Today’s report from the Joint Committee on Human Rights calls for:
comprehensive review of all FPNs which have been issued
a mechanism to challenge new FPNs
a decision that no criminal record should result from covid-19 FPNs
an assessment of income for big fines.
In The Government’s Response to covid-19: fixed penalty notices, the Committee sets out significant concerns about the validity of FPNs, the inadequacy of the review and appeal process, the size of the penalties and the criminalisation of those who cannot afford to pay.
More than 85,000 fixed penalty notices have been issued to people in England and Wales said to have broken covid-19 laws on restrictions since March 2020. FPNs allow people to pay a penalty instead of facing prosecution and a potential criminal record.
Penalties range from £200 for the failure to wear a face covering to £10,000 for organised gatherings offences.
It is possible to tell from penalties that have not been paid and have then progressed through the system towards a prosecution, that a significant number of FPNs are incorrectly issued.
A Crown Prosecution Service review of prosecutions brought under coronavirus Regulations that reached open court in February 2021, found that 27 per cent were incorrectly charged. Many more penalties may have been paid by people too intimidated by the prospect of a criminal trial to risk contesting their FPN through a criminal prosecution.
The high rates of error and the disproportionate impact on different groups in society are concerning and the Committee suggests a more graduated approach and consideration of removing these convictions from criminal records.
With no adequate mechanism to seek a review of an FPN other than through a criminal prosecution, the risk that breaches of human rights will not be remedied is significantly increased. The Committee says the current review processes are not clear, consistent or transparent and calls on Government to introduce a means of challenging FPNs by way of administrative review or appeal.
Regulations related to coronavirus restrictions have changed at least 65 times since March 2020, providing obvious challenges for police. Far more must be done by Government and police to ensure officers understand the Regulations they are asked to enforce, says the report.
This is crucial to ensure there is no punishment without law (Article 7, ECHR) and no unjustified interference with an individual’s right to family and private live (Article 8, ECHR). The Committee calls on the National Police Chiefs Council to undertake a review to understand why police are issuing so many incorrect FPNs and to take steps to correct this.
However, in respect of offences relating to potentially infectious persons under the Coronavirus Act 2020, which hasn’t changed since March 2020, the Committee’s report says it is ‘astonishing’ that the Coronavirus Act is still being misunderstood and wrongly applied by police to such an extent that every single criminal charge brought under the Act has been brought incorrectly.
The Committee says there is no reason for such mistakes to continue.
The Chair of the Joint Committee on Human Rights, Harriet Harman MP, said:“Swift action to make restrictions effective is essential in the face of this terrible virus. But the Government needs to ensure that rules are clear, enforcement is fair and that mistakes in the system can be rectified. None of that is the case in respect of covid-19 Fixed Penalty Notices.
“The police have had a difficult job in policing the pandemic. We hope that their initial approach – to engage, explain and encourage before issuing fixed penalty notices will continue. However, since January there have been greater numbers of FPNs as police move more quickly to enforcement action, and because of a lack of legal clarity, likely greater numbers of incorrectly issued FPNs.
“This means we’ve got an unfair system with clear evidence that young people, those from certain ethnic minority backgrounds, men and the most socially deprived are most at risk.
“Whether people feel the FPN is deserved or not, those who can afford it are likely to pay a penalty to avoid criminality. Those who can’t afford to pay face a criminal record along with all the resulting consequences for their future development. The whole process disproportionately hits the less well-off and criminalises the poor over the better off.
“And once again, this Committee is calling on the Government to distinguish clearly between advice, guidance and the law. Fixed penalty notices were originally designed to deal with straightforward matters of law – easily understood by all involved. But our inquiry has demonstrated is that coronavirus Regulations are neither straightforward nor easily understood either by those who have to obey them or the police who have to enforce them.
“With fixed penalties of up to £10,000 awarded irrespective of the individual’s financial circumstances, there is much at stake. The Government needs to review the pandemic regulations and create new checks and balances to prevent errors and discrimination.”
The UK Government has robustly defended it’s stance and says it will continue to support police efforts to enforce legislation.
Vague and costly recommendations are not enough to reboot aviation and tourism sectors facing another summer without international travel, says Westminster’s Transport Committee.
In an analysis of the Government’s Global Travel Taskforce Report, the Committee concludes that the Report sets out a framework without the detail required to restart international travel. Where detail is provided, the costs may be disproportionate to the risk and add £500 on to the cost of a family of four travelling to the safest parts of the globe where the vaccine roll-out is comparable to the UK.
