Connect with us

News

Rachel Reeves to seek ‘improved’ UK-EU trade terms if Labour wins election

Published

on

Rachel Reeves to seek ‘improved’ UK-EU trade terms if Labour wins election

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves would seek to break down EU trade barriers and secure billions of pounds through an early international investment summit if Labour wins the general election.

Reeves, in an interview with the Financial Times, signalled an ambitious push to revisit parts of Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal, including seeking closer alignment with EU rules in areas such as the chemicals sector and a better deal for workers in the City of London.

“We would look to improve our trading relationship with Europe, and do trade deals around the world,” she said, as she vowed that an incoming Labour government would “reset” Britain’s global image.

Advertisement

Her comments signal that Labour wants to go further than previously thought in seeking better trade terms with the EU, tackling head-on the “adversarial” Conservative post-Brexit relationship with Brussels and ditching a Tory fixation on regulatory divergence.

“I don’t think anyone voted Leave because they were not happy that chemicals regulations were the same across Europe,” Reeves said. “When my constituency voted leave it was purely because of immigration.” 

Labour has been reluctant to talk about Brexit in the election campaign, but as polling day approaches — and with the party 20 points ahead of the Conservatives — Reeves and Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer have given more glimpses of what they hope to achieve.

She also said Labour would take risks and was willing to “upset some people” to unlock the potential of the British economy, adding that she would use her political capital by pushing for growth rather than “having a fight about different taxes”. 

Ahead of the July 4 election, the Conservatives have warned of a Labour “tax trap”. But Reeves insisted the party could fund its priorities without resorting to tax rises on the wealthy, adding: “We’re not seeking a mandate to increase people’s taxes. We’re seeking a mandate to grow the economy.”

Advertisement

On Brexit, any attempt to reopen what Starmer has called Johnson’s “botched” 2020 trade deal with the EU would be highly complicated; there is little appetite in Brussels for a renegotiation and long-standing opposition to the idea of Britain “cherry-picking” parts of the single market.

Reeves talked about a “bespoke” arrangement for the chemicals industry, which is in talks with the government about a new regulatory system intended to avoid £2bn of extra costs associated with having to register products with a new UK regime. 

She reiterated Labour’s existing red lines in the area, saying there would be no rejoining the single market or customs union, and that freedom of movement and a deal on youth mobility were off the cards. These will limit the scope of any future EU deal.

Reeves stressed the importance of seeking greater mutual recognition of professional qualifications with the EU, pointing to the benefits this would entail to the services sector, including financial services.

“The majority of people in the City have not regarded Brexit as being a great opportunity for their businesses,” she said, arguing that services and financial services were “pretty much excluded” from Johnson’s Brexit deal.

Advertisement

But she said that Labour’s manifesto promise to seek a mutual recognition deal for professional qualifications with the EU, along with a veterinary deal and improved touring rights for UK artists were “examples” of what she wanted to achieve. “That’s not exclusive,” she said.

Reeves said she accepted the Office for Budget Responsibility’s assessment that Brexit would lop 4 per cent off Britain’s productivity potential.

The shadow chancellor, who on Monday will host senior business leaders at a meeting of her new “shadow” British Infrastructure Council, said she wanted a Labour government to hit the ground running and exploit the fact that the world would be looking afresh at the UK after election day. 

Among the further steps in the first 100 days of a Labour government would be an investment summit that aimed to lure in foreign investors who had been deterred by political instability in the UK, she said.

Reeves said she had spoken that morning to a business leader in the City who had said their global chief executive had been reluctant to come to a recent UK investment summit organised by Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s government. 

Advertisement

“They said ‘What’s the point, we’re just getting a bit tired of what’s happening in the UK. Do I have to come to this?’,” Reeves said. “This is a real reset moment to a different way of doing government.”

She added: “It’s not just inviting businesses in for a summit, but really bringing them into the centre of government. I want to make the Treasury not just a tax-and-spending department but a department for growth.”

Reeves said there was “a role for investment” from countries including China and Saudi Arabia, but added that it was right that Sunak’s government had excluded Chinese investment from the rollout of broadband and future nuclear projects. 

News

Trump claims US stockpiles mean wars can be fought ‘forever’; Kristi Noem testifies before Congress – US politics live

Published

on

Trump claims US stockpiles mean wars can be fought ‘forever’; Kristi Noem testifies before Congress – US politics live

Trump says US stockpiles mean “wars can be fought ‘forever’”

In a late night post on Truth Social, Donald Trump said that the US munitions stockpiles “at the medium and upper medium grade, never been higher or better”.

He added that the US has a “virtually unlimited supply of these weapons”, meaning that “wars can be fought ‘forever’”.

This comes after Trump said that the US-Israel war on Iran could go beyond the four-five weeks that the administration initially predicted. The president also did not rule out the possibility of US boots on the ground in Iran during an interview with the New York Post on Monday.

Advertisement

“I rebuilt the military in my first term, and continue to do so. The United States is stocked, and ready to WIN, BIG!!!,” he wrote.

