Cumbria Chamber urges Government to back business growth in spending review
Fresh calls have been made for the Government to prioritise business growth ahead.
Cumbria Chamber of Commerce has joined the British Chambers of Commerce (BCC) and chambers across the UK to urge the Government to put business growth at the centre of its spending plans.
The call comes ahead of Wednesday's Comprehensive Spending Review, which will set out the Government's budget priorities.
Suzanne Caldwell, managing director of Cumbria Chamber of Commerce, said: "Wednesday's Comprehensive Spending Review will impact the future shape of our economy for years.
"So the Government can't afford to get this wrong.
"At the end of the day it's businesses that create wealth and growth in our economy.
"So fundamentally the Government needs to put more time, money and effort into supporting business.
"That's a downpayment on our future prosperity."
The chambers have outlined a series of recommendations under three themes: Get Britain Thriving, Get Britain Working, and Get Britain Trading.
These calls focus on improved investment in infrastructure, people, and international trade.
Recommendations include funding for transport and energy projects, better grid connectivity, long-term support for Project Gigabit, and practical help for SMEs to adopt artificial intelligence (AI).
When it comes to getting Britain working, the chambers want more Apprenticeship Levy funding redirected to the Department for Education to boost training, and a broader Youth Guarantee for 18- to 24-year-olds.
The chambers want more employers to be involved in skills planning by extending investment in Local Skills Improvement Plans and addressing gaps in training provision.
On trade, the chambers are calling for investment in 'digital trade', better export support for SMEs, and a stronger pipeline of overseas investment.
The recommendations were developed through consultation between the 51 chambers across the UK, the BCC, and the BCC's Business Council.
They are also backed by research from the BCC's Insights Unit, which gathered feedback from more than 5,000 businesses on the biggest barriers to growth.
Ms Caldwell said: "If the Government wants strong and consistent economic growth, it has to look at three key areas.
"It must promote consistent investment in people, in infrastructure and in trade.
"If it provides the support businesses need to thrive, in an increasingly competitive and protectionist global market, then the future can still be bright."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Turn Cornwall into industrial zone for net zero, Miliband urged
Cornwall should be made into an industrial hub to fuel net zero, government scientists have urged Ed Miliband. Britain's favourite holiday county and the broader South West of England have been deemed an energy 'super-region', meaning its geology is suited to a raft of new energy-based industries. The hot volcanic rocks lying below parts of Cornwall and Devon make them a top prospect for geothermal energy, according to the British Geological Survey (BGS), which advises the Government on the country's earth science. 'Deep geothermal resources alone could provide enough energy to satisfy the UK's heating needs for at least 100 years,' the quango said. The brines found in many of Cornwall's abandoned mines are also rich in lithium, a mineral essential for making batteries. Meanwhile, Dorset offers the potential for energy storage with rocks suitable for creating caverns to store natural gas or hydrogen, according to the quango. There are already separate plans to create such caverns under Portland Harbour, Britain's former biggest naval base. 'South-west England has significant deep geothermal resources offering opportunities for sustainable heat and power generation,' the BGS said. 'The region's sedimentary basins provide potential sites for carbon capture and storage (CCS), energy storage and geothermal projects … the region is well placed to support the UK's decarbonisation plans.' The Eden Project near St Austell already exploits the region's natural advantages, keeping visitors warm using heat extracted from rocks 3.3-miles beneath its surface. However, the idea of expanding such schemes into a major industry in a county valued for its coastlines, landscapes and tourism is likely to face opposition. The South West is one of several areas whose geology the BGS suggests could support the move to net zero. Others include Northern Ireland, central Scotland, northern England and East Anglia. 'These geological super regions contain subsurface formations and conditions that are favourable to multiple different technologies within a relatively small area,' it said. The Scottish Central Belt is also deemed to be a rich source of geothermal energy with warm underground strata easily accessible via the region's many abandoned coal mines. Michelle Bentham, BGS chief scientist for decarbonisation and resource management, said: 'In Europe, geothermal energy is used much more widely. In the UK, we don't use it as widely and it's always been a bit of a Cinderella of clean energy technologies.' The BGS said careful planning for such technologies in these areas could help unlock an estimated £40bn of annual investment and support the Government's target of creating 650,000 jobs through renewable energy by 2030. Ms Bentham added: 'In the North Sea, we could potentially become a hub for carbon storage in Europe for countries that don't have the right geology who are trying to decarbonise.' Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Insurrection? Rebellion? Overwhelmed? Can Trump legally take control of California's National Guard?