This distinct lack of clarity does not offer confidence to industry or consumers to plan, invest or recover from the coronavirus pandemic. It leaves the planned safe restart of international travel on May 17 in jeopardy.
The UK’s aviation and tourism sectors were poised to accommodate the public’s desire to travel for business, study, holidays and to visit loved-ones. The UK [aviation industry] has been one of the hardest hit by the pandemic, according to the European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation. Another summer without international travel heralds significant economic adversity.
Recommendations
In its Report, the Committee sets out four clear recommended actions for Government:
Populate the traffic-light framework with destination countries by May 1 and announce the details in a statement to Parliament.
Explain the criteria and mechanism by which countries will move between risk categories by May 1.
Offer an affordable testing regime that supports public health and safe travel for everyone by maximising the role of lateral flow tests and ensuring the provision of affordable polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests, where required.
Act immediately to reduce waiting times and queues at the UK border, including working bilaterally with partner countries to agree mutual recognition of travel health certification, deploying more staff at the border, processing passenger locator forms before passengers arrive in the UK and establishing an efficient system based on a single digital app to process health certification submitted in a range of languages.
Transport Committee Chair, Huw Merriman MP, said: “The aviation and travel sectors were crying out for a functional report, setting out clear rules and offering certainty. This is not it.
“Where the industry craved certainty, the Government has failed to provide it. For UK citizens seeking to travel to the parts of the globe where the vaccine has been delivered as rapidly as the UK, the cost to families from testing could be greater than the cost of the flights.
“This is a missed opportunity for the Government to capitalise on the UK’s world-leading ‘vaccine dividend’. How can it be right that hauliers, arriving from parts of the globe where the vaccine roll-out is slow, are able to use cheaper lateral flow testing whilst a trip back from Israel requires a PCR test which is four times as expensive?
“This was an opportunity to provide a global lead with standardised rules on international health certification and promoting app-based technology, making the processes at borders more secure and less time consuming. The urgent situation facing the aviation and travel sectors warrants a clear action plan to green light our travel – and the Government must urgently set it out.”
Rory Boland, Editor of Which? Travel, said:“The government is reliant on factors outside its control in restarting international travel, including high and changing infection rates in many countries, so it’s understandable that it cannot provide clarity on where people can go yet. However, it needs to do a better job of fixing the issues it does control.
“Given the government has now dropped its advice not to book holidays, consumers need clarity on how the traffic light system will work and reassurance that last-minute changes won’t leave them facing thousand pound bills – as they did last summer.
“Test costs remain too high and risk pricing millions out of travel, while the problem of passengers queuing for several hours at border control at some UK airports has been going on for months.
“If people are to travel this summer, whether to see loved ones or on holiday, they need the government to make sure it is affordable and safe.”
While the pandemic has had an impact on all parents and families, the severity of that impact, and the potential long-term consequences, will vary significantly.
While there have been positives for some families in being able to spend more time together, emerging evidence suggests others are experiencing increasing mental ill health, poverty, domestic abuse and child neglect.
There are also concerns around the impact on children’s development, perhaps especially for those born in the last year.
The Committee has decided to conduct a short inquiry on this topic, and will begin by hearing from organisations working with more vulnerable and disadvantaged families about what they have observed over the last year and their concerns for the future.
Witnesses
Tuesday 20 April 2021
At 9.45am, the Committee will hear evidence from:
Jabeer Butt, Chief Executive, Race Equality Foundation
Sally Hogg, Head of Policy and Campaigning, Parent-Infant Foundation
David Holmes, Chief Executive, Family Action
Jaine Stannard, Chief Executive, School-Home Support
Jane Williams, CEO Founder, The Magpie Project
Themes for discussion
How the pandemic has affected more vulnerable and disadvantaged families.
What the long-term impact of the pandemic might be for parents and children.
What action is needed from Government to respond to these concerns.
Prime Minister Boris Johnson made this statement in the House of Commons yesterday
Mr Speaker, I beg to move:
That an Humble Address be presented to Her Majesty expressing the deepest sympathies of this House on the death of His Royal Highness The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, and the heartfelt thanks of this House and this nation for his unfailing dedication to this Country and the Commonwealth, exemplified in his distinguished service in the Royal Navy in the Second World War; his commitment to young people in setting up The Duke of Edinburgh’s Award, a scheme which has touched the lives of millions across the globe; his early, passionate commitment to the environment; and his unstinting support to Your Majesty throughout his life.
