The UK Shared Prosperity Fund launches today - here’s a quick 🧵 on the main issues.
1) the Conservative Party manifesto committed to setting up the UKSPF to replace EU funds lost to Brexit and that it would as “a minimum match the size of those funds in each nation”.
1/4
2) EU funds would have invested £10.85bn in the UK’s regions between 2021 and 2027, but the Government’s replacement fund has a much lower value.
The Teesworks report terms of reference pointedly do not cover the State aid / Subsidy Control compliance of the deals.
This matters because a transaction found to breach such law is capable of being set aside - potentially saving the taxpayer millions of pounds.
A short 🧵…
This is surprising given such areas of law are central to assessing regularity and propriety according to the Treasury’s “Managing Public Money” guidance.
Had the report cast doubt on the transactions, for example:
• that the transfer of 90% of the shares; or
• the transfer of the 110 acres described below
was not a commercial transaction, that would be helpful evidence in the event of a challenge brought by a competitor.
A short 🧵 about the transparency flaw in the UK Subsidy Control regime.
I flagged this issue at a recent Select Committee appearance, but so far no steps have been taken to fix this.
Which is a big concern, because it affects how unlawful subsidies can be challenged…
1/4
Under the current Subsidy Control regime, a business can challenge an unlawful subsidy to a rival by going to court.
However a challenge must be brought in a short window that only starts when information about the subsidy is published on the national transparency website.
2/4
Yet the national transparency database is set up in such a way that key information is not available.
This award was posted in late October 2021, but there’s no way for a potential challenger to discover this.
The Subsidy Control Bill has its second reading in Parliament tomorrow providing MPs with their first opportunity to debate the principles of this important piece of post-#Brexit legislation.
In this 🧵 I set out the main issues to look out for…
The European Commission has published a notice which pushes back on the UK government’s interpretation of when State aid law will apply under the Northern Ireland Protocol.
Is the honeymoon over? Will the EU start challenging UK subsidies?
You’ll recall that on 31 December, @beisgovuk published guidance on the new Subsidy Control regime.
The Northern Ireland Protocol section took a surprisingly robust approach to interpreting when EU State aid law needs to be applied and when it doesn’t.
Some of this was supported by the contents of a joint statement between the UK and EU, but crucially the words “liable to have an effect on trade” were downplayed.
Although the Subsidy Control guidance is clearly intended to be helpful, it’s very complicated.
Statements like the one below, are likely to have a chilling effect on the award of public funding.
2/5
The need for a “dual assessment” (taking account of EU State aid law as well as UK Subsidy Control rules) is necessary for awards due to Article 10 of the Northern Ireland Protocol.
The guidance is more optimistic on the impact of Article 10 than @GeorgePeretzQC (below).