As I say in the @FT article, a quick win would be to create safe harbours.

This would provide greater certainty for 99% of subsidies.
Funding could still go ahead outside those safe harbours, it would simply be a matter of making the justification against the Common Principles.
Furthermore, Ministers could decide that such awards don’t require the wider assessments set out in the @beisgovuk Subsidy Control guidance, eg determining whether the measure may give rise to an international dispute under the WTO rules.
The @Conservatives had four criteria for a new Subsidy Control regime, listed in a speech which was due to be delivered during the 2019 election.

The current regime only delivers on permissiveness. The safe harbour model could deliver on all four.

https://uksala.org/conservative-plans-to-replace-the-uk-state-aid-regime/
I agree with @GeorgePeretzQC that we need a clearer system of Subsidy Control.

There are over 550 public bodies awarding subsidies in the UK, therefore consistency is important.
And @jamesrwebber makes a good point about making the most of the opportunity available to shape the system to meet the UK’s objectives.
The more people who participate in the Subsidy Control consultation, the better the chances of getting a system that works effectively.
Finally, there’s an opportunity to create a new independent oversight body.

My hope would be that the government takes account of its commitment to #levellingup and locates the new organisation in an area which will really benefit from the jobs created.
You can follow @AlexanderPHRose.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled:

By continuing to use the site, you are consenting to the use of cookies as explained in our Cookie Policy to improve your experience.