Mr Speaker, it is fitting that on Saturday His Royal Highness the Duke of Edinburgh will be conveyed to his final resting place in a Land Rover, which Prince Philip had designed himself, with a long wheel base and a capacious rear cabin, because that vehicle’s unique and idiosyncratic silhouette reminds the world that he was above all a practical man, who could take something very traditional – whether a machine or indeed a great national institution – and find a way by his own ingenuity to improve it, to adapt it for the 20th or the 21st century.
That gift for innovation was apparent from his earliest career in the Navy. When he served in the second world war, he was mentioned in despatches for his “alertness and appreciation of the situation” during the Battle of Cape Matapan, and he played a crucial role in helping to sink two enemy cruisers. But it was later, during the invasion of Sicily, that he was especially remembered by his crewmates for what he did to save their own ship.
In a moment of high danger, at night, when HMS Wallace was vulnerable to being blown up by enemy planes, he improvised a floating decoy – complete with fires to make it look like a stricken British vessel – so that the Wallace was able to slip away, and the enemy took out the decoy.
He was there at Tokyo Bay in 1945, barely 200 yards away from the Japanese surrender on the deck of USS Missouri; but he wasn’t content just to watch history through his binoculars. It seems that he used the lull to get on with repainting the hull of HMS Whelp; and throughout his life – a life that was by necessity wrapped from such a young age in symbol and ceremony – one can see that same instinct, to look for what was most useful, and most practical, and for what would take things forward.
He was one of the first people in this country to use a mobile phone. In the 1970s, he was driving an electric taxi on the streets of London – the fore-runner of the modern low-carbon fleet, and, again, a vehicle of his own specifications. He wasn’t content just to be a carriage driver. He played a large part in pioneering and codifying the sport of competitive carriage driving.
And if it is true that carriage-driving is not a mass-participation sport – not yet – he had other novel ideas that touched the lives of millions, developed their character and confidence, their teamwork and self-reliance. It was amazing and instructive, to listen on Friday to the Cabinet’s tributes to the Duke, and to hear how many were proud to say that they, or their children, had benefited from taking part in his Duke of Edinburgh Award schemes.
I will leave it to the House to speculate as to who claimed to have got a gold award, and who got a bronze. But I believe those ministers spoke for millions of people – across this country and around the world – who felt that the Duke had in some way touched their lives, people whose work he supported in the course of an astonishing 22,219 public engagements, people he encouraged, and, yes, he amused.
It is true that he occasionally drove a coach and horses through the finer points of diplomatic protocol, and he coined a new word – dontopedalogy – for the experience of putting your foot in your mouth.
And it is also true that among his more parliamentary expressions he commented adversely on the French concept of breakfast, and told a British student in Papua New Guinea that he was lucky not to be eaten, and that the people of the Cayman Islands were descended from pirates, and that he would like to go to Russia except that, as he put it, “the bastards murdered half my family”.
But the world did not hold it against him, Mr Speaker. On the contrary, they overwhelmingly understood that he was trying to break the ice, to get things moving, to get people laughing and forget their nerves; and to this day there is a community in the Pacific islands that venerates Prince Philip as a god, or volcano spirit – a conviction that was actually strengthened when a group came to London to have tea with him in person.
When he spoke so feelingly about the problems of overpopulation, and humanity’s relentless incursion on the natural world, and the consequent destruction of habitat and species, he contrived to be at once politically incorrect and also ahead of his time.
In a quite unparalleled career of advice and encouragement and support, he provided one particular service that I believe the House will know in our hearts was the very greatest of all. In the constant love he gave to Her Majesty the Queen – as her liege man of life and limb, in the words he spoke at the Coronation – he sustained her throughout this extraordinary second Elizabethan age, now the longest reign of any monarch in our history.
It was typical of him that in wooing Her Majesty – famously not short of a jewel or two – he offered jewellery of his own design. He dispensed with the footmen in powdered wigs. He introduced television cameras, and at family picnics in Balmoral he would barbecue the sausages on a large metal contraption that all Prime Ministers must have goggled at for decades, complete with rotisserie and compartments for the sauces, that was – once again, Mr Speaker – a product of his own invention and creation.
Indeed as an advocate of skills and craft and science and technology this country has had no royal champion to match him since Prince Albert, and I know that in due course the House and the country will want to consider a suitable memorial to Prince Philip.