Share

Key events

During his opening remarks, Senate judicicary committee chairman, Chuck Grassley, blamed Democrats for the ongoing shutdown Department of Homeland Security (DHS) but highlighted four agencies: the Secret Service, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), and the Coast Guard.

Democrats are demanding tighter guardrails for federal immigration enforcement, but a sweeping tax bill signed into law last year conferred $75bn for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which means the agency is still functional amid the wider department shuttering.

Share
Continue Reading

News

Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP

Published

on

Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP

The Supreme Court

Win McNamee/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Win McNamee/Getty Images

The Supreme Court on Monday intervened in New York’s redistricting process, blocking a lower court decision that would likely have flipped a Republican congressional district into a Democratic district.    
  
At issue is the midterm redrawing of New York’s 11th congressional district, including Staten Island and a small part of Brooklyn. The district is currently held by a Republican, but on Jan. 21, a state Supreme Court judge ruled that the current district dilutes the power of Black and Latino voters in violation of the state constitution.  
  
GOP Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, who represents the district, and the Republican co-chair of the state Board of Elections promptly appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the justices to block the redrawing as an unconstitutional “racial gerrymander.” New York’s congressional election cycle was set to officially begin Feb. 24, the opening day for candidates to seek placement on the ballot.  
  
As in this year’s prior mid-decade redistricting fights — in Texas and California — the Trump administration backed the Republicans.   
 
Voters and the State of New York contended it’s too soon for the Supreme Court to wade into this dispute. New York’s highest state court has not issued a final judgment, so the voters asserted that if the Supreme Court grants relief now “future stay applicants will see little purpose in waiting for state court rulings before coming to this Court” and “be rewarded for such gamesmanship.” The state argues this is an issue for “New York courts, not federal courts” to resolve, and there is sufficient time for the dispute to be resolved on the merits. 
  
The court majority explained the decision to intervene in 101 words, which the three dissenting liberal justices  summarized as “Rules for thee, but not for me.” 
 
The unsigned majority order does not explain the Court’s rationale. It says only how long the stay will last, until the case moves through the New York State appeals courts. If, however, the losing party petitions and the court agrees to hear the challenge, the stay extends until the final opinion is announced. 
 
Dissenting from the decision were Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Writing for the three, Sotomayor  said that  if nonfinal decisions of a state trial court can be brought to highest court, “then every decision from any court is now fair game.” More immediately, she noted, “By granting these applications, the Court thrusts itself into the middle of every election-law dispute around the country, even as many States redraw their congressional maps ahead of the 2026 election.” 

Monday’s Supreme Court action deviates from the court’s hands-off pattern in these mid-term redistricting fights this year. In two previous cases — from Texas and California — the court refused to intervene, allowing newly drawn maps to stay in effect.  
  
Requests for Supreme Court intervention on redistricting issues has been a recurring theme this term, a trend that is likely to grow.  Earlier last month  the high court allowed California to use a voter-approved, Democratic-friendly map.  California’s redistricting came in response to a GOP-friendly redistricting plan in Texas that the Supreme Court also permitted to move forward. These redistricting efforts are expected to offset one another.     
   
But the high court itself has yet to rule on a challenge to Louisiana’s voting map, which was drawn by the state legislature after the decennial census in order to create a second majority-Black district.  Since the drawing of that second majority-black district, the state has backed away from that map, hoping to return to a plan that provides for only one majority-minority district.    
     
The Supreme Court’s consideration of the Louisiana case has stretched across two terms. The justices failed to resolve the case last term and chose to order a second round of arguments this term adding a new question: Does the state’s intentional creation of a second majority-minority district violate the constitution’s Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments’ guarantee of the right to vote and the authority of Congress to enforce that mandate?    
Following the addition of the new question, the state of Louisiana flipped positions to oppose the map it had just drawn and defended in court. Whether the Supreme Court follows suit remains to be seen. But the tone of the October argument suggested that the court’s conservative supermajority is likely to continue undercutting the 1965 Voting Rights Act.   

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California

Published

on

Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California

Note: Map shows the area with a shake intensity of 3 or greater, which U.S.G.S. defines as “weak,” though the earthquake may be felt outside the areas shown.  All times on the map are Pacific time. The New York Times

A minor earthquake with a preliminary magnitude of 3.5 struck in Central California on Monday, according to the United States Geological Survey.

The temblor happened at 7:17 a.m. Pacific time about 6 miles northwest of Pinnacles, Calif., data from the agency shows.

As seismologists review available data, they may revise the earthquake’s reported magnitude. Additional information collected about the earthquake may also prompt U.S.G.S. scientists to update the shake-severity map.

Source: United States Geological Survey | Notes: Shaking categories are based on the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale. When aftershock data is available, the corresponding maps and charts include earthquakes within 100 miles and seven days of the initial quake. All times above are Pacific time. Shake data is as of Monday, March 2 at 10:20 a.m. Eastern. Aftershocks data is as of Monday, March 2 at 11:18 a.m. Eastern.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending