Category Archives: Brexit

Commissioned by the Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS), SAG-CS had been formed earlier this year to monitor chemical safety of products on the UK market; mirroring the work previously conducted by the European Commissions Scientific Committee for Consumer Safety (SCCS) when the UK formed part of the EU. The mission of SAG-CS was to provide OPSS with scientific advice and risk assessment in the areas of public health and consumer safety across three categories: cosmetic products and cosmetic ingredients; toys; and textiles.

So, were there any cosmetic chemicals up for discussion in the first year of SAG-CS? And should cosmetic manufacturers be concerned about any specific ingredients?

Dr. Emma Meredith, director-general of the Cosmetic, Toiletry and Perfumery Association (CTPA), said that, for now, nothing on cosmetics or cosmetic ingredients had been raised.

Addressing attendees at SCS Formulate 2021s first day of inform sessions in Coventry, UK, Meredith said: Currently, its not looking at cosmetic ingredients; its main focus is toys.

After SAG-CSs first two meetings one in July and a second in September the advisory group had already published two UK mandates on chemicals in toys, one on formaldehyde in toy materials and another on aluminium in toys or components of toys.

Set to meet six times per year, Meredith said over the next 12 months the group was scheduled to continue its focus on toy safety rather than cosmetics. However, she said the full process of SAG-CS and subsequent regulatory impacts remained unclear.

We now have a process for ingredient management that mirrors the EU. If an issue is raised, the SAG-CS will be asked to review. Beyond that, OPSS has still not clarified what that process is.CTPA is in constant dialogue with OPSS to ensure we have clarity for industry on this important process as soon as possible, she said.

Meredith said that since January 2021, any chemical reviewed by the EUs SCCS or chemical legislation adopted in the EU market was no longer automatically adopted in the UK, as had been the case prior to this date.

Up until January this year, the UK had fully onboarded the EUs restricted and prohibited chemicals list, for example, but since this date some new legislation had passed in the EU, including classifications of carcinogenic, mutagenic or toxic for reproduction (CMR) chemicals under the EUs third and fourth Omnibus, she said. Earlier this month, the European Commission detailed its fourth Omnibus update, adding 23 CMR chemicals to its prohibited substances list under Article 15 of the EU Cosmetics Regulation 1223/2009, including zinc Pyrithione. Bans on these chemicals would be in place for any cosmetic product placed on the EU market from March 1, 2022.

In the EU, our ingredients are under constant review () So were already seeing a little bit of divergence between the EU and UK, Meredith said.

The UKs REACH legislation also differed to the EU version, she said, with a sharp focus and responsibility placed on downstream users.

For CTPA and all involved in the industry, it became apparent that UK REACH would have a massive impact for our industry, not just for the perspective of availability and problems in the supply chain but because as an industry we are downstream users, Meredith said.

Implemented in January 2021, the UK REACH regulation placed a huge level of responsibility on downstream users of ingredients that was not there before, she said. Whilst under EU REACH, the movement of ingredients had been simple given the high level of involvement and responsibility taken by suppliers, now, UK cosmetic manufacturers sourcing ingredients from the EU were responsible for compliance with the UK chemicals legislation.

For a lot of companies, the UK REACH has been a very massive and steep learning curve which is still ongoing. The key principles are ECHA-based, hazard-based legislation if you have no data to support the safe use, you cannot market that chemical. But the burden of proof is on companies to identify and manage the risks linked to the substances. Then you need to demonstrate how the substance can be safely used and communicate the risk management measures to the users.

To ease this new pressure on cosmetic manufacturers, Meredith said the CTPA had fought really strongly to ensure all legal requirements under UK REACH were introduced in a phased approach, giving companies two, four or six years to fulfil regulatory obligations depending on hazard. This phased approach, she said, had started from October 28, this year.

Looking forward at the remainder of 2021 and 2022, Meredith said that, unlike its EU counterpart, UK REACH would not be focused on D5, D6 and microplastics, though regulatory management option analysis (RMOAs) were expected for those ingredients some time in the future. Instead, UK REACH would be focused on Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAs), she said.

PFAs is a priority and already undergoing an RMOA, she said. And whilst this group of chemicals was vast, it wasnt widely used in cosmetics nor would industry defend their use in cosmetics, she said. The CTPA was, however, concerned that should UK REACH regulate PFAs, it might set a precedent on regulating groups of chemicals rather than individual chemicals, she said. Yes, there are a certain amount of PFAs with environmental concerns, but you should look at the individual ingredient.

Go here to read the rest:

Post-Brexit chemical safety: SAG-CS and UK REACH now in place for ingredient management - CosmeticsDesign-Europe.com

Tuesday 16 November 2021 12:08 pm

After the UK left the European Union, a range of payment providers reported so-called IBAN discrimination as a number of companies across Europe began to refuse Euro account bank details if they contained the country code GB.

As a result ofBrexit, sending a payment to Eurozone countries resulted in additional charges. Whilst the fee is nominal, it means that payments can be short of the required full amount being sent.

In an exclusive interview with City A.M., rising City star Anastasia Demetriou, a former Howard Kennedy solicitor and currently general counsel at IFX Payments in London, warns that without much-needed regulation post-Brexit, the cross border payments industry is a potential breeding ground for financial crime.

In a bid to tackle the risk of financial crime, there has been an industry wide focus on regulation, with the EUs 5th Anti-Money Laundering Directive being probably the best example.

Key elements of 5AMLD seek to prevent the movement of illicit funds across international borders with enhanced due diligence measures for high-risk third countries as well as ensuring beneficial ownership transparency, Demetriou said.

Of course, implementing effective governance within the financial services arena is difficult, but the complexities of cross border payments pose a particular challenge, Demetriou said.

Having regulatory structures in place is a crucial piece of the industry puzzle.

There is no global consensus; different jurisdictions have varying outlooks on consumer risk, consumer protection and the role top-down governance should take in mitigating risk.

A good regulatory framework will have two primary roles. The first is protection; by ensuring that customer funds are safe, and that sensitive data is secured. The second is facilitation; maintaining the sectors reputation and taking an active role in the prevention of financial crime, which will in turn build consumer confidence, Demetriou said.

Demetriou highlighted that,within the global payments sphere, a key barrier to the effective implementation of global regulation is the lack of a standardised set of rules across the board.

Demetriou stressed how a lack of standardised regulation in the payments industry could allow a Wild West culture to grow.

She added that the sector needs to retain its legitimacy but also be given the tools and freedom to innovate. Finding that delicate balance on a global scale is ambitious but necessary.

The role of regulation within a jurisdiction is largely attributed to its cultural norms or even political inclination.

Demetriou provided the example of the EU and the UK where the payments regulatory framework is derived from the same directives; each jurisdiction is tasked with accomplishing a set of goals but the directive doesnt dictate the means to achieve the desired outcomes.

Although rules and principles are outlined, adherents are given flexibility and liberty in implementation, she explained.

Whilst certain standards need to be met, participants will have different interpretations, Demetriou stressed some local regulators take a more light touch approach and others may take a more prescriptive stance.

Whilst the EU passporting system for financial services companies is no longer applicable to the UK post-Brexit, in Demetrious view, this arrangement brings to light the challenge of having one set of rules which, once adopted at a national level, result in inconsistencies in implementation.

The UK has long been a leading financial services centre which Demetriou suggests is evidenced in its largely competitive and proportionate approach to sector supervision given that regulators have had the opportunity to assess and refine their interventions.

In contrast, Demetriou points to the USwhich, she argues, has the most complex regulatory scheme as financial services are regulated at both the state and federal level, with a vast network of rules implemented and enforced with varying and overlapping scopes of authority.

Ultimately, without formal coordination amongst supervisory authorities businesses can find themselves in a regulatory minefield.

The potential for divergence across jurisdictions leaves global businesses in the sector grappling with inconsistent standards and requirements which is exacerbated by the fact that regions are at varying stages of advancement.

So if we are aware of these problems and inconsistencies, what opportunities are there to conquer them?

Demetriou pointed out that, in the UK, the sector is anticipating a post-Brexit radical overhaul of financial services regulation, primarily with the intention of retaining the UKs competitive edge in the sector and ensuring that we continue to be attractive to overseas markets.

The FCA has a clear mission for the industry to retain its legitimacy but to also still have the freedom to innovate. There is always a risk of the regulatory framework becoming a mere tick box exercise, she said.

The challenge is finding the sweet spot between fostering good industry practice without stifling the industry players with over-regulation and unnecessary bureaucracy, Demetriou added.

In the short-term, Demetriou expects to see a real emphasis on fraud prevention and Anti-Money Laundering.

Financial crime, unfortunately, continues to become more sophisticated and this, coupled with further technological advances, means that businesses need to invest time and money in tackling such a pervasive threat.

That being said, with the rise of e-money/digital cash and cryptocurrency it is increasingly important for companies to remain agile and responsive to compliance risk, she continued.

Ultimately, fixing the complexities of regulation in the payments industry is not necessarily about adding more measures into the mix.

Rather, the focus should be on polishing and where appropriate, standardising the systems we have across jurisdictions, to increase efficiency and allow the continued flourishing of the payments sector, Demetriou concluded.

View post:

Post-Brexit payments space is 'breeding ground for financial crime as Wild West culture' looms, warns rising City star - City A.M.

Brexit is still causing fractures in the relationship between the UK and the EU as Northern Ireland remains a sticking point. Lord Frost warned Brussels last week against massive and disproportionate retaliation if the UK decides to unilaterally suspend post-Brexit trade rules. The UK is considering enacting Article 16 a measure which could mean suspending parts of the Northern Ireland protocol. Prime Minister Boris Johnson and his colleagues have argued that the Protocol isn't working as it currently stands.

Brussels and London have attempted to resolve the dispute, but so far haven't reached an agreement.

This has also coincided with rising tensions over fishing in recent months.

As France repeatedly clashes with the UK over access to fishing waters, Lord Frost warned the EU in May that its member states must "get used to" the UK controlling its waters.

Lord Frost told Parliaments European Scrutiny Committee that fishing organisations and so on thought we had agreed five and a half years of no change thats not the case.

He added: We have the right to regulate our own waters in a totally different way to licence fishing vessels and so on.

"Getting used to that is at the root of some of the difficulties.

We have licenses for lots of French fishing vessels in fact. Im sure it will settle down.

The post-Brexit trade agreement sees British fishermen get 25 percent more fish in its own waters by 2025 than it did pre-Brexit.

This process has begun this year and will continue over the next four years, with regular re-negotiations on quotas occurring from 2025.

In recent weeks, the Channel Island Jersey has been at the centre of French anger over fishing rights.

Some French boats were denied permits to fish in the island's waters because of difficulty proving they had worked there prior to Brexit.

The UK National Federation of Fishermen's Organisations says that sorting out those legitimate boats from opportunists trying to take advantage of the situation is a normal, technical exercise, adding it is "best done through quiet dialogue and far from excitable politicians".

READ MORE:Brexit Britain boom as Qatar to invest 100m in Rolls-Royce

Yesterday, Prime Minister Johnson assured Jersey the UK will stand by it if France goes through with "unjustified" threats around fishing rights.

Mr Johnson met Jersey ministers and "underlined the strength of the UK-Jersey relationship and committed to continue working closely together on issues of mutual importance", said a Government spokesperson.

They added: "On fishing licences, the Prime Minister reaffirmed his support for Jersey's approach, which has been reasonable.

"He reiterated that the UK would continue to stand behind Jersey in the event that they were carried through, although he welcomed their deferral and said he hoped that they would be taken off the table permanently.

"Both sides agreed that they would continue to assess new evidence in support of the remaining licence applications and that technical discussions with the EU Commission and France would continue."

View post:

'Get used to it' Lord Frost warned EU to accept UK controls its fishing waters - Daily Express

Tuesday 16 November 2021 3:17 pm

Labour is still committed to getting a post-Brexit equivalence deal for the UKs financial services sector if elected, shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves has said.