A version of this story appeared in CNN's What Matters newsletter. To get it in your inbox, sign up for free here. President Donald Trump has built his presidency around stretching the bounds of presidential authority, and his response to protests over an immigration crackdown in Los Angeles is no exception. He invoked a rarely used law to federalize the National Guard over the objection of Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom and local officials, who did not want to bring in the military. Trump may have the authority to take over the National Guard, but the move highlights the two-track command structure of National Guard units, which are normally deployed by a state's governor. The law cited by the White House to take control of the National Guard cites three reasons for that extraordinary step to be taken: the United States, or any of the Commonwealths or possessions, is invaded or is in danger of invasion by a foreign nation; there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States; or the President is unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States 'It sounds like all three to me,' said Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, when asked during congressional testimony which reason the White House was citing. Thus, to the White House, protests launched by job site and Home Depot deportation raids are the equivalent of invasion, rebellion and something the US government doesn't feel like it can handle without the military. It's a far cry from Trump's first term, when his Defense Secretary Mark Esper said, 'The option to use active-duty forces in a law enforcement role should only be used as a matter of last resort, and only in the most urgent and dire of situations,' when the administration considered using the military to address widespread protests related to the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis in 2020. The law also requires orders to be sent through state governors, but rather than cooperating, Newsom has complained the White House has illegally overstepped its authority and put troops on the street without adequate plans to feed or house them. The National Guard — the modern version of a state militia — has roots that predate the founding of the country. A series of laws beginning in the early 20th century gave the president and the federal government more power to standardize the National Guard, but they are still mostly supposed to be a state force. 'There's a tension,' said former Rep. Adam Kinzinger, a CNN political commentator who also served in the Illinois Air National Guard. 'How is the National Guard actually a militia if the president, against the wishes of the governor, can activate that militia against its own state?' Unless Trump ultimately invokes the Insurrection Act, Kinzinger said, the use of the National Guard must be extremely limited to roles such as guarding federal buildings. The Insurrection Act is a rarely invoked law, passed in 1807 and updated during Reconstruction, that dictates the extreme situations in which US troops can be used on American streets. Trump did not cite the Insurrection Act when he federalized California's National Guard. Hegseth said the military — Trump also called up Marines from Twentynine Palms, California — is required to protect ICE agents doing their jobs on the streets of Los Angeles. unknown content item - Mobilizing the military to act in US cities is not unprecedented in US history. President Dwight Eisenhower called up the 101st Airborne Division to protect Black students in Little Rock, Arkansas, during the integration of public schools in 1957. The most recent example of the National Guard being deployed in a state over the authority of its governor was in 1965, during the Civil Rights Movement, when President Lyndon B. Johnson cited the Insurrection Act to deploy the National Guard to protect marchers led by the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. in Alabama. The most recent example of the Insurrection Act being cited to deploy the National Guard came in the early 1990s, when California Gov. Pete Wilson asked the federal government for help responding to riots after four Los Angeles Police Department officers were acquitted in the horrific beating of Rodney King. Those riots were widespread and deadly, in contrast with the smattering of skirmishes in Los Angeles this week. Each of those instances involved the Insurrection Act, a law passed in 1807. While Trump has called protesters and rioters 'insurrectionists,' he has not technically invoked the Insurrection Act. People can legitimately debate whether the Los Angeles protests warrant federalizing the National Guard, but Trump cited no law in giving Hegseth authority to mobilize regular military to help in the response. Approximately 700 Marines were mobilized. What may be alarming about Trump's order, according to Elizabeth Goitein, an expert on presidential emergency powers at the Brennan Center for Justice, is that he did not specifically mention Los Angeles, which means he could have essentially OK'd the use of the military across the country for protests against ICE actions that have not yet occurred. 'ICE activity is happening across the country, and will likely draw protests in many places,' Goitein wrote in a detailed thread on social media. 'Trump is authorizing military deployment nationwide, regardless of whether protests involve violence *or are even happening yet.*' That means Americans should be prepared for the possibility of more deployments around the country, something that runs against the American tradition of separating military force from police force. Sending troops and Marines to Los Angeles was necessary, according to Rep. Zach Nunn, a Republican congressman from Iowa and a member of his state's National Guard. 'We have a sanctuary city in LA that refuses to stand with federal law enforcement. We have cops who are bleeding in the street,' he told CNN's Kasie Hunt, referencing skirmishes between law enforcement and protesters. Trump said more service members could be on the way. 'We have to make sure there's going to be law and order,' the president told reporters at the White House on Monday. Even if the Marines aren't directly involved in policing or interacting with protesters, their presence challenges what has been normal in the US. 'An army turned inward can quickly become an instrument of tyranny,' Goitein wrote in her thread. 'That's why domestic deployment should be an absolute last resort.' California is suing the federal government for overstepping its authority, and Newsom invited Trump to arrest him, an idea the president embraced when taking questions from reporters at the White House, but which would be unprecedented since the Civil War. After some Trump supporters argued he should have invoked the Insurrection Act to delay certification of the 2020 election, Goitein was among the many scholars who argued that the laws concerning extreme uses of presidential power needed to be updated and clarified. There is one law, the Posse Comitatus Act, that largely bars the use of the military inside the US. But there is also the Insurrection Act, which has not changed much since the 1870s, when it was used by President Ulysses S. Grant in an attempt to smother the early Ku Klux Klan. That's when Congress amended the Insurrection Act to give presidents more authority. But it did not define the term 'insurrection' or lay out how presidential power should be curbed. Grant went as far as to suspend writ of habeas corpus, the legal principle by which people can't be imprisoned without trial or appearance in court. Critics of the Trump administration argue his actions to militarize the situation in Los Angeles are intended as a sort of theater but are making the situation worse. 'We have domestic law enforcement agencies capable of handling these problems on almost every circumstance,' said Kori Schake, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, appearing on CNN on Monday. 'The standard for invoking the Insurrection Act has historically been very high, and it would be an ominous sign for the Trump administration to invoke it in these circumstances,' Schake said.
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The Daily T: ‘Tax rises are inevitable' – Rachel Reeves's spending review decoded
The Chancellor's much-anticipated spending review is a day away, with extra cash expected for defence, health and education. Are tax rises on the horizon to pay for all this? Camilla is joined by guest presenter Jacob Rees-Mogg, who says Labour doesn't understand business and argues that Keir Starmer could survive sacking Rachel Reeves… The former Tory MP also reacts to the Government's U-turn on the winter fuel payment, supposedly a response to a healthier economy under Labour. But the unemployment and jobs figures seem to say otherwise. Plus, how two very different rows about immigration triggered riots in North Ireland and in LA. Protests turned violent after an alleged sexual assault in Ballymena, while unrest is ongoing in California's biggest city over ICE raids and Donald Trump's immigration crackdown. Watch episodes of the Daily T here. You can also listen on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