It is with that same spirit of innovation that as co-gerent of the Royal Family, he shaped and protected the monarchy, through all the vicissitudes of the last seven decades, and helped to modernise and continually to adapt an institution that is above politics, that incarnates our history, and that is indisputably vital to the balance and happiness of our national life.
By his unstinting service to The Queen, the Commonwealth, the armed forces, the environment, to millions of people young and not so young around the world, and to countless other causes, he gave us and he gives us all a model of selflessness, and of putting others before ourselves.
And though I expect Mr Speaker, he might be embarrassed or even exasperated to receive these tributes, he made this country a better place, and for that he will be remembered with gratitude and with fondness for generations to come.
AND AT HOLYROOD:
First Minister Nicola Sturgeon moved the following motion at The Scottish Parliament yesterday:
Motion of Condolence following the death of His Royal Highness The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh: First Minister’s statement – 12 April, 2021
Presiding Officer,
The tributes paid to the Duke of Edinburgh over these last three days show the affection in which he was held – here in Scotland, across the United Kingdom, and indeed around the world.
On behalf of the people of Scotland, I express my deepest sympathy to Her Majesty the Queen – who is grieving the loss of her ‘strength and stay’, her husband of almost 74 years – and also to the Duke’s children, and to the wider Royal Family.
Of course, before he became the public figure so familiar to all of us today, the Duke of Edinburgh had already led a life of distinction.
Like so many of his generation, he endured difficulties and faced dangers that generations since can barely comprehend.
As a naval officer in World War Two, he was mentioned in dispatches for his part in the Battle of Matapan.
In 1943, his courage and quick-thinking helped save HMS Wallace from attack in the Mediterranean.
And during a two year spell at Rosyth, he was responsible for escorting merchant vessels on a route known as “E-boat alley”, because of the frequency of the attacks from German vessels.
For these contributions alone, he – like all of our veterans – is owed a significant debt of gratitude.
The Second World War was, however, just the beginning of the Duke of Edinburgh’s life of public service.
From 1947, he was the Queen’s constant companion.
And from 1952, he was her consort.
As has been much noted in recent days, he became the longest serving consort in British history.
That role, in a constitutional monarchy, cannot be an easy one – particularly, perhaps, for someone who is spirited and energetic by temperament.
And of course, he faced the additional challenge of being the husband of a powerful woman – at a time when that was even more of an exception than it is today.
That reversal of the more traditional dynamic was highly unusual in the 1940s, 50s and 60s – and even now, isn’t as common as it might be.
Yet the Duke of Edinburgh was devoted to supporting the Queen. They were a true partnership.
Indeed, like First Ministers before me, I got to witness the strength of that partnership at close quarters during annual stays at Balmoral.
I always enjoyed my conversations with the Duke of Edinburgh on these visits – indeed on all of the occasions that I met him – and I was struck by how different he was in private to the way he was sometimes characterised in public.
He was a thoughtful man, deeply interesting and fiercely intelligent. He was also a serious bookworm, which I am too, so talking about the books we were reading was often, for me, a real highlight of our conversations.
Prince Philip was without doubt a devoted consort to the Queen – but of course he also carved out a distinctive individual role.
He took a particular interest in industry and science, and he was far-sighted in his early support for conservation. Indeed, as far back as 1969, in a speech here in Edinburgh, he warned of the risks of “virtually indestructible plastics”.
And of course, in 1956 he founded The Duke of Edinburgh Award Scheme, which now every year provides opportunity, hope and inspiration to more than 1 million young people in more than 100 different countries across the world.
In addition, the Duke of Edinburgh was patron of more than 800 charities. At the time of his retirement from Royal duties, he had completed well over 20,000 engagements.
Many of these engagements were of course here in Scotland – a country that he loved from a very early age.
He was educated in Moray, taught to sail by a Scottish trawler skipper, and as has been mentioned already, was based at Rosyth for two years during the war.
When the Duke received the Freedom of the City of Edinburgh in 1949, he spoke then of the “numberless benefits” that Scotland had given him.
Some of his very first duties with the Royal Household were undertaken here in Scotland.
In July 1947 – just a week after the announcement of his engagement to the then Princess Elizabeth – the couple travelled here to Edinburgh.
And in the years since, the Duke has been present at many of the key moments of our modern history – including, of course, the official openings of our Scottish Parliament.
He has served many Scottish charities and organisations – indeed, he was Chancellor of the University of Edinburgh for more than 50 years.
Throughout all of that time, the public has held him in great affection.
On that first Royal Visit to Edinburgh in 1947, people gathered just across the street, in the forecourt of Holyrood Palace, and celebrated the Royal engagement with country dancing.