Reeves told TheCityUKs national conference today that, if elected, Labour will fix some of the holes in the patchwork Brexit deal with the EU.

The UKs financial services sector has not been granted equivalence by the EU post-Brexit, which means the City has lost its wide-ranging access to European markets.

Brussels only grants equivalence to outside countries if they keep their financial services regulations within the orbit of the EUs.

Chancellor Rishi Sunak has already outlined a number of changes he wants to make to the UKs financial services rulebook post-Brexit, including changing share listings rules to attract more tech unicorns to go public in the UK, allowing blank-cheque Spacs to list in London and reducing capital requirements for insurance firms.

Reeves said that Labour still supports trying to get some sort of equivalence deal with the EU, after her predecessor Anneliese Dodds outlined these ambitions last year.

I want to ensure weve got the widest possible agreement [on equivalence], she said.

The current government hung financial services out to dry during Brexit negotiations, but it wasnt the only sector to experience this damning approach. We will make practical improvements to build on the national interest.

The vast majority of UK-based financial institutions were prepared to lose its pre-Brexit access to the EU from January this year.

Financial services institutions moved more than 1 trillion of assets and 7,600 jobs from London to other European capitals in anticipation of the UK not getting equivalence post-Brexit, according to EY figures.

This is far less than was expected.

London also lost its crown as Europes share trading capital in January, after a flow of transactions switched to Amsterdam.

The UKs capital has since caught up and share trading activity is very similar across London and Amsterdam.

Speaking about the prospect of equivalence in July, Sunak said: We are moving forward, continuing to cooperate on questions of global finance, but each as a sovereign jurisdiction with our own priorities.

. We now have the freedom to do things differently and better, and we intend to use it fully.

See the original post here:

Reeves says Labour still committed to post-Brexit equivalence for the City - City A.M.

The European Union urged Switzerland on Monday to set out a clear timetable for resolving issues over its place in the EU internal market by January after breaking off talks with its biggest trading partner in May.

Brussels has been pushing for a decade for a treaty that would sit atop a patchwork of bilateral accords and have the Swiss routinely adopt changes to single market rules.

It would also have provided a more effective way to resolve disputes.

Maros Sefcovic, the European Commissioner overseeing EU-Swiss affairs, told a news conference on Monday that the EU's door remained open, but that "it takes two to tango".

After a meeting with Swiss Foreign Minister Ignacio Cassis, he told reporters: "What we now need from Switzerland is the unambiguous political will to engage with us on the real issues that count and a credible timetable.

"In other words, any political dialogue must be focused and substantial."

The European Union wants Switzerland to agree to dynamic alignment of its laws with EU law, a level-playing field, a mechanism to settle disputes and regular contributions to EU funds for poorer EU members.

Mr Sefcovic added: "We will meet again in Davos in the second half of January to assess the progress.

READ MORE:Nexit fury as Shell leaves Netherlands to move to Brexit Britain

In May, Switzerland walked out of talks to replace its bilateral agreement with an overarching framework agreement with Brussels to manage their relationship.

Bern said the pact threatened its sovereignty and ability to protect its labour market.

The move was branded by some as Switzerland's "Brexit moment".

Switzerland has never been an EU member and rejected joining the European Economic Area in a referendum in 1992.

But it has enjoyed almost full access to the EUs single market through a series of 120 bilateral agreements and is a member of the blocs Schengen passport-free travel area.

The country has also been largely aligned with Brussels on a vast array of economic and legal matters.

Brussels claimed the framework agreement would have upgraded and enhanced their relationship.

Read more from the original source:

EU erupts at Switzerland as Bern's 'Brexit' stance turns heads: 'Takes two to tango' - Daily Express

Former MEP Lord Kamall has branded theEuropean Uniona project of white privilege" as he talked about the different COVID-19 self-isolation rules for overseas students compared to their British counterparts. Boris Johnson this weeksignaled tougher overseas travel rules and self-isolation for those without jabs.

Speaking in the House of Lords, Lord Kamall said: As someone whose family comes from outside the EU and somebody who's taught in universities.

