Markus Andrews

The government cannot guarantee that Britain’s public sector workers will get an above-inflation pay rise next year, the business minister has said.Chancellor Rishi Sunak has announced he is ending the year-long public sector pay freeze ahead of his Budget on Wednesday.But business minister Paul Scully said the government could not be sure the pay rises would be above predicted inflation of 4 per cent – saying it would depend on the advice of the pay review bodies.“The chancellor is keen to give people a rise,” he told Sky News on Tuesday. “They [the pay review bodies] will then take that into account as they look to what should be an appropriate rise for the public sector, given the public finances.”Challenged whether it could effectively amount to a pay cut, Mr Scully conceded: “It could be anything,” adding: “We will see where we are come next April when the review bodies have reported.”TUC general secretary Frances O’Grady has warned that pay rises had to be above inflation – and called on the chancellor to increase budgets at government departments, warning that pay rises could not come at the cost of funding public services.“The pay freeze won’t be over unless the chancellor fully funds pay rises above the rising cost of living. Otherwise, he will force departments to choose between pay cuts or service cuts,” said the union boss.Unison union general secretary Christina McAnea said the pay freeze would continue “in all but name” unless Whitehall departments were given extra money by Mr Sunak to fund the wage increases.Mr Scully could not guarantee that government departments would get more money at the Budget, but said he did not think cuts would be necessary.Mr Sunak in November announced pay restraint for police, teachers and other frontline workers between April 2021 and March 2022, with the exception of the NHS and workers earning less than £24,000, following heavy government borrowing during the Covid crisis.It comes as the government confirms that the national minimum wage is to increase for adults over 23 from £8.91 to £9.50.But with rising living costs, a national insurance rise on the way, and the universal credit uplift cut, Mr Scully admitted he could guarantee that people on low incomes would be better off next year.“I can’t make that assumption in terms of inflation and other things,” he told Sky News.The business minister acknowledged the economy is going through a “difficult time” in terms of cost-of-living pressures – but said a 6.6 per cent increase in the national living wage was part of a “suite of measures” designed to support people on low incomes.“We know there are pressures. We know this is a difficult time for the economy, for people in the country in terms of the cost of living,” he told BBC Breakfast. “The 6.6 per cent increase is quite a substantial increase … It is still keeping us on target to end low pay by 2024.”The Institute of Fiscal Studies said those on universal credit will see their disposable income go up by only £250 a year because their taxes go up and benefit receipt falls as their earnings increase.Labour’s shadow chief secretary to the Treasury Bridget Phillipson said the Conservative government’s decision last year to freeze pay for frontline workers was “damaging and unsustainable”.She added: “The government must work to ensure a fair settlement and reflect the vital work of all key workers including many who have been burnt out over the course of the pandemic.” More

A “go-slow” strategy for customs checks coming in and out of the UK before Christmas is reportedly being prepared by France as the row over fishing rights after Brexit escalates. France will finalise a set of potential sanctions on Tuesday which could be rolled out if its fishermen are not given greater access to UK waters. Fury was sparked after the government in London announced last month that it had approved just 12 of the 47 applications it had received from French small boats. Paris called the move “unacceptable”. Fishing industry representatives in France have since threatened to block the port of Calais and stop exports to the UK in the run-up to Christmas if they are not granted more permits to fish off Britain’s coast. Now, the Telegraph reports one of the main concerns for UK officials is the country deliberately disputing trade across the Channel. It said France could order custom officials to cause backlogs by conducting more checks on shipments to and from Britain and hit companies with new surcharges for tougher controls at the border. The government in Paris has previously suggested that Britain’s imported energy supply could be disrupted in retaliation for a lack of access to UK waters.Annick Girardin, France’s maritime minister, has told French fishermen that she “won’t give up” as the country’s prime minister Jean Castex prepares to warn negotiators they have until midnight on Friday to resolve the fishing row. The potential sanctions which will be unveiled on Tuesday could be rolled out as early as 1 November. Ms Girardin said: “We are one week away from the deadline set by France for answers from the UK. I want to give clear visibility to the fishermen and remind them the French government is by their side. I want my licences back.”France has asked its European Union partners to act as one in the dispute, urging the 27-nation bloc to prepare retaliation measures.Earlier this month, France and 10 other EU nations issued a joint declaration denouncing UK’s attitude over fishing licenses.The cross-Channel tensions over fishing have been long-running, with earlier rows leading to Navy ships being scrambled to Jersey amid concerns of a blockade of the island. More

