£570m cost of Erasmus is ‘money coming back to UK’, says minister – UK politics live

Minister defends £570m cost of UK rejoining Erasmus student exchange scheme, saying it’s money ‘coming back’ to UK

Rejoining Erasmus will cost the UK £570m. In an interview this morning, Nick Thomas-Symonds, the Cabinet Office minister who is in charge of post-Brexit relations with the EU, defended this on the grounds that the money would be “coming back” to the UK.

He said:

We’ve agreed that there will be a 30% discount for the UK’s participation. And that is, of course, money that is then, as it were, coming back.

It’s making sure that there are students and young people, indeed people of other ages across the UK, who are benefiting from it.

Thomas-Symonds also said that, after 10 months, there would be a review to consider who many people are using the scheme.

He is now making a statement about the announcement to MPs.

Key events

Tories and Reform UK claim council funding settlement biased in favour of Labour areas

The Conservatives have criticised the local government settlement as biased in favour of Labour-voting areas. The party issued a statement from James Cleverly, the shadow housing secretary, saying:

Labour say they want to make local government funding ‘fair’, but are instead launching a nakedly political power grab. The government is fiddling the funding model to punish councils that keep council tax low and moving funding to badly-run Labour councils that spend irresponsibly. Inevitably, councils that lose out will be forced to cut services or raise tax – and with referendum principles scrapped, those hikes will be big.

This is part of Labour’s mission to hike council tax across the board. Hidden behind their rhetoric about supporting local government is a council tax bombshell, with the average family in a band D home facing a cumulative £1,143 council tax increase across this parliament.

And Reform UK has claimed the settlement is biased against rural areas. Stephen Atkinson, the Lancashire county council leader and chair of the Reform UK group on the Local Government Association, said:

At its core, this is a settlement that leaves behind rural communities, funnelling money towards Labour-dominated London and city councils. It is a cynical settlement driven by Labour’s fear of Reform rather than what’s good for ordinary people.

Cities are already prioritised above counties and shires for investment. We were promised mayors to drive investment in our towns and villages, but Labour chose to cancel these elections. Left behind Britain is being forgotten again as a result of this Government’s political games.

Six councils with very low council bills to be given complete freedom to raise bills about 5%

Under the local government settlement, six councils in England will be given total freedom to raise their council tax by as much as they want. They won’t have to ask permission if they want to put up bills by more than 5%. (See 4.18pm.)

The government says:

Six councils with historically very low bills will be given flexibility for 2 years with local leaders given the choice to use the flexibility: Wandsworth, Westminster, Hammersmith and Fulham, City of London, Kensington and Chelsea, and Windsor and Maidenhead.

Around 500,000 households in these areas already have very low bills, with Band D households paying between £450 and £1,280 less in council tax than the average English household.

This temporary measure gives them the option of bringing their bills more in line with the rest of the country – making the system fairer.

Of the six councils, three off them are Labour-run (Hammersmith and Fulham, Wandsworth and Westminster – although the latter two have only been Labour since 2022), one is Tory (Kensington and Chelsea), one is Lib Dem (Windsor and Maidenhead, but only since 2023), and one is run by independents (the City of London Corporation, which is an odd authority in lots of ways).

Poorest councils in England will get 24% spending boost per person under new council funding formula, minister says

Alison McGovern, the local government minister, is making a statement to MPs about funding for English councils.

It is a three-year settlement, covering 2026-27, 2027-28 and 2028-29. It is the first multi-year settlement in a decade.

McGovern said that the 10% most deprived councils would get 24% spending boost per head as a result of a change to the funding formula.

She confirmed that the government is maintain the cap on council tax increases that are allowed – 3%, or 5% (an extra 2%) for authorities that have to fund adult social care.

And she said some councils will be allowed to apply for permission to raise council tax by more than that amount. But that will only apply to authorities with below-average bills, she said.

Here is the news release about the statement.

Here is the government document with details of how the settlement was decided.

Here is the draft of the document that needs to be approved by MPs.

The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government has also published a raft of other documents relating to this process. You can find them all here.

Northern Ireland executive sets aside £120m to fund PSNA data breach payouts

The Stormont executive has agreed to set aside almost £120m for a Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) data breach payouts, PA Media reports. PA says:

It is understood that ministers are also continuing their discussions on a multi-year budget, which would be the first in Northern Ireland in more than a decade.

This afternoon Naomi Long welcomed agreement to commit to set aside £119m to fund the costs of the PSNI data breach.

The PSNI breach occurred in August 2023 when a spreadsheet released as part of a freedom of information request held hidden data with the initials, surname, rank and role of all PSNI officers and staff.

The information later got into the hands of dissident republicans.

The PSNI accepted liability for the data breach and a test case over potential compensation has begun in the courts.

The Treasury previously refused two requests by the executive to fund the compensation payments.

Long said she hopes the move by the executive will reassure those affected.

“This will enable the PSNI to advance negotiations with police officers and police staff in a timely manner, to bring about an early settlement of the ongoing legal proceedings and ensure that significant additional costs to the public purse are not incurred,” she said.

“I am also mindful of the distress experienced by those affected and I hope that today’s decision will bring reassurance to staff and their families.”

Deputy first minister Emma Little-Pengelly also welcomed the executive’s decision.

She said: “The PSNI data breach was a costly mistake within the PSNI.

“The Treasury has refused to meet the cost of this error. We have stepped in to secure funding, in acknowledgment that the PSNI does not have the resources to settle the cases and that this was the right thing to do. The sooner these cases are settled the better, before legal costs ramp up any further.

“The loss of £120m to fund public services however is significant. This was a very costly error.

“Whilst this is good news for the PSNI, it will have significant impact for next year’s overall budget for public services which is far from ideal.”