And recognise the great asset that there is and then the great advantage there is being open to the world and global Britain.

I do share the frustration.

You know, we yes, we have left the EU, very much a project of white privilege moving to a more global outlook.

He continued: And it's really important that now we focus on the world generally.

So the issue is quite technical at the moment.

One of the things for the test and trace system to work is the fact that you need access to the underlying data and verification.

We will look at a number of different options on how we achieve that.

Boris Johnson has warned that travel restrictions and self-isolation rules for those who come into contact with positive Covid cases will be toughened for people who do not get their booster jab.

It came after the Joint Commitee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) on Monday recommended that the booster programme should be extended to include people aged 40 to 49.

Mr Johnson told a Downing St press conference: Its very clear that getting three jabs getting your booster will become an important fact and it will make life easier for you in all sorts of ways, and we will have to adjust our concept of what constitutes a full vaccination to take account of that. And I think that is increasingly obvious.

He added: As we can see from whats happening, the two jabs sadly do start to wane, so weve got to be responsible and weve got to reflect that fact in the way we measure what constitutes full vaccination.

Follow this link:

EU 'project of white privilege' former MEP erupts as Brexit hailed for 'global outlook' - Daily Express

SCOTLANDS deposit return scheme is not set to roll out on the previously promised date next year with Greens minister Lorna Slater pointing to the impacts of the pandemic and the mismanagement of Brexit for holding up the key policy.

Ms Slater, the Scottish Governments Circular Economy Minister told MSPs that she will announce an updated timeline for the scheme "in due course", adding the policy will begin "as soon as practically possible".

Industry leaders have called for the scheme to be delayed until at least September 2023.

Ms Slater said that the businesses "were and still are badly affected by the pandemic and the mismanagement of Brexit.

The minister labelled the policy as a flagship scheme of this Government, which was intended to be rolled out in 2022.

She said: Unfortunately, as you are all keenly aware I know, 2020 was an unprecedented year, the global pandemic and Brexit had a major impact on businesses, particularly retailers and those involved in their supply chains and challenges persist today.

Unfortunately, the very businesses who will be most instrumental in making the DRS operate, including hospitality businesses, small convenience stores, and small brewers were and still are badly affected by the pandemic and the mismanagement of Brexit.

Ms Slater also warned there have also been unresolved issues including a lack of clarity from the UK Government on the VAT treatment of deposits, which she warned adds unnecessary cost, time delay and risk to the project.

She said: I have written to the UK Government twice and offered to meet to discuss further as did the former cabinet secretary for the environment. Industry too has written.

However, I only heard yesterday from the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, that they do not see a route to remove that from deposits. This is deeply disappointing.

The Financial Secretary has offered to work with my officials and industry on potential VAT adjustments.

I understand this falls well short of what is needed here. But I have tasked my officials to work on this urgently to understand the implications and agree a way forward. The Government is committed to the scheme being operational as soon as practically possible.

Ms Slater added that her officials and the Circularity Scotland Limited company will agree a final timescale and clear milestones for delivery, insisting that she will announce this schedule to Parliament in due course.

Conservative MSP Maurice Golden said that if the scheme is going to be delayed, hopefully ministers at least use the time wisely to improve the proposed deposit return scheme.

He added: They can do that by ensuring a future-proof of open standard system compatible with the rest of the UK and a digital app allowing home collections is essential to stop disabled and vulnerable groups being effectively excluded.

Mr Golden also brought up the issue of transparency.

He added: Deposit return is shrouded in secrecy with a multi-million pound tender process hidden from the public and this Parliament.

"FOIs wont work because the SNP used a private company to oversee it.

So, we dont need to see the commercial responses but will the minister release the brief and specification that has been provided to bidders?

Ms Slater said that during the original debate to introduce the deposit return scheme, the Conservatives pushed for a delay to the scheme and then a further delay.

Pointing to the call for home collections, Ms Slater stressed that was absolutely part of the legislation for the deposit return scheme.

She added: The UK has not as yet defined their return scheme so there is nothing yet for us to align to.

The Scottish Government is leading the way on this as with so many things.

Labours Mercedes Villabla warned that VAT deposits haven't been a barrier to implementation of deposit return schemes in other European countries.

She added: We know how concerned the minister was about industry lobbying causing delays to the scheme. So can she confirm what discussion she has had with large-scale producers to ensure that it is they are not local authorities who will foot the bill of any delay?

And finally, we acknowledge that the minister has committed to come back to the chamber to outline the final timeline. But can she confirm today when she will return to the chamber?

Ms Slater claimed she was currently engaging with all the businesses involved to figure out what the shortest practical time it is possible to implement this scheme, given the challenges around Brexit and around the pandemic that is currently still raging.

She added: This scheme will be implemented by industry for industry so industry engagement is at the core of this scheme.

This is how the scheme will be implemented - it isbased on the producer pays principle.

Ms Slater said that a firm date for industry as to when this system will go live is absolutely critical, adding she will return to the chamber as soon as possible to make that announcement.

The Scottish Beer & Pub Association (SBPA), which is a founder member of Circularity Scotland Ltd the government appointed scheme administrator has called for the scheme to be delayed until at least September 2023.

Scottish Beer & Pub Association chief executive, Emma McClarkin, said:The beer and pub sector cautiously welcomes confirmation of a delay.

"Unfortunately, due to a variety of factors, it would have been impossible for the scheme to be ready by the previous date of July 2022.

We all share the ambition of the Scottish Government to reduce emissions, improve recycling and speedily move towards a more circular economy this delay is crucial in that.

"DRS will have massive impact on both brewers and publicans, to ensure a successful roll-out of the scheme, a delay until at least September 2023 is required.

Read the original post:

Further deposit return delay blamed on Covid, Brexit and VAT row with UK Government - HeraldScotland

As things stand, under the terms of the Northern Ireland Protocol agreed by the UK and EU, it is necessary.

To avoid creating a post-Brexit hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic and endangering the Good Friday Agreement EU goods should be checked when they arrive on the mainland UK.

Sign up to our Opinion newsletter

Sign up to our Opinion newsletter

And so, the Scottish government has just handed a 310,000 contract to US engineering giant Tetra Tech to help find a suitable site. However, the actual construction of the post has been halted until there is greater clarity from the UK government on the long-term funding, the need for this infrastructure, and more information about the timescales when controls might come into effect.

The problem is that the UK government has been threatening to invoke Article 16 of the protocol that allows either side to take safeguarding measures if they believe the current arrangements are causing serious problems. The UK argues this is within the terms of the recently signed agreement; the EU disagrees.

Whatever the rights or wrongs, the reality is that it risks blowing up into a serious trade dispute with the EU unless calmer heads prevail.

Following the claim by Boris Johnsons former aide, Dominic Cummings, that the UK government always intended to ditch parts of the Northern Ireland Protocol and that cheating foreigners is a core part of the job, ministers need to be working hard to demonstrate this is not the case.

For this is not only about peace in Northern Ireland, and good trading and diplomatic relations with the EU, as vital as both those things are.

At a time when the UK is looking to sign trade deals with as many countries as possible, it is also about Britains reputation on the world stage.

The phrase Perfidious Albion goes back centuries but has become virtually archaic because successive modern-day governments carefully cultivated good relations with the rest of the world.

If the UK fails to find an acceptable compromise with the EU soon, the uncertainty over a border post may be echoed by uncertainty on a global scale about whether Britain can be trusted. Good reputations are hard to win, but easily lost.

A message from the Editor:

Thank you for reading this article. We're more reliant on your support than ever as the shift in consumer habits brought about by coronavirus impacts our advertisers.

Follow this link:

Brexit Britain needs to earn a reputation for being trustworthy, not return to the days of 'Perfidious Albion' Scotsman comment - The Scotsman

Chair of the International Trade Select Committee Angus MacNeil ruthlessly interrogated Boris Johnson over the UK's trade deals with New Zealand and Australia post-Brexit. Mr MacNeil wanted specific numbers from the Prime Minister on how much the UK would recoup from these deals following forecasts Brexit will cost the UK GDP around 4.9 percent. The tense clash saw Mr Johnson erupt at Mr MacNeil as he delivered a lively offensive against the SNPand accused them of being against "every free trade deal that was ever done."

Speaking on the Liaison Committee, Mr Johnson fielded questions from Select Committee chairs about his actions in government.

Mr MacNeil was invited to ask his questions and chose to grill the Prime Minister on Brexit.

He explained figures suggested Brexit will cost the UK 4.9 percent of GDP and wanted to illustrate that by converting it into 494.

Mr MacNeil then asked how much of that 494 would be recouped from the Australia and New Zealand deal.

Mr Johnson replied: I think that both deals will give opportunities I cant give you numbers, it depends on how much the Australians decide to sell

Mr MacNeil attempted to interject several times but was told off and informed he should let Mr Johnson finish his answer before coming back at him.

The Prime Minister said it was a good opportunity for Scottish beef and whiskey and believed exports could increase by 100billion across the UK.

Mr Johnson then went on the offensive and accused Mr MacNeil of downplaying the importance of the trade deal.

He could be heard shouting over Mr MacNeil: Are you turning your nose up at that?

Are you against it? SNP is every free trade deal that is ever done!

Never let it be forgotten that they were against joining the EU!

Mr MacNeil wanted Mr Johnson to stop heckling himself before explained out of the 494 from earlier, the Australian deal would take back 2 and the New Zealand one would take back 1.

The New Zealand and Australian free trade deals ends tariffs on certain goods with the main one being agriculture products.

However, UK farming unions fear there could be a fall in food quality from the deals as imported foods may not follow the same high standards.

National Farmers' Union Vice-President Tom Bradshaw told Express.co.uk he was not against trade deals but was concerned the Australian and New Zealand deals gave little benefit to the UK.

He was concerned some imported products, like meats, would not match the same standards in the UK.

Originally posted here:

'SNP is against every deal!' Boris Johnson erupts over tense Brexit trade agreement probe - Daily Express

Scottish devolution is under threat from the Conservatives and "there is little anyone can do to stop them", John Swinney has claimed.

The Deputy First Minister used a speech today to launch a fresh attack on the UK Government over the controversial Internal Market Act introduced in the wake of Brexit.

The bill was passed last year by MPs at Westminster despite the Scottish Government t aking the rare step of withholding its consent.

Tory ministers argue the Internal Market is required as it harmonises rules and regulations on trade across the four UK nations.

But the SNP insists it is is little more than a power grab that allows Westminster to legislate on areas that should be the preserve of the Scottish Parliament.

Swinney told the Institute for Government the UK's present constitutional arrangement meant little could be done to stop Westminster from interfering with devolved administrations.

This UK Government is engaged in a project of undermining good governance in these islands," he said. "And under the UKs constitution there is little anyone can do to stop them.

That project exposes the fact that the UK is not what many people in Scotland believed, or hoped, it to be - a partnership of equals.

The SNP MSP claimed the passing of the Internal Market Act showed that instead of an arrangement based on recognition of each others areas of competence, interest and expertise, on trust and agreement, and which built on existing rules, we got the opposite he will say.

Swinney added: The Internal Market Act imposes a rigid system, with very limited exceptions, and with no consideration of the UKs inbuilt constitutional and economic imbalances. It is the assertion of centralising political power in the guise of even-handed market management.

Its primary purpose is to undermine devolution, constrain the choices of the devolved governments and legislatures, and diminish alternative centres of decision making and power in the UK.

A spokeswoman for the UK Government said: Now more than ever, people in Scotland want to see the UK and Scottish Governments working together to protect lives, jobs and recover from the effects of Covid-19 on our economy and public services.

The UK is by far the biggest market for Scotlands goods and services, accounting for 60 per cent of our trade.

The UK Internal Market Act ensures Scotland benefits as a full partner within the UK economy.

To sign up to the Daily Record Politics newsletter, click here.

More:

Tories accused of 'undermining' Scottish devolution with Brexit power grab - Daily Record