The government should stop using aid cash to invest in fossil fuels abroad if it wants to be taken seriously on climate matters, MPs have said.In a striking report days before the UK hosts an international climate summit, the cross-party international development committee said the government’s investment policy “raises questions about the UK’s credibility as a ‘force for good’ and its commitment to net zero”.The MPs say the government should use the next two years to transfer cash invested abroad in fossil fuels into renewable energy projects.Currently the CDC, the government’s development finance arm, invests in fossil fuels projects – an approach aid charities have described as “mind boggling” and said is “undermining efforts” to tackle the climate crisis.According to figures collated by the group Tearfund, the CDC’s fossil fuel portfolio, is worth at least £700m.Sarah Champion, who chairs the international development committee, said tackling global climate change “means tackling the social and economic problems of vulnerable communities most affected by it”.“There are some simple actions the government should do straight away – it’s a no brainer that it should start by ending all investments in projects involving fossil fuels,” she said.“It’s the industrialised countries that caused most of the climate change. It’s now our moral duty – as well as being in our own interests – to help clean this dangerous mess up.” In the report, released on Tuesday, the MP say they are concerned about the broad list of exemptions in the government’s new fossil fuel policy as it raises questions about the UK’s credibility as a “force for good” and its commitment to net zero.They add: “We therefore urge the government by 31 October 2022 to drastically scale up its investment in renewable energy abroad and to end all exemptions for direct and indirect investment in fossil fuel projects abroad through CDC and other channels apart from support for clean cooking methods for people living in poverty.”The cross party group, which provides parliamentary scrutiny for aid spending, also say the government should “instruct CDC to publish a full list of its existing investments in coal, oil and gas and how they intend to divest from fossil fuels by 31 October 2022”.The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) has been contacted for comment on this story. More

Australia will commit to a target of net zero carbon emissions by 2050 but will not increase its goal for 2030 at an upcoming U.N. climate summit in Scotland Prime Minister Scott Morrison said Tuesday.Morrison’s conservative Liberal Party-led government was narrowly re-elected in 2019 with a climate policy that opposed the 2050 net zero target adopted by the opposition center-left Labor Party. Morrison wrote in an opinion piece published Tuesday in Australian News Corp newspapers that his government will indeed commit to the 2050 net zero goal, but will not up its election pledge to reduce emissions between 26% and 28% below 2005 levels by 2030.“I said we would meet and beat this target and we will,” Morrison wrote.Getting to the net zero commitment took political wrangling on the part of Morrison’s ruling party, including winning the support of a rural-based junior coalition member — the Nationals party — with a number of concessions.One of them was that Resources Minister Keith Pitt, who maintains Australia will continue exporting coal for decades, was made the fifth Nationals’ Cabinet minister. Morrison on Monday announced Pitt’s promotion.Morrison will announce further details of the agreement with the Nationals after they are explained to government lawmakers at a meeting later Tuesday at Parliament House.The conditions also include a government review every five years of the economic impacts of the net zero target outside major cities. The first assessment would be delivered in 2023, The Australian newspaper reported.Finance Minister Simon Birmingham described the reviews as a “health check” on how various parts of Australia were being effected by the transition to net zero.“What it will do is focus the minds of the government of the day very clearly on where additional investments may be necessary to help ensure the transition,” Birmingham told Australian Broadcasting Corp.British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who will host the upcoming summit in Glasgow, Scotland, known as COP26, congratulated Australia on its net zero ambition.“That was very difficult for Australia because Australia’s very heavily dependent on coal, on lots of carbon-producing industries, and they’ve done a heroic thing,” Johnson said, referring to the 2050 commitment.However Australia is likely to be criticized in Glasgow for its relatively weak 2030 target. The United States has committed to reductions of between 50% and 52% below 2005 levels. Britain has pledged to cut emissions by 68% below 1990 levels.Australia is one of the world’s largest exporters of coal and liquified natural gas. The nation is also one of the world’s worst greenhouse gas emitters per capita because of its heavy reliance on coal-fired power.COP26 will assess progress since nations agreed in the 2015 Paris accord to limit warming to less than 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit). The meeting in Glasgow is widely seen as the last chance to hold global warming to 1.5 C (2.7 F) above pre-industrial levels. More

The government is set to lift the public sector pay freeze it imposed on millions of workers last year, Rishi Sunak will announce on Wednesday.The partial pay freeze was imposed by the chancellor in response to the coronavirus pandemic, and was described by unions as “kick in the teeth” for key workers who it hit.Critics accused the chancellor of economic mismanagement for taking demand out of the economy during a downturn, but Mr Sunak said he wanted public sector wages to match “the context of the wider economic climate” in which wages were falling.The Treasury briefed the wage plans to the media on Monday evening ahead of the chancellor’s Budget on Wednesday – despite a warning from the Commons speaker not to do so.“The economic impact and uncertainty of the virus meant we had to take the difficult decision to pause public sector pay,” chancellor Rishi Sunak said in a statement.“Along with our Plan for Jobs, this action helped us protect livelihoods at the height of the pandemic.“And now, with the economy firmly back on track, it’s right that nurses, teachers and all the other public sector workers who played their part during the pandemic see their wages rise.”TUC General secretary Frances O’Grady warned that pay rises had to be above inflation and said the rises could not come at the cost of funding public services.“The pay freeze won’t be over unless the chancellor fully funds pay rises above the rising cost of living. Otherwise, he will force departments to choose between pay cuts or service cuts,” she said.The Treasury said the pay rises would depend on the recommendations of independent pay review bodies in particular sectors.Bridget Phillipson, Labour’s shadow chief secretary to the Treasury said: “With a new deal for workers, exploitative practices like zero hours contracts banned, Fire and rehire outlawed, a minimum wage of at least £10 an hour and fair pay agreements, a Labour government will transform work and raise standards.”This Conservative government’s choice last year to freeze pay for so many frontline workers, who have been among the real heroes of the pandemic, was damaging and unsustainable. “The government must work to ensure a fair settlement and reflect the vital work of all key workers including many who have been burnt out over the course of the pandemic.”The original freeze affected the majority of public sector workers, but some, including NHS staff, were not affected. Mr Sunak was accused of playing “divide and rule” by targeting specific workers.UK inflation measured on the consumer prices index hit 3 per cent in August, up from 1 per cent in March this year.It comes as the government confirms that the national minimum wage is to increase for adults over 23 to £9.50. More

Hopes for a breakthrough on tackling the climate crisis at Cop26 are fading after Boris Johnson admitted he is “very worried” the summit will fail and it was revealed poor nations will not receive the $100bn of help they were promised until 2023 – three years late.With just six days until the crucial Glasgow gathering, the United Nations also released fresh alarming evidence that the world is “way off track” in curbing greenhouse gas emissions.Speaking to children in Downing Street, the prime minister dropped his previous optimism about the chances of reaching an agreement to deliver net zero emissions by 2050.“It will be very, very tough, this summit, and I’m very worried because it might go wrong and we might not get the agreements that we need,” he admitted – while insisting it “can be done”.It was then confirmed that rich countries will not reach their long-promised target of $100bn a year to help developing nations adapt to the climate emergency until three years later than originally planned.The cash is crucial to winning the trust of poorer countries to make their own CO2-cutting commitments, but the 2020 target has been missed. There is “confidence” it will be met in 2023, a report to Cop26 said.Oxfam said it meant the money would be “three years late”, while ActionAid called the announcement “the bare minimum needed to build trust in the climate talks”.Mr Johnson has made the $100bn fund a personal mission for the summit, although the UK’s own contribution – of around £2.3bn a year until 2025 – has drawn criticism.The prime minister has also talked up the prospects for a deal to halt runaway climate change, sparking tensions with his more cautious envoy, the Cop26 president Alok Sharma.But he switched tack in a press conference with school children, warning “it is very, very, very far from clear that we will get the progress that we need”.Mr Johnson also got into a bizarre spat with the head of the World Wildlife Fund when he described recycling as a “red herring” because cutting plastic use is the key. Tanya Steele, the WWF chief executive, said that went too far.With less than a week until the summit, around half of the world’s 20 biggest economies have yet to announce their emission contributions to meet the aim to “keep 1.5 degrees within reach”.In a further blow, the leaders of big emitters Russia and Brazil will not be in Glasgow and President Xi of China is unlikely to make the trip – although India’s prime minister, Narendra Modi, is now travelling.Mr Johnson – who last month told the UN it was easy to go green – said it was “touch and go” whether the goals set for Glasgow would now be met.Downing Street denied a change of tone, insisting he was simply being “realistic” about the prospects for success, but Labour accused the prime minister of trying to “shift the goalposts and manage down expectations”, instead of showing leadership.Germany and Canada, which had responsibility for piling on fresh pressure, said the figure would be hit in 2023 “based on pledges made by developed countries as of 20 October 2021”.“Making good on a promise made more than a decade ago is setting a pretty low bar for a successful Cop26,” said Teresa Anderson, ActionAid International’s climate policy coordinator.Jan Kowalzig, senior climate policy adviser at Oxfam, protested: “This shortfall, which started to accumulate in 2020, will likely amount to several tens of billions of dollars.”The report failed to set out which countries are the worst offenders – but Australia, Canada, the US, Italy, Spain, Portugal and Greece have all been criticised in the past.The UK government admitted it was “disappointing that the goal has not been met so far”, but Mr Sharma insisted it was “a step towards rebuilding trust” with developing countries.But Matthew Pennycock, Labour’s climate change spokesman, called the wait until 2023 “of the utmost concern”.“This is a matter of trust for states on the frontline of the climate crisis and every wealthy country falling short, including the UK, will need to do more to reassure them,” he said.Meanwhile, the report from the UN’s World Meteorological Organisation laid bare the scale of the task in Glasgow, if the climate emergency is to be averted.It found the world is on course for a temperature increase by the end of this century far in excess of the Paris Agreement target of 2C – let alone the 1.5C which is the government’s aim for Cop26.Levels of climate-heating gases in the atmosphere hit record levels in 2020, despite Covid lockdowns, and the trend has continued in 2021. More

The UK’s Brexit minister has rejected a compromise plan over the question of how much power EU judges should have in Northern Ireland.It comes after reports that the European Court of Justice could have its role downgraded in the territory but still play a part in overseeing the Brexit deal. Answering questions at a parliamentary committee hearing, Lord Frost said the UK was “not interested in arrangements which would keep the court in by some other name”.And he said it could not be put “at one removed” from decisions to satisfy the UK.“What we’d like to see instead is an arbitration mechanism, which is normal in these sort of treaties; it is exactly what we have in the trade and co-operation agreement (TCA),” he said.The minister added: “It’s highly unusual in an international treaty to have disputes settled in the court of one of the parties and that is the fundamental principle that we take into this, and the fundamental thing we need to remove from the arrangements going forward.”Lord Frost agreed to exactly this plan two years ago when he personally negotiated the agreement, which he now blames for disruption to trade.Asked whether he could be leaving room for another role for the ECJ in the agreement, he added: “I think many people have been trying to play on the words that we use to make them bear a meaning that they won’t support and to explore nuances that don’t exist.”The minister is currently leading talks with Brussels over the agreement, which has governed Northern Ireland’s trade relationship with the EU and Great Britain since Brexit.He last week welcomed EU proposals to reduce paperwork and checks on goods travelling across the Irish Sea, and said they were the basis for negotiations.But he told MPs on Monday: “The problem with them is that they don’t go far enough.“I’m not sure they would quite deliver the kind of ambitious freeing-up of trade between Great Britain and Northern Ireland that we want to see, but what we’re trying to test is whether they could find the basis to go further than what they have put on the table.“That’s the kind of discussions we have been having and it has been quite constructive so far, but the gaps between us remain significant, and there is a lot of working through to go.”Lord Frost said the problem needed to be solved this autumn. He also blasted the EU for dragging its feet on whether the UK should be allowed to participate in EU programmes, questioning whether the bloc was acting in “good faith”.Under proposals to change the NI agreement reported by The Times, day-to-day disputes would be handled by an independent arbitration panel – with the ECJ only called in to interpret European Union law on a limited basis where required.The EU says the ECJ must have a role in the agreement because it allows Northern Ireland to stay inside the single market and customs union. Under the EU’s treaties, only the ECJ can interpret European law. The Northern Ireland protocol was drawn up to prevent a hard border between Ireland and Northern Ireland, a requirement of the island’s peace process; it does this by moving customs and regulatory checks to the Irish Sea, between Northern Ireland and Great Britain. More

