Scottish Parliament and has undone the work of its principal architect, Donald Dewar.
"I am old enough to remember when Ian Murray stood against Brexit and voted down the Act which he described as damaging and that undermined the devolution settlement.
"It is complete hypocrisy that now he has his feet under the cabinet table he now backs this legislation and endorses Brexit - picking apart the powers of Scotland's parliament.
"This is yet another promise broken by the Labour Party and it is another blow to the devolution settlement - any politician from Scotland worth their salt must fight tooth and nail to see the Internal Market Act repealed."
Holyrood twice voted against the Internal Market Act. Labour MSPs backed the most recent motion to scrap it in 2023.
The UK Government published its review of the act on Tuesday.
UK trade minister Douglas Alexander promised "improvements" to the law but made clear ministers have not considered scrapping it.
He said "the review has not considered repeal of the Act or any of its provisions" because the UK Government has 'been explicit about the need for businesses to have certainty'.
The UK Government is promising changes to the law, including the introduction of exclusions to the legislation.
As well as considering economic impacts, issues of environmental protection and public health will also be looked at for exclusions – with the UK Government saying this ensures a 'balance of factors is considered'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
23 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Get early retirees off the golf course and back to work – why early retirement isn't good for UK plc
Early retirement is a wealthy indulgence that needs to be discouraged. As a minimum, ministers should strip away any inducement offered by the tax system for people who want to retire in their 50s. Every western country needs their more mature workers to keep going, if not full time, then part time. And if not paid work, then unpaid voluntary work that acknowledges the luck that flows from being a 21st-century baby boomer in good health. Communities, regions and countries cannot afford for older people to pack up and head for the golf course, or worse, book a permanent cruise and spend their cash in international waters. Last week, the government convened a pensions commission to consider a narrow question: how to boost the incomes of lower-paid workers in retirement. It is understandable that the government is worried about the increasing numbers of low-income workers who will soon spend a long retirement struggling to make ends meet. This is a genuine concern and a subject worthy of a commission. Yet there is a need to address a far wider question, which is how society will thrive when the age pyramid is inverted, with only a smattering of young people holding up a mountain of retirees. Retirement has its origins in the Industrial Revolution and the need to prevent older people from ending their years in abject poverty, not to fulfil a bucket list of expensive desires. The commission should ask why anyone in the 21st century should think they can put their feet up seven days a week when they are fit and well, and able to participate in economic life. Yet a prosperous retirement is the aim of so many – and not only when they are approaching their 60s. If you look at the strike record of full-time university lecturers you would think they obsess about their pensions every day. Council staff spend precious hours scrolling through WhatsApp groups discussing the most mundane changes to their retirement plans with a degree of attentiveness that, to give them credit, is in line with the generosity of their benefits. Company boardrooms are no different. Executives will set aside huge amounts of time to manage their complex and stunningly generous pensions. Having a financial consultant ready and available on the phone to talk about their retirement plans has become a must-have demand in the corporate world. Maybe its the lure of sailing on the Adriatic or cruising the Caribbean that captivates so many, or less positively, the frustration and anxiety from working near, with or for incompetent or venal managers in a succession of modestly paid jobs. Still, whatever the reason, too many people want to cash out of the economy, trading their pension and property gains for a long period of rest, with only the stress of remembering what day it is to bump their heart rate. Sign up to Business Today Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning after newsletter promotion Some economists have argued that this moment – when boomers are no longer participating in the workplace – will trigger a profound shift in the economy. Those workers still in the labour market will bid up their wages, pushing up prices and making high inflation a permanent feature. Governments will find it harder to borrow money, in part because pension funds, after decades of growth, will have a declining need to buy their bonds. There are also extra bills to pay. In its latest report on the UK, the International Monetary Fund says the effects of population ageing on health and pension costs will account for a further 8% of GDP by 2050 compared with an extra 5.5% of GDP, on average, in other advanced European economies. These are important issues connected with the nation's finances. So, too, are the ways better-off baby boomers insulate themselves. First, they take most of the pension money and invest it abroad where the gains are much higher, either because their workforces are young, dynamic and more productive or because the companies are American and enjoy monopolistic strangleholds in their respective markets. Investing abroad gives the boomer a ring-fenced income no matter how clapped out the economy they call home. The second track is to import young workers from abroad, boosting the labour supply as boomers make their exit. Financial insulation is understandable when government finances are under strain. Yet one of the reasons the wheels are coming off the modern liberal state is because baby boomers, who by sheer force of numbers and their better education spurred the postwar recovery, are causing the downturn by bailing out. Worse, they are cashing out, too. Without a debate about what it means to be old and the responsibilities that come with receiving a pension, the government's commission will be left to merely tinker. We are only a few years away from the baby boomer generation all reaching retirement age. Everyone born in the years up to 1964 will be eligible to collect the state pension in 2031. It's a turning point that everyone should be preparing for, especially when all the Pimm's-drinking early retirees are added to the list. The commission's remit should be wider.
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Free childcare crisis as surge in demand leaves Labour with funding black hole
Ministers have been warned the childcare sector is at risk of 'collapse' after a boom in demand for free care left a major government scheme in financial peril. A plan to expand free childcare for British families is set to cost the government an extra £1bn per year at a time when ministers are grappling to fill the gaping black hole in public finances. Labour has not spelled out how the funding gap will be filled, but experts predict the shortfall will create 'substantial pressure' on the government and could put the entire childcare sector under threat. In an exclusive interview with The Independent, Bridget Phillipson insisted the unexpectedly high take-up – a quarter higher than predicted – was a 'good problem to have' and would not leave children without places. But the education secretary could not guarantee that parents would get a space at their local nursery in September, when the scheme expands to offer eligible children aged nine months and older 30 hours a week of free childcare. Industry leaders said parents would be left 'disappointed' while nurseries warned a a lack of staff meant they were already struggling to deliver the government's pledge. CEO of the Early Years Alliance Neil Leitch told The Independent: 'One thing is absolutely clear: if 80 per cent of all hours delivered are government hours, and those hours are inadequately funded, the infrastructure will collapse over a period of time. 'I can't say it will be one year or five years, but you can bet your bottom dollar if you don't give somebody enough money to deliver a service, at some point they stop.' Figures published in March show the number of people newly entitled to free childcare was 26 per cent higher than originally estimated – 379,000 compared to 302,000. This meant that the Department for Education spent £2bn on the policy last year, up from a planned £1.6bn. But this is only set to grow as further hours of free childcare are rolled out. According to the highly-respected Institute for Fiscal Studies, the cost of extending free childcare to under-3s could end up costing £1bn more a year than previously expected, from 2026/7 onwards – up from around £4bn to approximately £5bn. A boost to funding announced in Rachel Reeves' Spending Review, of £640 million, would 'go some way to filling this gap… (but) could still leave substantial pressure from higher-than-expected take-up', the IFS said. Associate director Christine Farquharson said the DfE will still likely face 'difficult choices' within its budget and may have to 'trim back' spending in other areas to meet its childcare commitments. 'They have a fixed pot of money. When one thing becomes more expensive, that puts more pressure on other areas of the [education] budget,' she told The Independent. Ms Farquharson said predictions for how many parents would take up the free hours were 'complex' but added: 'It does seem like [the Tories] underestimated take-up pretty systematically.' It is just one of many financial decisions facing the chancellor ahead of the autumn Budget after planned welfare cuts, aimed at saving £5bn annually, were reversed. Ms Reeves is being pushed to bend her rules on borrowing or to rise taxes to keep public finances on track. The free childcare policy was launched in December 2023 with great fanfare under former Tory chancellor Jeremy Hunt. The first stage was put in place from September 2024, when the government extended 15 hours a week of free term-time childcare to working parents with a child aged nine months and over. From September, that will be extended to 30 hours a week . Labour say they were left a 'pledge without a plan' when they entered government. Ministers have been working to massively expand the number of nursery spaces and staff but the task has been made more difficult by the fact that, unlike schools, many nurseries are private providers. But industry leaders warned that, with 8 in 10 of all nursery hours soon set to be paid for by the government, the infrastructure was at risk of 'collapse' without more money. The sector has already been forced to absorb huge additional costs in recent years, including April's national insurance rise, it warned. Childcare in the UK is one of the most expensive in the world, according to the OECD. Mr Leitch added: 'What we have to bear in mind is that we've already got a recruitment and retention crisis. The reality is, many settings don't have the people to be able to accommodate those additional hours. So I'm afraid there will be parents that will be disappointed.' Sarah Ronan, the director of the Early Education and Childcare Coalition, said the IFS was right to sound the alarm, adding that if the government did not match demand with funding it is leaving providers with 'no choice' but to limit the number of places they offer – or raise fees. 'The harsh reality is that if providers don't do that, they'll face closure and then we'll have an even worse crisis on our hands,' she said. Purnima Tanuk, the executive chair of the National Day Nurseries Association (NDNA), said the government's ambitions 'will be put at risk if there is not sufficient investment in early years.' She added that 'almost 70 per cent of nurseries told us that staff shortages mean they cannot offer the children's places they have room to deliver'. Munira Wilson, the Lib Dem education spokesperson, said providers had been left 'hanging by a thread and parents (are) facing the prospect of childcare deserts'. 'The government need to ensure that the funding for childcare hours matches the actual costs of delivery,' she said. Official statistics released last week showed a 7.2 per cent increase in early years staff, the largest annual rise since the series began. The Department for Education would not be drawn on where any extra money might come from. But Ms Phillipson insisted she was unafraid of the policy's popularity. She urged families to check what they are are entitled to, adding: 'I want as many parents as possible to take up the offer. It allows parents to juggle work and family life, but it also sets up children to succeed And the demand that parents are showing is a good problem to have, because it also brings economic dividends as well. 'If people are able to work, or work a few more hours… that helps us all as a society as well and it gets economic growth going'. Ms Phillipson has previously warned that, as the policy expands again in September, parents in the first wave might not get their first choice of nursery. Asked if she could say that all parents who want a space would get one, she told The Independent: 'What I can't guarantee is that it will be as close to home as they would like or it will be their first choice, but we're confident that the roll out will go well in September.' Ms Farquharson did add that the higher uptake of free childcare could ultimately be a good sign for the economy, even if it is more expensive in the short term. 'This higher uptake might mean that we're getting a lot more parents moving into paid work because of these entitlements than first predicted,' she said. 'If the goal for this policy is to drive growth, then this would be a fantastic success story.' However, the extent to which that is the case will only become apparent over the next few years, she said. A DfE spokesperson said: "High-quality, affordable childcare plays a vital role in our Plan for Change, which is why early years funding will rise to over £9 billion next year helping us meet our target of getting tens of thousands more children each year ready for school. 'We're backing families with this record investment including a £75 million grant this year to support providers in delivering more places and a 45 per cent uplift in early year pupil premium, building on the real difference this is making for families as highlighted by the Coram survey who say costs for some has halved.'
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Doge reportedly using AI tool to create ‘delete list' of federal regulations
The 'department of government efficiency' (Doge) is using artificial intelligence to create a 'delete list' of federal regulations, according to a report, proposing to use the tool to cut 50% of regulations by the first anniversary of Donald Trump's second inauguration. The 'Doge AI Deregulation Decision Tool' will analyze 200,000 government regulations, according to internal documents obtained by the Washington Post, and select those which it deems to be no longer required by law. Doge, which was run by Elon Musk until May, claims that 100,000 of those regulations can then be eliminated, following some staff feedback. A PowerPoint presentation made public by the Post claims that the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) used the AI tool to make 'decisions on 1,083 regulatory sections', while the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau used it to write '100% of deregulations'. The Post spoke to three HUD employees who told the newspaper AI had been 'recently used to review hundreds, if not more than 1,000, lines of regulations'. During his 2024 campaign, Donald Trump claimed that government regulations were 'driving up the cost of goods' and promised the 'most aggressive regulatory reduction' in history. He repeatedly criticized rules which aimed to tackle the climate crisis, and as president he ordered the heads of all government agencies to undertake a review of all regulations in coordination with Doge. Asked about the use of AI in deregulation by the Post, White House spokesperson Harrison Fields said 'all options are being explored' to achieve the president's deregulation promises. Fields said that 'no single plan has been approved or green-lit', and the work is 'in its early stages and is being conducted in a creative way in consultation with the White House'. Fields added: 'The Doge experts creating these plans are the best and brightest in the business and are embarking on a never-before-attempted transformation of government systems and operations to enhance efficiency and effectiveness.' Musk appointed a slew of inexperienced staffers to Doge, including Edward Coristine, a 19-year-old who was previously known by the online handle 'Big Balls'. Earlier this year, Reuters reported that Coristine was one of two Doge associates promoting the use of AI across the federal bureaucracy.
