EU equality laws to be reinstated to avoid ‘gap in protections’ for workers
The government has announced plans to reinstate EU equality laws before they expire at the end of the year – admitting the move is required to avoid a “clear gap in protections” for workers.
Ministers will today lay a statutory instrument intended to “enshrine” key rights and principles derived from the European Union into British law.
Politics Live: Braverman is ‘dangerous’ and ‘divisive’, ex-Tory minister tells Sophy Ridge
It follows questions over whether some employment protections related to things like equal pay and maternity leave would be scrapped from January when The Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill comes into effect.
The controversial legislation – also known as the “Brexit Freedoms Bill” – will dispense with hundreds of Brussels-derived laws still on British statue books. It will also end the supremacy of EU law over UK law, erasing previous case law principles.
Trade unions and employment lawyers had warned this would create uncertainty over key protections for British workers which derive from the EU and don’t exist in British law.
The government said its update today means “that necessary protections are clearly stated in our domestic legislation”.
One legal expert welcomed the announcement – but said it raised “legitimate questions” around what gains had been made from post-Brexit sovereignty if EU laws are simply going to be replicated.
The protections being retained include the “single-source” test, which gives women the right to equal pay with men for doing work of equal value, and preventing women from experiencing less favourable treatment at work because they are breastfeeding.
Other laws being retained include:
• Protecting women from unfavourable treatment after they return from maternity leave, where that treatment is in connection with a pregnancy or a pregnancy-related illness occurring before their return;
• Ensuring that women can continue to receive special treatment from their employer in connection with maternity, for example through enhanced occupational maternity schemes;
• Confirming that the definition of disability in the context of employment will explicitly cover working life;
• Holding employers accountable if they create or allow discriminatory recruitment conditions, such as if they make public discriminatory statements about access to employment in their organisation;
• Providing explicit protections from indirect discrimination by association, so that those who may be caught up and disadvantaged by discrimination against others are also protected.
The move could risk angering Eurosceptic Tories, who want to see the UK move away from the EU’s influence.
Max Winthrop, the chair of the Law Society’s Employment Law Committee, welcomed the clarification that vital rights “would not be for the legislative dustbin as of December 31st”.
Click to subscribe to Politics at Jack and Sam’s wherever you get your podcasts
However, he said the move does raise “legitimate questions” about the point of Brexit, from a sovereignty standpoint.
“When we are effectively replicating legislation from the EU, and I can understand why the government have done that because it would not be particularly popular to say ‘let’s scrap maternity rights’, it does leave the big question as to what exactly is it that we’ve gained from leaving the EU,” he told Sky News.
“We haven’t gained what was sometimes referred to as the Singapore-on-the-Thames approach. In other words, to deregulate the marketplace. So you then have to ask yourself the question, is the loss of seamless trade throughout the European Economic Area really worth the cattle?”.
He added that the announcement shows why the original plan to scrap all remaining EU laws by the end of this year “would have probably been disastrous”.
“It shows the complexity of junking 40 years worth of (EU) legislation, and the sorts of steps we’ve had to go through to maintain the protections that a lot of people probably thought they already had.”
The Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill was originally intended to scrap all EU-era laws which were kept in place after the Brexit transition period in order to minimise disruption to businesses.
But the promised bonfire of Brussels rules and regulations was dramatically scaled-back in May, with less than 600 now set to be junked by the end of this year.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Kemi Badenoch was told off in the House of Commons by the Speaker of the House
Business Secretary Kemi Badenoch said the change was necessary because of the “risks of legal uncertainty” caused by automatically scrapping some 4,000 laws, but there was significant backlash from within the Conservative Party, with arch-Brexiteer Jacob Rees-Mogg accusing the prime minister of “behaving like a Borgia”.
Notes accidently left on the press release announcing today’s measures suggest some concern that retaining the protections could rile up the right wing of the party.
The notes discussed how to answer questions about why the government isn’t scrapping the protections, and whether maintaining discrimination laws would threaten free speech and “make businesses feel they must follow the woke agenda”.