More than 70 years later – shortly after he had announced his retirement from public life – I witnessed the warmth of the reception he received as he accompanied the Queen to the opening of the Queensferry Crossing.
This is an event I had known he was determined to attend – he was fascinated and deeply impressed by the feats of engineering that each of the three Forth Bridges represent.
Presiding Officer,
One of the Duke of Edinburgh’s early engagements in Scotland, shortly after the Queen’s Coronation, was to plant a cherry tree in the grounds of Canongate Kirk, just across the road from here.
It stands directly opposite the tree planted by the Queen a year previously.
These trees are just about to bloom, as I am sure they will do each spring for decades to come.
I am equally sure that – not just in the weeks ahead – but many years from now, people will think fondly of the Duke of Edinburgh as they pass Canongate Kirk and look across to Holyrood Palace.
It is right that our Parliament pays tribute to him today.
In doing so, we mourn his passing and we extend our deepest sympathy to Her Majesty The Queen and her family.
We reflect on his distinguished wartime record; his love and support for the Queen; and his decades of public service to Scotland, the United Kingdom, and the Commonwealth.
Above all, Presiding Officer, we celebrate – and we honour – an extraordinary life. I move the motion in my name.
The House of Commons will next meet on Monday at 2.30pm, following the announcement of the death of His Royal Highness The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh. The Scottish Parliament will also reconvene on Monday.
The Scottish Parliament’s flags are flying at half-mast following the death of His Royal Highness The Duke of Edinburgh.
Scottish Parliament Presiding Officer Ken Macintosh said: “On behalf of the Scottish Parliament I would like to extend our sincere condolences to Her Majesty The Queen and to the Royal Family following the death of His Royal Highness The Duke of Edinburgh.
“The Duke of Edinburgh accompanied Her Majesty The Queen on each of her visits to the Scottish Parliament since 1999. Their unwavering support for this institution and The Duke’s unwavering support to Her Majesty were clear for all to see and his loss will be deeply felt.”
A report from Westminster’s Work and Pensions Committee is calling on the UK Government to ‘act quickly and decisively’ to protect pension savers, more than five years on from the introduction of the pension freedoms, which have put people at risk of a much wider range of scams and fraud.
The report warns that commonly cited figures of the scale of pension scamming are likely to substantially underestimate the problem.
The situation is likely to be getting worse rather than better, with the covid-19 pandemic offering scammers new opportunities.
The Committee heard throughout its inquiry that pension scammers have moved online, with regulators powerless to hold search engines and social media to account for hosting scam adverts as they do traditional media.
Tech firms such as Google are accepting payment to advertise scams and then further payments from regulators to publish warnings – a practice the Committee describes as ‘immoral’.
The Government must now rethink its decision to exclude financial harms from the forthcoming Online Safety Bill and use it to legislate against online investment fraud.
In the same way as traditional media, online publishers should be required to ensure financial promotions are authorised.
The report also calls for the multi-agency task force set up to tackle pension fraud to be strengthened.
The existing Project Bloom should be renamed the Pension Scams Centre and given dedicated funding and staffing to manage an intelligence database and law enforcement.
Currently the fragmentation of reporting, investigation and enforcement has made tackling pension scams more difficult.
The Financial Conduct Authority must also ‘raise its game’ and publish information about its enforcement action, with the Committee hearing numerous criticisms that it is not effective in stopping scams, punishing scammers or retrieving scam proceeds.
Rt Hon Stephen Timms MP, Chair of the Work and Pensions Committee, said: “The pension freedoms brought more choice for savers on how to use their pension pots, but the reforms have also opened up a whole new world of opportunity for scammers and fraudsters.
“At the same time, a woeful lack of online regulation has helped them reach more people than ever before.
“The result is an online free for all, where scammers can advertise with impunity while the tech giants line their pockets from the proceeds of their crimes.
“With global firms such as Google being increasingly influential as providers of information, consumers looking for financial advice are being let down by not being afforded the same level of protection they receive from adverts which appear on television or in a newspaper.
“There must now be parity across the media to ensure all adverts are regulated and the Government should use its Online Safety Bill to act.
“Tighter online regulation must be just the first step in improving protections for savers. Stronger enforcement with a new Pensions Scams Centre, a more effective FCA and extra support for victims are also desperately needed.
“Pension scams can cause huge financial harm and psychological distress and any one of us saving for the future is at risk of falling prey to a scammer.
