Border checks on fruit and vegetable imports from EU scrapped
Planned border checks on fruit and vegetables imported into the UK from the European Union will be scrapped.
The Government has said Sir Keir Starmer's Brexit reset deal will stop the proposed controls coming into force on July 1.
The produce sector has suggested that halting the plans will save businesses around £200 million of additional supply chain costs.
Bosses had warned that this could add to inflation, put pressure on food supply chains and threaten the future of businesses.
The new SPS (sanitary and phytosanitary) deal with the EU will eliminate routine border checks for food exports and imports on certain products.
The Government said impending checks on 'medium-risk' fruit and vegetables, such as tomatoes, grapes, plums, cherries, peaches and peppers, will now not be introduced.
The latest relaxation in trade rules will take place until January 31 2027 as a 'contingency measure', according to officials.
Biosecurity minister Baroness Hayman said: 'This Government's EU deal will make food cheaper, slash bureaucracy and remove cumbersome border controls for businesses.
'A strengthened, forward-looking partnership with the European Union will deliver for working people as part of our plan for change.'
It is the fourth time the border check plans have been pushed back, with the proposals previously set to come into force in January.
The checks on fruit and vegetables were the latest phase of the Government's Border Target Operating Model which introduced checks on animal and plant products last year.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
8 minutes ago
- Yahoo
State Legislature Acts To ‘Make Texas Healthy Again'
Under Senate Bill 25, which awaits Gov. Greg Abbott's signature, Texas could become one of the first states to mandate warning labels on foods containing artificial dyes and specific chemicals. The bill, dubbed the Make Texas Healthy Again Act, requires labels on products containing one or more of some 40-plus additives, such as Blue 1, Red 40, Yellow 5, butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA), and titanium dioxide. The label would state: 'WARNING: This product contains an ingredient that is not recommended for human consumption by the appropriate authority in Australia, Canada, the European Union, or the United Kingdom.' The warning label must be prominent, readable, and would apply to products packaged after January 1, 2027. A loophole allows producers using existing packaging through 2036 to avoid the requirement. The bill also invalidates state labeling rules if federal regulations supersede them. 'Texas can really lead here. … These bills represent a Texas way that prioritizes transparency, prioritizes good education and prioritizes incentive change,' Calley Means, a top adviser to U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., said during a Senate Health and Human Services Committee hearing. Beyond labeling, SB 25 increases physical activity requirements for middle school students from four to six semesters of 30-minute daily sessions and mandates nutrition education for undergraduates, developed by a seven-member Texas Nutrition Advisory Committee appointed by the governor by December 31, 2025. The committee would include experts in metabolic health, a licensed physician, a Texas Department of Agriculture representative, and others. In addition, doctors and nurses must complete continuing education on nutrition to maintain their licenses. 'This sweeping legislation is not just another bill. It's a call to action — one that so many Texans and Americans are realizing — that something is wrong and that something needs to change in our food industry and in our sedentary lifestyle,' Sen. Lois Kolkhorst (R-Brenham), the bill's sponsor, told The Texas Tribune. The bill garnered bipartisan support, with 10 Senate Democrats and three House Democrats sponsoring or co-sponsoring. 'This is about the MAHA parents and the crunchy granola parents coming together to say, 'We are sick and tired of being sick and tired,'' said Rep. Lacey Hull (R-Houston) before the House passed the bill on May 25. Food industry groups, including Walmart, Coca-Cola, Pepsi, General Mills, and Frito-Lay, opposed the labeling, warning in a letter that it 'could destabilize local and regional economies.' Rep. Barbara Gervin-Hawkins (D-San Antonio) expressed concern that 'the cost of food will continue to rise,' the Tribune reported. Kolkhorst countered in February that 'the market will adjust.' Supporters, like the Episcopal Health Foundation, see health benefits. 'The amount of money and time we're spending treating diabetes as opposed to preventing it is huge, especially in Texas,' said Brian Sasser, the foundation's chief communications officer, per the Tribune. Andy Keller of the Meadows Mental Health Policy Institute added, 'In a world that pretends the brain is not part of the body, this bill will put tools in the hands of children, parents and teachers to begin truly addressing emotional health and wellbeing.' The bill aligns with federal Make America Healthy Again initiatives, with Kolkhorst noting Kennedy's personal call urging its passage. 'As in so many cases, we're not waiting on Washington,' said Sen. Bryan Hughes (R-Mineola) in February. 'Texas will act.'
