Category Archives: Society

Britain, European Court, European Parliament, European Union, Government, Politics, Society

EU law may have precedence over UK courts for years after Brexit

BREXIT

The position paper was released by David Davis’s Department for Exiting the EU.

The UK Government has denied watering down its Brexit plans as officials have admitted EU judges could have jurisdiction over Britain for years after it leaves the bloc.

The Prime Minister, Theresa May, insisted the UK would ‘take back control’ of its laws, saying: ‘When we leave the EU we will be leaving the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice.’

But a position paper published by the Government suggested the ECJ could continue to have control over Scots and English law for up to three years after Britain leaves at the end of March 2019.

That could mean EU judges will continue to pass down rulings on key issues until an independent new body is established to adjudicate on post-Brexit rows over trade or immigration.

Jacob Rees-Mogg, the Tory MP for North East Somerset, said: ‘If the ECJ has jurisdiction, you are part of a European superstate. Once you leave, it cannot have jurisdiction – that is the simple test.’

Officials have not been able to rule out the possibility that European judges could still have some influence even after the end of the three-year transition period. They highlighted the fact that trade deals that the EU has reached with other countries including Moldova force them to take account of European law.

Justice minister Dominic Raab admitted the Government would continue to keep ‘half an eye’ on EU laws after Brexit.

The prime minister said that after leaving the EU, ‘Parliament will make our laws – it is British judges who will interpret those laws and it will be the British Supreme Court that will be the arbiter of those laws’.

Mr Rees-Mogg welcomed the fact that the position paper made it clear the UK will eventually leave the influence of the ECJ.

But he added: ‘I would oppose the continuation of ECJ jurisdiction from the moment we leave the EU. If it continues beyond that, it is a problem. Once the European Communities Act is repealed, there will be no legal basis for ECJ jurisdiction.’

The position paper released by David Davis’s Department for Exiting the EU ruled out any ‘direct’ ECJ jurisdiction over Scots and English law after Brexit. It said legal disputes involving individuals and businesses should in future be decided in the UK judicial system, with the Supreme Court as the final arbiter.

It added a new dispute resolution mechanism – which could involve a joint committee or arbitration panel – will have to be created to deal with disagreements over the interpretation and application of the Brexit deal.

But it did not rule out the ECJ maintaining its authority during the transitional period, expected to last a number of years after the March 2019 deadline for Brexit, saying only that Britain will ‘work with the EU’ on the design of interim judicial arrangements.

It set out a range of existing arrangements involving the ECJ that could act as possible models for the new mechanism. These include the EU’s agreement with European Free Trade Association states such as Norway and Iceland and a treaty with Moldova.

Norway has its own EFTA Court to rule on disputes with the EU but it has to ‘pay due account’ to all relevant ECJ decisions.

The EU-Moldova agreement requires that, where a trade dispute concerns an interpretation of EU law, an arbitration panel must refer the question to the ECJ and be ‘bound by its interpretation’.

The Government document makes it clear that Britain is not committed to following any of the existing models, but it does not explicitly rule out any scenario other than direct ECJ jurisdiction.

The main job of a resolution body would be to adjudicate on disputes between the EU and the UK on how a trade deal will operate. It could also have to pass judgment on immigration matters.

Remain-backing groups accused the Government of a climbdown for saying there would be no ‘direct’ jurisdiction of the ECJ compared with its previous position of no jurisdiction whatsoever.

UK officials said that Britain would seek ‘legal autonomy’ but that the remaining power of the ECJ to rule on UK matters depended on the ‘scope’ of the transition period, which could last until 2022.

. More on Brexit UK Government threatens to get tough if Brussels bars trade deal

Standard
Government, Health, Science, Society

Pesticide use deemed ‘worse for children than passive smoking’

RESEARCH

Crop Spraying

A study has revealed that crop spraying with elemental sulphur, one of the most widely used pesticides, is a greater danger than passive smoking to children.

CROP spraying with the world’s most widely used pesticide could be a greater danger to children than passive smoking, a new scientific study has said.

Scientists have linked elemental sulphur to higher levels of asthma and breathing problems in youngsters living near sprayed fields.

Significantly, the chemical is widely used on both conventional and organic farms on the basis that it is a ‘natural’ substance.

It is typically used to prevent and eradicate fungi such as mildew from fruit crops such as strawberries and grapes. The chemical is also widely used on wheat, barley, hops, sugar beet and swedes.

However, the fine powder can drift and damage the lungs of children living nearby, according to the landmark study.

Academics at the University of California, Berkeley, say farmers may need to change how they use the spray.

This could include a ban on spraying near homes, or wetting the powder before spreading it, meaning it is less likely to blow into neighbouring communities.