“The Government and the regulators have been left playing catch-up following the pension freedom reforms and must now act quickly to protect savers and their hard-earned money.”
Rocio Concha, Director of Policy and Advocacy at Which?, said:“This report is a damning indictment of the approach of tech giants like Google to tackling scams.
“These companies have some of the most sophisticated technology in the world, yet they are failing to utilise it to prevent scammers from abusing the platforms by using fake and fraudulent content on an industrial scale to target victims and devastate lives.
“The case for including scams in the Online Safety Bill is overwhelming. Online platforms must be given a legal responsibility to identify, prevent and remove fake and fraudulent content from appearing on their sites and give their users the protection they deserve. The government must not miss the opportunity to act now.”
“Unimaginable” cost of Test & Trace failed to deliver central promise of averting another lockdown
In May last year NHS Test and Trace (NHST&T) was set up with a budget of £22 billion. Since then it has been allocated £15 billion more: totalling £37 BILLION over two years.
The Department of Health & Social Care (DHSC) justified the scale of investment, in part, on the basis that an effective test and trace system would help avoid a second national lockdown – but since its creation we have had two more lockdowns.
In its report Westminster’s Public Accounts Committee says that while NHST&T clearly had to be set up and staffed at incredible speed, it must now “wean itself off its persistent reliance on consultants”; there is still no clear evidence of NHST&T’s overall effectiveness; and it’s not clear whether its contribution to reducing infection levels – as opposed to the other measures introduced to tackle the pandemic – can justify its “unimaginable” costs.
The scale of NHST&T’s activities is striking, particularly given its short life. Between May 2020 and January 2021, daily UK testing capacity for COVID-19 increased from around 100,000 to over 800,000 tests. NHST&T had also contacted over 2.5 million people testing positive for COVID-19 in England and advised more than 4.5 million of their associated contacts to self-isolate.
But the percentage of total laboratory testing capacity used in November and December 2020 remained under 65%, and even with the spare capacity, NHST&T has never met the target to turn around all tests in face-to-face settings in 24 hours. Low utilisation rates – well below the target of 50% – persisted into October last year.
A major focus for NHST&T in early 2021 was the mass roll-out of rapid testing in different community settings, but there have been particular setbacks for the roll-out to schools, after NHST&T had significantly underestimated the increase in demand for testing when schools and universities returned last September.
Meg Hillier MP, Chair of the Public Accounts Committee, said: “The £23 billion test and trace has cost us so far is about the annual budget of the Department for Transport.Test & Trace still continues to pay for consultants at £1000 a day.
“Yet despite the unimaginable resources thrown at this project Test and Trace cannot point to a measurable difference to the progress of the pandemic, and the promise on which this huge expense was justified – avoiding another lockdown – has been broken, TWICE.
“DHSC and NHST&T must rapidly turn around these fortunes and begin to demonstrate the worth and value of this staggering investment of taxpayers’ money. Not only is it essential it delivers an effective system as pupils return to school and more people return to their workplace, but for the £billions spent we need to see a top class legacy system.
“British taxpayers cannot be treated by Government like an ATM machine. We need to see a clear plan and costs better controlled.”
Test and Trace chief Baroness Dido Harding has defended the £37 billion service and said the committee report is ‘old news’.
Scotland’s ability to legislate in areas such as food, health and environmental standards is being undermined in a “systematic attack” on devolution, according to Constitution Secretary Michael Russell.
A report published yesterday by the Scottish Government shows the extent to which the Scottish Parliament’s devolved powers are being eroded by the UK Government following the 2016 Brexit vote.
AFTER BREXIT: The UK Internal Market Act & Devolution sets out how:
the Scottish Parliament’s views on Brexit have been ignored by the UK Government
terms of reference designed to agree Brexit negotiating objectives among the UK’s four governments were disregarded
the UK Government and Parliament now regularly legislate in devolved policy areas and adjust the powers of the Scottish Parliament without the consent of the Scottish Parliament
UK Government Ministers have taken powers to spend in devolved areas
Most notably, the recently passed UK Internal Market Act allows the UK Government to in effect impose standards in a large number of areas that are devolved.
It means the Scottish Parliament could have its hands tied if it wants to stop the sale of hormone injected beef, regulate food content to prevent obesity or ban single-use plastics to protect the environment, the report sets out
The report also details how the Act is being used by the UK Government to divert funding that would otherwise come to the Scottish Parliament to decide how it should be spent.