Monday’s military coup in Sudan threatens to wreck the country’s fragile transition to democracy, more than two years after a popular uprising forced the removal of longtime autocrat Omar al-Bashir The move comes after months of mounting tensions between the military and civilian authorities. Protesters are in the streets denouncing the takeover, and troops have opened fire, killing some of the marches, opening the door for greater turmoil in the country of 40 million.Here is how Sudan reached this point:WHAT HAPPENED MONDAY?The military dissolved the transitional government of Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok as well as the Sovereign Council, a power-sharing body of military officers and civilians that had been ruling Sudan since late 2019.Gen. Abdel-Fattah Burhan announced that the military would hold power until elections can be held in July 2023. Declaring a state of emergency, the top military official said a government of technocrats would be formed to administer until elections are held.His announcement came hours after the military arrested Hamdok along with several other senior officials and political leaders.WHAT HAPPENS NOW?The United States European Union and United Nations have denounced the coup, but much depends on how much leverage they put on Sudan’s military. The country is in need of international aid to get through its economic crisis. On the other side, Sudan’s generals have strong ties with Egypt and Gulf countries like Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, which so far have stopped short of criticizing the takeover, instead calling for calm.Burhan said he is serious about holding elections on schedule. But a year and half is a long time, and it is not clear whether the powerful military is willing to release the grip it has had on power for decades. Protesters fear it will steer the process to ensure its control and are vowing to keep up their pressure in the streets, raising the likelihood of new confrontations.WASN’T THERE A DEMOCRATIC ‘REVOLUTION’ ALREADY IN SUDAN?The pro-democracy movement, which was a mix of groups including professional unions, political parties and youth groups, won the removal of al-Bashir in April 2019. But it was only a partial victory, with protesters unable to push the military out of politics completely. Al-Bashir, who came to power in a 1989 coup, had ruled for 30 years with an iron grip, backed by the military and Islamists. Months of massive protests finally forced the military to remove and imprison him.Right after his ouster, the military seized power for itself. But protesters stayed in the streets, demanding the generals hand over power to civilians. Crackdowns turned bloody, and in June 2019, armed forces stormed the main protest camp outside the military headquarters, killing more than 100 people and raping dozens of women. Eventually, the military agreed to a compromise. It formed the Sovereign Council, a body made up of both military officers and civilians that was to rule the country until elections could be held. The council appointed Hamdok as prime minister of a transitional government.Under the compromise, the council was to be headed first by military figures before civilians were to lead it. Since then, Burhan has led the council, and the deputy chief has been Mohammed Hamdan Dagalo, the chief of the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces, a group notorious for atrocities during the Darfur war in the 1990s and blamed for the 2019 Khartoum massacre.A civilian was supposed to step in as council leader in November to run it until the 2023 elections.The compromise won an end to Sudan’s pariah status in the world. The U.S. took Sudan off its list of countries supporting terrorism, after the military-led council reached a peace deal with Israel.The transitional government also reached a peace deal with many of the rebel groups around Sudan that have been waging insurgencies against the Khartoum government for years. That deal allowed the armed rebels to return to Khartoum, waiting to be absorbed into the military. Meanwhile, Hamdok’s government rolled back many of the strict Islamist rules from the al-Bashir era, winning praise from Western governments and rights groups. However, it has struggled to deal with a crippled economy.WHAT SPARKED THE COUP?Tensions have been growing for months between supporters of the military and of civilian rule. The Forces for the Declaration of Freedom and Change, or FDFC, the main protest umbrella group, has been stepping up calls for the military to hand leadership over to civilians in the government. The FDFC is made up of various anti-al-Bashir political parties, professional movements and rebel groups.It has also called for restructuring the military and security agencies to dismiss al-Bashir loyalists, absorb various armed factions into their ranks and be put under civilian supervision.Supporters of the military also have stepped up action. Since September, tribal protesters have blocked the main road to Sudan’s Red Sea port as well as fuel pipelines, demanding Hamdok’s government be dissolved.Also, a pro-military splinter faction of the FDFC began an anti-government protest sit-in this month outside the Sovereign Council headquarters, accusing officials of mismanagement and monopolizing power. The faction includes rebel groups that struck peace deals with the military and some political parties.Many of the protesters on both sides are motivated by economic hardship. Already a problem under al-Bashir, it was one of the reasons people rose up against him. But since then, the country has faced even greater shocks in trying to rejoin the global economy. Economic reforms implemented by the interim government have meant rising inflation and shortages of basic goods for the average citizen. Emboldened by the protests, Burhan repeatedly called for dissolving Hamdok’s transitional government. He went further by saying recently that the military would only hand over power to an elected government. More