The research, which is being funded by the US Government, is the first to link agricultural use of sulphur with poor respiratory health in children living nearby. Researchers looked at a group of children in Salinas, California, which is well known for growing strawberries, lettuce, tomatoes and spinach. Known as America’s ‘salad bowl’ it is also an important area for grape growing.

The study linked reduced lung function, more asthma-related symptoms and higher asthma medication use in children living less than a mile from recent elemental sulphur applications compared to unexposed children.

Researchers found an association with the spraying of the fungicide and a fall in the lung function of children aged seven who lived within 1,100 yards. This was measured as an average fall of 143 millilitres per second (ml/s) in the amount of air the children could forcefully blow out in one second.

This is worse than the 101 ml/s reduction shown in children of the same age exposed to passive smoking via their mothers for five years.

Professor Brenda Eskenazi said: ‘This study proves the first data consistent with anecdotal reports of farm workers and shows that residents – in this case, children – living near fields may be more likely to have respiratory problems from nearby agricultural sulphur applications.’

Co-author of the study Asa Bradman said: ‘Sulphur… is naturally present in our food and soil and is part of normal human biochemistry, but breathing in sulphur dust can irritate airways and cause coughing.

‘We need to better understand how people are exposed to sulphur used in agriculture and how to mitigate exposures. Formulations using wettable powders could be a solution.’

A spokesperson for the UK Pesticides Campaign, said: ‘This study provides further evidence of the significant health risks for rural residents living in the locality of pesticide sprayed crops.’

‘It also again confirms the fact that such risks and adverse impacts on residents exposed to agricultural pesticides anywhere in the world has simply not been properly assessed before such pesticides are approved.’

Standard
Britain, Economic, Government, Politics, Society

Rapacious fixed-odds betting terminals should be curbed

BRITAIN

Fixed Odds Betting Terminals

The Institute for Public Policy Research estimates gambling costs the UK more than £100 million.

IN 2005, a law to liberalise gambling was passed by the Labour government. Following a vociferous public campaign, it was only then that the government was forced to abandon its plans for giant super-casinos across the country.

Nevertheless, with neither fanfare nor further public debate, the new law effectively allowed every high street betting shop to turn itself into a casino – by installing fixed-odds betting terminals (FOBTs). These touch screen machines, which are so addictive they’re compared to using crack cocaine, offer casino-style games such as roulette, blackjack and poker. In just 20 seconds, a player can gamble – and lose – £100.

Today, it is clear that the social consequences have been catastrophic. Driven by the greed of bookmakers’ in their quest for riches, the number of machines has doubled in just a decade to 35,000. It is no coincidence that the number of problem gamblers has also more than doubled, to almost 600,000.

Meanwhile, we have seen rising violence in betting shops, more family breakdown and ballooning levels of personal debt. Inevitably, it is the poorest communities – where the highest concentration of betting shops are found – which have suffered most.

For those hopeless and desperate gambling addicts who stand like zombies, pumping in money until they have none left, these corrosive machines are life-destroying. But more depressingly, they destroy the lives of those closest to them, mostly the wives and children of those who have become addicted. The bookmakers, meanwhile, profit to the tune of £1.8billion a year.

To his eternal shame, David Cameron also failed to confront this problem with the necessary political rigour that was needed. Instead, what we got was a token effort, in the form of a registration scheme for those wanting to bet more than £50, which was cynically exploited by bookmakers who could target addicts with mouth-watering offers. He ducked entirely the one change that would have made a difference: by reducing the maximum stake. That stank of surrender to the army of betting industry lobbyists.

Now there is good reason to fear we may face another betrayal. Last year ministers launched a new crackdown on fixed-odds machines which promised to consider cutting the maximum stake.

The review has, however, stalled because those at the Treasury fear losing vast sums of tax revenues if stakes are cut from £100 to the suggested £2.

For many, this will seem an utterly immoral position. It is also deeply misguided, for it ignores the benefit to the taxpayer which would come from limiting these rapacious machines. Isn’t it obvious that the State will save a fortune by not having to rescue the countless families broken by addictive gambling?

Chancellor Philip Hammond’s position sits very uncomfortable with a government led by Theresa May, who came into office determined to fight for the vulnerable against unfettered and exploitative capitalism.

As the daughter of a clergyman, Mrs May won’t need the Church of England to say – as it commendably did last week – that these machines are deeply iniquitous.

After a disastrous election, reigning them in is exactly the kind of policy which would prove that Mrs May’s government retains both its authority and moral purpose.

Very few issues in politics are black and white. But with fixed-odds betting terminals, the case for controlling them is unanswerable. The Treasury should consider its position on FOBTs and realise the huge damage that addiction to them is causing.

Standard