Given the rules protect UK taxpayers as much as EU businesses you would have thought UK politicians would have been making this case long ago…

Do you remember a bizarre advert for Conkers that played around the Birmingham area in the early 1990s?

Glum kids on a sink estate being surprised by big squirrel marketing Conkers theme park.

To be fair, it also seems out of step with Denmark’s culture too

Does that include gambling on politics?

If so, we should probably get our bets in quickly…

Alastair Campbell talks of objective, strategy and tactics.

This government doesn’t know its objective.

Hopefully this budget will force them to pick one.

Maybe they got asked what they wanted under their name?

In this opinion article, published in today’s @PracticalLawUK, I look into the reasons why there’s been so few cases, but also what can be learned from the Competition Appeal Tribunal decisions so far.

lnkd.in/eDzd_RXe

🧵 / End

#SubsidyControl #StateAid #Brexit

MPs were told that there would be around 23 cases each year.

On that basis they agreed a Subsidy Control regime based on private enforcement within a short challenge window.

The reality is that 1,000 days in there’s been 2 cases decided with 2 more being considered soon.

When the regime was being designed Boris Johnson’s government rejected the opportunity to have a regulator with powers to investigate and act when there are concerns about a breach of the Subsidy Control Act.

Instead the regime relies upon private enforcement actions.

But the problem is that it’s true - so you’re only convincing those who had the ability to see through the 💩 in 2016.

Gosh.

So far this is all I’ve seen - but it would be great for the region.