Read more:
Government to unveil plans centred around criminal justice
Hard to see how Rishi Sunak’s first King’s Speech won’t be his last
The document stresses that if the EU laws aren’t retained, “employers would in some circumstances be able to make statements, for example, that they wouldn’t hire people because they are black. That is not right and not in line with Britain’s proud history of equality and fair play”.
“We are only restating laws where there would otherwise be a clear gap in protections: this is an area where we think the law needs to be strong and clear,” the document says.
A government spokesperson said: “We are committed to ensuring that the fundamental rights and freedoms of people in the United Kingdom remain protected.
“Our work is ensuring that necessary protections are retained and will end the inherent uncertainty of relying on judicial interpretations of EU law.
“Today’s update will ensure that Great Britain maintains its proud history of equality and that necessary protections are clearly stated in our domestic legislation.”
King’s Speech live: Watch our special programme on Sky News, hosted by Sophy Ridge, from 10.30am on Tuesday. You will also be able to follow the event live via the Politics Hub on the Sky News app and website.
A new long-awaited child poverty strategy is promising to lift half a million children out of poverty by the end of this parliament – but critics have branded it unambitious.
The headline announcement in the government’s plan is the pledge to lift the two-child benefit cap, announced in Rachel Reeves’s budget last week.
It also includes:
• Providing upfront childcare support for parents on universal credit returning to work
• An £8m fund to end the placement of families in bed and breakfasts beyond a six-week limit
• Reforms to cut the cost of baby formula
• A new legal duty on councils to notify schools, health visitors, and GPs when a child is placed in temporary accommodation
Many of the measures have previously been announced.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Two-child cap ‘a real victory for the left’
The government also pointed to its plan in the budget to cut energy bills by £150 a year, and its previously promised £950m boost to a local authority housing fund, which it says will deliver 5,000 high-quality homes for better temporary accommodation.
Downing Street said the strategy would lift 550,000 children out of poverty by 2030, saying that would be the biggest reduction in a single parliament since records began.
But charities had been hoping for a 10-year strategy and argue the plan lacks ambition.
A record 4.5 million children (about 31%) are living in poverty in the UK – 900,000 more since 2010/11, according to government figures.
Phillip Anderson, the Strategic Director for External Affairs at the National Children’s Bureau (NCB), told Sky News: “Abolishing the two-child limit is a hell of a centre piece, but beyond that it’s mainly a summary of previously announced policies and commitments.
“The really big thing for me is it misses the opportunity to talk about the longer term. It was supposed to be a 10-year strategy, we wanted to see real ambition and ideally legally binding targets for reducing poverty.
“The government itself says there will still be around four million children living in poverty after these measures and the strategy has very little to say to them.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
‘A budget for benefits street’
‘Budget for benefits street’ row
The biggest measure in the strategy is the plan to lift the two-child benefit cap from April. This is estimated to lift 450,000 children out of poverty by 2030, at a cost of £3bn.
The government has long been under pressure from backbench Labour MPs to scrap the cap, with most experts arguing that it is the quickest, most cost-effective way to drive-down poverty this parliament.
The cap, introduced by Conservative chancellor George Osborne in 2017, means parents can only claim universal credit or tax credits for their first two children. It meant the average affected household losing £4,300 per year, the Institute for Fiscal Studies calculated in 2024.
The government argues that a failure to tackle child poverty holds back the economy, and young people at school, cutting their employment and earning prospects in later life.
However, the Conservatives argue parents on benefits should have to make the same financial choices about children as everyone else.
Shadow chancellor Mel Stride said: “Work is the best way out poverty but since this government took office, unemployment has risen every single month and this budget for Benefits Street will only make the situation worse. “
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
OBR leak: This has happened before
‘Bring back Sure Start’
Lord Bird, a crossbench peer who founded the Big Issue and grew up in poverty, said while he supported the lifting of the cap there needed to be “more joined up thinking” across government for a longer-term strategy.
He has been pushing for the creation of a government ministry of “poverty prevention and cure”, and for legally binding targets on child poverty.