One example is the UK Government administered Levelling Up Fund for infrastructure projects, which is bypassing any Scottish Parliament involvement in around £400 million of expected consequential funding.
Additionally UK Government Ministers now have the power to extend to Scotland’s NHS the controversial market access principles that the Act introduces.
Mr Russell added: “Devolution has helped to move Scotland forward, building on the fundamental principle that the Parliament and Government elected by the Scottish people should make decisions for Scotland.
“But since the Brexit vote there has been a systematic attack on the Scottish Parliament’s powers, fundamentally undermining devolution.
“Bit by bit, the settlement that secured 74% support in the 1997 devolution referendum, is being unpicked under the cover of Brexit and without the consent of Scottish people.
“This is not a big bang abolition – it is instead the slow demise of devolution in the hope that no-one will notice.
“The UK Government has signalled its desire is to ‘undo’ devolution and it is now repeatedly using its majority at Westminster to impose laws in devolved policy areas.
“Most alarming of all, the Internal Market Act has substantially weakened the Scottish Parliament’s powers.
“The Act is going to have a very real impact on everyone in Scotland. The Scottish Parliament’s ability to ensure high levels of food standards and stop the sale of single-use plastics could be rendered obsolete – undoing devolution and undermining Scotland’s ability to directly shape its future.
“UK Government Ministers also now have the power, at a stroke of their pen, to subject Scotland’s NHS to the market access principles the Act introduces.
“That is why we will continue to resist the damaging effects of this Act in every way possible, and why we are bringing forward an independence referendum Bill – to keep Scottish powers in the hands of the Scottish people.”
Matthew Thornton, a post-doctoral researcher at the University of St Andrews, is presenting his research to politicians, Parliamentarians and a panel of expert judges as part of STEM for BRITAIN today (Thursday 4th March).
STEM for BRITAIN is an annual poster competition, usually held in the House of Commons, involving some 200 or so early career researchers. The Parliamentary and Scientific Committee runs the event in collaboration with the Institute of Physics, the Royal Society of Chemistry, the Royal Academy of Engineering, Royal Society of Biology, Physiological Society, Council for the Mathematical Sciences, and the Nutrition Society.
The aim of the competition is to give members of both Houses of Parliament an insight into the outstanding research work being undertaken in UK universities by early-career researchers.
Dr Thornton’s poster will be judged against dozens of other scientists’ research, in the only national competition of its kind.
His presentation will explain how he and his colleagues are expanding our knowledge of quantum systems, which will enable the design of new and remarkable sources of quantum light.
The most important inventions of the 20th century, including the transistor, the laser and the atomic clock, were built on a deep understanding of the quantum nature of materials and atoms. For example, quantum physics is required to explain how electrons move within semiconductors, and so helped to predict the underlying behaviour of transistors.
Matthew’s work will improve the stability of atomic clocks such as those used in GPS satellites, enable development of microscopes which can take higher resolution pictures of small objects with less intense light than normal, and help enable a secure, unhackable quantum internet.
He said: “This prestigious event is a great opportunity to display some key outcomes from my time in St Andrews, and to practice communicating the underlying principles.
“The foundational idea of my recent research is that effects which ordinarily destroy a quantum state can, in some contexts, actually create quantum light from a classical input. I find this both counterintuitive and beautiful.
“In the future I plan to move further into the quantum technologies arena in order to create devices which help people.”
Stephen Metcalfe MP, Chairman of the Parliamentary and Scientific Committee, said: “This annual competition is an important date in the parliamentary calendar because it gives MPs an opportunity to see the work of a wide range of the country’s best young researchers.
“These early career engineers, mathematicians and scientists are the architects of our future and STEM for BRITAIN is politicians’ best opportunity to meet them, virtually on this occasion, and understand their work.”
Matthew’s research has been entered into the physics session of the competition, which will end in a gold, silver and bronze prize-giving ceremony.
Judged by leading academics, the gold medalist receives £1000, while silver and bronze receive £750 and £500 respectively.
Due to COVID-19 the 2021 event is being held online, but will nevertheless still be supported by Parliamentarians, including those Members of Parliament whose constituents have been shortlisted to present their posters.
The winners will be announced virtually on Monday 8th March.
Westminster’s Women and Equalities Committee has published its report on coronavirus and the gendered economic impact. The report has found that the economic impact of coronavirus has affected men and women differently. This is because of existing gendered economic inequalities, the over-representation of women in certain types of work and the actions the Government has taken.
Conduct an Equality Impact Assessment of the Job Retention Scheme and the Self Employed Income Support Scheme. This should draw on existing inequalities and would better protect those already at a disadvantage in the labour market, including women. It could also inform more effective responses to future crises.
Assess the equality impact of the Industrial Strategy and the New Deal, and analyse who has benefited from the industrial strategy. Priorities for recovery are heavily gendered in nature, with investment plans skewing towards male dominated sectors.
Conduct an economic growth assessment of the care-led recovery proposals made by the Women’s Budget Group. (Treasury)
Maintain increases in support, including the £20 increase to the Universal Credit standard allowance. (Department for Work and Pensions)
Review the adequacy of and eligibility for Statutory Sick Pay. Women are over represented among those who are not eligible.
Legislate to extend redundancy protection to pregnant women and new mothers.
Review childcare provision to provide support for working parents and those who are job seeking or retraining.
Reinstate gender pay gap reporting and include parental leave policies, ethnicity and disability.
Provide better data to improve reporting and analysis on how gender, ethnicity, disability, age and socio-economic status interact to compound disadvantage.
Ensure that the Government Equalities Office and Minister for Women are more ambitious and proactive.
Committee Chair Caroline Nokes said: “As the pandemic struck, the Government had to act quickly to protect jobs and adapt welfare benefits. “These have provided a vital safety net for millions of people. But it overlooked the labour market and caring inequalities faced by women.
“These are not a mystery, they are specific and well understood. And yet the Government has repeatedly failed to consider them.
“This passive approach to gender equality is not enough. And for many women it has made existing equality problems worse: in the support to self-employed people, to pregnant women and new mothers, to the professional childcare sector, and for women claiming benefits. And it risks doing the same in its plans for economic recovery.
“We heard evidence from a wide range of organisations, including Maternity Action, the National Hair and Beauty Federation, the TUC, the Professional Association of Childcare and Early Years, the single parents campaign group Gingerbread, the Young Women’s Trust and the Women’s Budget Group. And written evidence from many more.
“The message from our evidence is clear: Government policies have repeatedly skewed towards men—and it keeps happening.
“We need to see more than good intentions and hoping for the best. The Government must start actively analysing and assessing the equality impact of every policy, or it risks turning the clock back.
“Our report sets out a package of twenty recommendations for change and a timescale. Taken together, these will go a long way towards tackling the problems and creating the more equal future that so many women—and men—want to see.
“The Government should seize this opportunity.”
Responding to today’s report by the Woman and Equalities Committee, which sets out how women have been disproportionately impacted by the pandemic, TUC General Secretary Frances O’Grady (above) said: “Women have been put in an impossible situation during the pandemic – often expected to work and look after children at the same time.
“Too many working mums are having to cut their hours or being forced to leave their jobs because they cannot manage.
“If ministers don’t act, women will be pushed out of the labour market. And that means women’s and children’s poverty will soar.
“Ministers must give all parents a temporary right to be furloughed now.
“And they must fix the UK’s lamentable support for working parents. That means giving all parents at least ten days’ paid parental leave each year, making real flexible working available to all, and funding childcare properly.
“Unless ministers strengthen rights and support for working parents, women’s equality risks being set back decades.”
On the committee’s recommendation to carry out and publish an equality impact assessment on how government policies have affected women, Frances O’Grady added: “The government must urgently carry out and publish equality impact assessments of all its policies during this pandemic.
“This crisis, and the government’s response to it, is deepening inequalities for women at work.”
A TUC survey of 52,000 working mums published earlier this month revealed that 9 in 10 had experienced higher levels of anxiety and stress levels during this latest lockdown.
Nearly three-quarters (71%) of those who had applied for furlough following the latest school closures have had their requests turned down.
The TUC says this situation results from the UK’s failure to help families balance paid work and childcare.
It is calling on the government to introduce:
A new temporary right to furlough for groups who cannot work because of coronavirus restrictions – both parents and those who are clinically extremely vulnerable and required to shield.
Ten days’ paid parental leave, from day one in a job, for all parents. Currently parents have no statutory right to paid leave to look after their children.
A right to flexible work for all parents. Flexible working can take lots of different forms, including having predictable or set hours, working from home, job-sharing, compressed hours and term-time working.
Give additional financial support to the childcare sector so that childcare providers can continue to offer support to working parents.
An increase in sick pay to at least the level of the real Living Wage, for everyone in work, to ensure workers can afford to self-isolate if they need to.
Newly self-employed parents to have access the self-employment income support scheme (SEISS).