Yahoo
8 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Labour MPs call for action on benefits after winter fuel U-turn
Labour MPs have broadly welcomed the government's decision to reinstate winter fuel payments for three-quarters of pensioners but some are using the U-turn to renew their calls for planned benefit cuts to be reversed. Nine million pensioners in England and Wales with an annual income of £35,000 or less will now be eligible for up to £300 to help with energy bills this winter. Labour MPs thanked the government for listening to their concerns, arguing means testing the payment was fair but that the threshold was set too low last year. However, several urged ministers to also think again on planned cuts to disability payments, while others called for the two-child benefit cap to be scrapped. Under planned changes to the benefits system it would be harder for people with less severe conditions to claim personal independence payments (Pips), while the government is promising more support to help people get into work. While the two-child benefit cap policy prevents most families from claiming means-tested benefits for any third or additional children born after April 2017, which critics say has pushed people into poverty. Ministers are considering lifting the cap, with a decision expected in the autumn, when a child poverty strategy is published. Pressure from Labour backbenchers over the issues - as well as on winter fuel payments - has been growing since the party's poor performance at local election's in May. The winter fuel payment was previously paid to all pensioners but last year the government announced only those receiving pension credit or another means-tested benefit would be eligible in England and Wales. The original cut last year was estimated to save £1.7bn, with the government arguing it was necessary because of the state of the public finances. But the move, which meant more than 10 million pensioners did not receive the payment in 2024, was criticised by charities, unions, opposition parties and many Labour MPs. Following mounting pressure, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer announced a U-turn last month, with the details of who will get the payment this winter set out on Monday. The chancellor said she would detail how the £1.25bn policy would be paid for in the autumn Budget. How much is the winter fuel payment and who will get it? Labour hope to put winter fuel misstep behind them At-a-glance: Key changes to benefits in welfare shake-up Imran Hussain was among the Labour MPs to call for the planned benefit cuts to be scrapped in response to a government statement in the Commons on changes to winter fuel payments. "It is clear the government has listened, so I ask them to listen again to the growing calls in this chamber and scrap their planned, devastating cuts to disability support," the MP for Bradford East said. Fellow Labour MPs Nadia Whittome and Richard Burgon also welcomed the winter fuel U-turn but urged the government to listen to backbench concerns over benefit cuts. In response, Torsten Bell, who is both a Treasury minister and pensions minister, told MPs there needed to be "a better system focusing on supporting those who can work into work". He added that the status quo - where 1,000 people a day are going onto Pips - was not "a position that anybody should support". Labour MP Rachael Maskell, who has been a leading campaigner for restoring winter fuel payments, welcomed the government's change in policy, saying it was "long overdue". She told BBC Radio 4's World at One programme the £35,000 salary threshold for the payment was a "sensible measure". However, Maskell called on the government to consider a larger payment following increases in energy prices over the past year. The MP for York Central also urged a rethink on planned benefit cuts, adding: "You can't rob disabled people in order to pay older people, that doesn't make sense." Meanwhile, she was among several MPs to reiterate their calls for the government to scrap the two-child benefit cap. In the Commons Rebecca Long Bailey, Labour MP for Salford, also asked for reassurances minsters "are doing all they can to outline plans to lift the two-child cap on universal credit as soon as possible" to bring children out of poverty. In response Bell said "all levers to reduce child poverty are on the table". The minister added: "She's absolutely right to raise this issue, it is one of the core purposes of this government. "We cannot carry on with a situation where large families, huge percentages of them, are in poverty." The Conservatives have called for the government to apologise to pensioners who lost out on winter fuel payments last year. Shadow work and pensions secretary Helen Whately described the U-turn as "the most humiliating climbdown a government has ever faced in its first year in office". She told the Commons "this rushed reversal raises as many questions as it answers", arguing the move was "totally unfunded" and could lead to tax rises. Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey said: "Finally the chancellor has listened to the Liberal Democrats and the tireless campaigners in realising how disastrous this policy was, but the misery it has caused cannot be overstated. "Countless pensioners were forced to choose between heating and eating all whilst the government buried its head in the sand for months on end, ignoring those who were really suffering." Sign up for our Politics Essential newsletter to read top political analysis, gain insight from across the UK and stay up to speed with the big moments. It'll be delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Yahoo
8 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Over 12,000 Harvard alums lend weight to court battle with Trump in new filing
More than 12,000 Harvard University alumni have signed onto a legal document in support of the university's lawsuit against the Trump administration. The document, known as an amicus brief, hasn't been officially accepted by the court as of 2 p.m. Monday. It is a reaction to the federal government pulling or freezing nearly $3 billion in funding to the university. 'As alumni, we are deeply alarmed by the Government's reckless and unlawful attempts to assert control over the core functions of Harvard and its fellow institutions of higher education. Without due process or any recognizable basis in law — and with complete disregard for the freedoms the Constitution secures and the constraints it imposes — the Government has embarked on a campaign to deploy every power at its disposal to damage Harvard,' the brief reads. The 12,000 alumni range from being a part of the Class of 1950 all the way through the Class of 2025. Crimson Courage, a community of Harvard alumni whose mission is to stand up for academic freedom, kicked off the campaign for signatures. Several other individuals and groups have or aim to submit court documents in support of Harvard's lawsuit. Among them have been two dozen universities, Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell, the American Civil Liberties Union, the American Council on Education, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression — also known as FIRE — and Columbia Alumni for Academic Freedom, according to court filings. Read more: 'We are not just fighting for Harvard': For alums, this year feels different 'The Government's escalating attacks — and this case — are about much more than funding. The Government strikes at the very core of Harvard: the longstanding practices and values of openness, free inquiry, and mutual respect, and its founding commitment to veritas — the quest for truth above all,' the brief said. 'The Government's end goal is to narrow our freedoms to learn, teach, think and act, and to claim for itself the right to dictate who may enjoy those freedoms. As alumni, we attest that Harvard's true greatness resides in the ways we share these values and exercise these freedoms, which have long shaped how we understand and connect with one another, and how we anchor our continuing efforts to make a difference in service to the world,' it states. All Ivy League schools are supporting Harvard lawsuit — except these 2 Embassies directed to resume processing Harvard University student visas 'We are not just fighting for Harvard': For alums, this year feels different What a monk, a librarian and a dentist have to do with Harvard's fight with Trump Judge blocks Trump admin from banning Harvard international students from entering US Read the original article on MassLive.