“You have to be able to measure yourself, you can’t have the government marking its own homework,” he told Sky News.
Lord Bird also said he was a “great believer” in resurrecting Sure Start centres and expanding them beyond early years.
The New Labour programme offered support services for pre-school children and their parents and is widely seen to have improved health and educational outcomes. By its peak in 2009-2010 there were 3,600 centres – the majority of which closed following cuts by the subsequent Conservative government.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Lord Bird on the ‘great distraction’ from child poverty
PM to meet families
Sir Keir Starmer’s government have since announced 1,000 Best Start Family Hubs – but many Labour MPs feel this announcement went under the radar and ministers missed a trick in not calling them “Sure Starts” as it is a name people are familiar with.
The prime minister is expected to meet families and children in Wales on Friday, alongside the Welsh First Minister, to make the case for his strategy and meet those he hopes will benefit from it.
Several other charities have urged ministers to go further. Both Crisis and Shelter called for the government to unfreeze housing benefit and build more social rent homes, while the Children’s Commissioner for England, Dame Rachel de Souza, said that “if we are to end child poverty – not just reduce it” measures like free bus travel for school-age children would be needed.
The strategy comes after the government set up a child poverty taskforce in July 2024, which was initially due to report back in May. The taskforce’s findings have not yet been published – only the government’s response.
Sir Keir said: “Too many children are growing up in poverty, held back from getting on in life, and too many families are struggling without the basics: a secure home, warm meals and the support they need to make ends meet.
“I will not stand by and watch that happen, because the cost of doing nothing is too high for children, for families and for Britain.”
A group of former executives from the collapsed crypto-friendly Signature Bank has launched a new blockchain-based, state-chartered bank called N3XT, with the goal of enabling instant 24-hour payments.
N3XT said on Thursday that it aims to settle payments instantly at any time using a private blockchain and offers programmable payments through smart contracts. The company added that its systems have been designed for interoperability with stablecoins, utility tokens, and other digital assets.
Signature Bank founder Scott Shay founded N3XT, which will operate under a Wyoming Special Purpose Depository Institution (SPDI) charter and will not offer lending services.
Signature Bank was one of three crypto-friendly banks, along with Silicon Valley Bank and Silvergate Bank, that collapsed in the 2023 US banking crisis due to a bank run and ties to the then-rapidly falling crypto market.
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation took control of Signature Bank in March 2023, just days after the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank, saying it had an overreliance on uninsured deposits, weak risk controls and was facing a worsening run on deposits.
N3XT avoiding lending services
Jeffrey Wallis, Signature Bank’s former director of digital asset and Web3 strategy, will be N3XT’s CEO and president and said that crypto innovations are at the heart of the new venture.
“Money should move as seamlessly as information,” he said. “We’re applying crypto innovations to banking to deliver instant, programmable payments for institutional clients.”
N3XT won’t be offering lending, and the bank claims its reserves are also backed one-to-one by cash or short-term US Treasurys, with promises to share reserve holdings daily.
At launch, N3XT lists its client base as unnamed businesses across crypto, foreign exchange, shipping and logistics, and a variety of other sectors.
Crypto venture capital firms backing N3XT
The bank raised three rounds of financing from a range of investors that included Winklevoss Capital, the venture capital firm of Tyler and Cameron Winklevoss, Paradigm and HACK VC.
Related: Group of EU banks pushes for euro-pegged stablecoin by 2027
Hack co-founder Alexander Pack said in an X post on Thursday his firm is ready to support N3XT and its founders as they emerge from “stealth mode.”
“N3XT’s founders, Scott and Jeff, are forces of nature: they previously built Signature Bank, the biggest and best bank to support the US crypto industry in a regulated way, before the last administration forced them to shut down,” he said.
“Most founders would quit after something like that, but instead they immediately went back to work building N3XT,” Pack added.
Magazine: 6 reasons Jack Dorsey is definitely Satoshi… and 5 reasons he’s not
-
Sports2 years agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports3 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Sports3 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment3 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment1 year agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024