Jonathan
Ashworth MP, Labour’s Shadow Health Secretary, commenting on reports that NHS
England is to develop new guidelines in order to stop GPs from prescribing
certain medicines, said:

“This
Government has forced the NHS through the longest period of financial squeeze
in its history. Indeed, hospital bosses have recently warned it will be
‘mission impossible’ to achieve the standards of care the public demand given
the scale of the underfunding.

“We
have long warned this underfunding would lead to greater rationing of services
and treatments. Ministers need to explain what today’s restrictions will mean
for those eligible for free prescriptions such as the elderly, pregnant and
those on low incomes.

“Of
course, NHS bosses are right to demand the best possible value for money from the
medicines they buy so that every penny can go towards patient care. But let’s
be clear: the greater restrictions and rationing proposed today are a direct
result of Theresa May’s underfunding of the NHS.“

The EU has constantly underestimated UK unhappiness with the EU and our resolve to leave as a result.

They are in danger of doing so again. They are determined to believe just leaving is impossible, because it does not suit them. No worry that it forces them into their own Project Fear. No worry that it means trying to think of ways to harm themselves.

Leaving without a deal is always going to be better for us than a punishment deal. What is bizarre is the number of politicians in the UK  who are on the EUs side,actively promoting the idea that the UK has to pay a fortune to the EU to leave when there is no such legal or moral obligation on us. The BBC also claims to have found government officials who want to undermine the walk away option. So they too want to weaken the very strong UK position.

The EU should not overplay its hand by believing the UK woukd not dare to just leave if there is no deal that makes sense.

Henry VIII legislation is a pejorative term for laws passed without Parliamentary approval.  The EU has been good at using such powers. Henry VIII sometimes passed laws by proclamation, without reference to Parliament. That is exactly how the EU legislates when it puts through directly acting Regulations. The UK Parliament cannot amend or vote down such laws, but just has to accept them as good UK law. Once we have left the EU there will be  no more directly acting Regulations that Parliament cannot vote down.

Incorrectly some people argue that a Henry VIII clause is a clause in an Act of Parliament which allows government to provide more detail under the Act  by means of Statutory Instrument rather than having to enact further primary legislation. This has been a common practice by governments of all persuasions. Parliament agrees the framework and main provisions of an Act, then allows details like level of charges or dates of implementation to be made by Statutory Instrument. SIs  still need Parliamentary approval. Parliament may  debate any SI it wishes, and can vote them down if they do not suit. Parliament decides when it passes the original primary legislation how much details it is willing to handle at a future date by SI and how much of the detail has to be on the face of the Bill. Any perishable or often changing provision, like a fee or charge level, is often best left to more flexible SIs.

This system has only been extended beyond its desirable limits by substantial legislation required by the EU. Much EU legislation takes the form of a Directive or instruction to the member states to enact laws in line with the Directive. The UK has often done this by means of Statutory Instruments under the power of the 1972 European Communities Act. Large swathes of our environmental, agricultural, trade and many other areas of  law have been put  through by such means. The 1972 Act offered by far and away the biggest extension of the power to government to legislate by SI ever adopted, and it is a power which has been used over and over again since 1972. That will end with repeal of the Act. The government has never been granted the same power to use SIs by non EU Acts.

When Parliament passes the Great Repeal Bill to provide continuity of law as we exit the EU under the Article 50 process it will wish to transfer all existing EU law into UK law, and to allow some future changes to be made by SI where these are tidying up matters. Parliament will not allow the government to create a new fishing policy or a new agriculture policy by SI under the Repeal Act nor will the government demand such power. Once the UK has left the EU and ensured continuity of law, it will then be up to Parliament to decide which areas it wishes to amend or repeal. A new fishing policy, for example, may well  be a priority. That will require a proper White Paper and an Act of Parliament. Brexit is about strengthening Parliamentary and public scrutiny and consent to our laws. Only the EU made law by proclamation ignoring the UK parliament, and only the 1972 Communities Act greatly widened the power to use SIs.

Southwest China’s Yunnan, the top province for tourists, rolled out harsh regulations to tackle tourist scams.

Yunnan is the top tourist province in China, receiving over 431 million domestic and overseas tourists in 2016, about 10 percent of the national total. It boasts rich tourism resources, including unparalleled natural scenery, ethnic culture and world heritage sites such as Lijiang.

However, it has faced increasing public criticism after incidents such as forced shopping excursions, scams, and the humiliation and beating of tourists.

Statistics from the National Tourism Administration and web resources show Yunnan frequently ranks top in the number of complaints filed by tourists.

In February, complaints against Yunnan tour operators accounted for about 34.8 percent of the national total. Most of the complaints were related to cheap tours and forced shopping.

“The new regulation was made to separate tours from shopping, and we aim to restore tourism market order within a year,” said Yu Fan, director of the provincial tourism development commission at a press conference on Monday.

Shops at tourist destinations often sell overpriced goods of shoddy quality. According to the new regulation, which comes into effect on April 15, these shops will turn into supermarket-style shops with proper pricing and fall under day-to-day supervision by tourism and commerce authorities.

The regulation bans kickbacks or commissions, which had come under the guise of “parking fees” or “tea fees” for bus or taxi drivers, and “head-count fees” for guides.

“The new regulation removes the source of profit for tour operators,” said Mou Xuemei, director of the tourist guide association in Lijiang, Yunnan.

“It means guides can no longer receive commissions, and their earnings will solely depend on whether their clients are happy,” Mou said.

In Lijiang, there are about 2,000 tourist guides.

“The new policy will greatly impact them, and I have heard them talking about the policy since word of it came out,” she said.

“Kickbacks are a national problem. Everyone will look and see how tourism reform in Yunnan goes,” she said.

According to a tourism industry report, some shops sell jade, medicine and Pu’er tea at ten times the price of purchase. Fifty to 90 percent of the money goes back to travel companies, which then give kickbacks to their guides accordingly.

“Commissions based on shopping tours are dysfunctional and distort the proper enjoyment of the travel experience,” said Garry Crockett, global executive chairman of China Ready & Accredited, a tourism consulting firm.

“The new regulation brings China’s domestic tourism policy into harmony with international best practice. Most Western travellers expect transparency in tour arrangement and like to be provided with freedom to choose which shop they patronize during their travels,” he said.

Yunnan will establish a rating system for tourist guides and increase supervision of guides. It will also establish a blacklist for discredited tour operators.