Labour will be pushed ‘even further to left’ with Andrea Egan as new Unison general secretary, Tories claim

Labour is going to be pushed “even further to the left” following the election of Andrea Egan as the new Unison general secretary, the Conservatives are saying.

In a statement, Kevin Hollinrake, claimed:

This is another blow to Keir Starmer’s already damaged authority.

Having already bent over backwards for the unions in their disastrous Unemployment bill, it is clear that Starmer is now set to be pushed even further to the left by his union paymasters.

A reader asks:

Does anyone understand why it’s Your Party and Ulster Unionist Party, but Scottish National party and Democratic Unionist party?

Andrew tried to explain but it made no sense.

I’ll try again. It’s Guardian house style. The questioner is wrong about the UUP – it should be Ulster Unionist party in Guardian copy – but they are right to say it is lower case p for all parties, except for Your Party. For some reason, this particularly annoys SNP supporters.

Most news organisation have their own style guides, and this is what ours says about this.

party
lc in name of organisation, eg Conservative party, Monster Raving Loony party. Your Party is an exception

As for why we don’t capitalise party, it’s a reflection of the fact the Guardian tends to keep the use of capitals to a minimum. In our style guide, in an entry on the c page, there is a longer explanation why. Other papers, like the Telegraph, tend to use capitals more enthusiastically. You might argue that that is because they like hierarchy, and we don’t, but maybe it’s just habit, or coincidence.

As for why Your Party gets an exception, there is a simple explanation, and it is the fallback one for all rules about style and grammar; Your party would just look silly.

Ulster Unionist party looks fine, because people talk about the Ulster Unionists. But no one talks about “Your”. It needs the capital P to look proper.

Minister defends £570m cost of UK rejoining Erasmus student exchange scheme, saying it’s money ‘coming back’ to UK

He said:

We’ve agreed that there will be a 30% discount for the UK’s participation. And that is, of course, money that is then, as it were, coming back.

It’s making sure that there are students and young people, indeed people of other ages across the UK, who are benefiting from it.

Thomas-Symonds also said that, after 10 months, there would be a review to consider who many people are using the scheme.

He is now making a statement about the announcement to MPs.

Tories claim rejoining Erasmus is sign of ‘pro-EU ideology’ and accuse Labour of ‘worrying disregard’ for Brexit vote

The Conservative party has now issued a response to the news that the UK is rejoining the Erasmus scheme. (See 8.51am.) In a statement Alex Burghart, the shadow Cabinet Office minister, said:

The UK re-joining Erasmus was a big Brussels demand, and Keir Starmer has seemingly caved in to the EU without getting anything in return for our £500m – just like he did over our fishing rights.

The Erasmus scheme is drastically more expensive than the Turing Scheme introduced after Brexit, which benefited more British people. Turing was a global programme rather than a scheme based on a blank cheque for Brussels. Scrapping it in favour of Erasmus poses serious questions about whether this government is really focused on opportunities for young Brits, or instead on re-entangling Britain with EU programmes at any price.

Rejoining Erasmus, reopening costly energy integration, and edging back into EU regulatory frameworks looks less like pragmatism and more like pro-EU ideology. The British people voted in 2016 to take back control, and Labour’s approach shows a worrying disregard for that democratic decision.

Net migration to UK could rise to 300,000 by end of decade, says government adviser

Net migration to the UK could rise to around 300,000 by the end of the decade, a leading government adviser has said. Prof Brian Bell, the chair of the migration advisory committee, said the overall migration figure will jump “in the medium term” from the current level of 204,000 as the numbers of overseas students and workers rise again. As Rajeev Syal reports, Keir Starmer’s election manifesto pledge is to reduce net migration, as Labour heads towards a general election campaign where immigration is expected to be a major issue.

The Treasury has put out a news release about the issuing a licence to get the £2.5bn that has been frozen since the sale of Chelsea FC to be released for the people of Ukraine.

Explaining what will happen now, the Treasury says:

Since the sale of the club in 2022, the UK Government has tried to agree a way forward with Abramovich and his company, Fordstam Ltd. The government will consider any proposal from Abramovich to voluntarily donate the multi-billion-pound proceeds to Ukraine.

Under the terms of the licence, proceeds must go to humanitarian causes in the country while any future gains can be spent more broadly on victims of conflict worldwide. In neither case can the funds benefit Abramovich or other sanctioned individuals.

It is now time for Roman Abramovich to act. Once a charitable foundation is established, the proceeds from the sale can be transferred in accordance with the terms authorised by today’s OFSI [Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation] licence. However, should he fail to act, the money will remain frozen and the government will consider all options, including pursuing the matter in court.

Starmer rejects Labour MP’s claim that changing settlement rules for health workers ‘profoundly un-British’

During PMQs the Labour MP Neil Duncan-Jordan said that changing settlement rules for health workers from overseas was “profoundly un-British”.

He said:

Over the past few weeks, I’ve been contacted by a number of constituents who work in the health and care sector because they are concerned about the proposed changes to the rules surrounding indefinite leave to remain.

These individuals came to this country to do a job we asked them to do, and then we decided to change the rules halfway through the process.

Does the prime minister agree that if we are to be a proud, rules-based nation, going back on our word to people who are contributing to our society and building lives here is not only just unfair, it’s also profoundly un-British?

At the moment people who come to the UK to work can normally applied for settled status – the right to stay for good – after five years. But instead the government is increasing the baseline waiting period to 10 years, with individuals having to wait longer or shorter depending on a range of factors, such as the salary they get, or the benefits they have received.

And Starmer replied:

We’re replacing a failed settlement system with one that is fair and recognises contribution. It is right to apply more stringent controls, and we’re currently consulting on the right approach.

I do recognise the huge contribution of those working in our NHS, and will not change the rules for those who already have settled status.

Source link