Thread by @pmdfoster

Starting now…a knotty and important subject that @GeorgePeretzQC @RS_Economist and @tompope0 know lots about! Nuggets to follow…/1

https://twitter.com/instituteforgov/status/1481197051056689152

Peretz @GeorgePeretzQC opens with point that new U.K. system does have more flex than EU - either block exemption or getting permission from EU Commission.

But flip side is less certainty for granting authorities, which might retard grants /2

One big point here is that we’re still waiting for quite a lot of detail on how the system will be operated and monitored in practice, including the CAT tribunal/JR system. /3

George also raises Q of what happens when private sector says a grant is a subsidy when public body doesn’t believe it to be. /4

Now Rabat Siddique. @RS_Economist says transparency is key, and govt website doesn’t always help!

Also biz wants to know what the framework will look like. I.e govt intention…the big Q/5

Siddique adds that business that doesn’t have expertise in house need more practical detail and clarity on how much info companies need to provide to show they’ve considered a grant fully. /6

Now Peretz saying when advising clients can’t give absolute guarantees- biz will have to learn what that means in practice. /7

Now Tom Pope explains that the new policy “very much impinges on devolved competence” but relative to EU system DAs have more control, but fact that DAs treated same as any other local authority is potentially problematic. /8

What about Subsidy Advice Unit? Rahat Siddique says business welcomes the non-binding role of that, and welcomes advice role. BUT raises Q of whether CMA has bandwidth to do the role well/9

And Peretz says important that CMA doesn’t take too much of a competition law approach to the advisory role. /10

On Article 10 NIP Peretz says that there remains potential for serious political dispute…but we wait and see what case law brings. Still early to say. /11