Boris Johnson’s post-Brexit trade plans to cuddle up to America while distancing the UK from the EU could see us “lose more than we gain”, Labour has warned.
The UK spelled out its hopes for a free trade deal with Washington in a 184-page document.
But the scale of the negotiations appears much less ambitious than Downing Street or Donald Trump have previously claimed.
Government stats today showed that the best-case scenario for a trade deal with the US would grow the UK economy by just 0.16%.
Meanwhile, talks between the EU and UK got underway on our future relationship with Brussels, with British officials committed to obtaining a Canada-style deal with the EU.
Previous Treasury analysis suggested could shrink the UK economy by 4.9%.
Publishing their negotiating strategy for talks with the US, the government said the £3.4 billion yearly increase outlined in the document happens in the best-case scenario where the UK eliminates import tariffs with the States.
Critics pointed towards estimates of a potentially larger hit to the economy caused by Brexit , and warned the blow will “pale in comparison to the benefits”.
Labour’s Shadow Shadow Trade Secretary Barry Gardiner said: “Under their proposals, we stand to lose more than we gain.
“The government used to talk about “The sunlit uplands” of their plans for the future. Well these uplands look pretty rocky and there’s not much sun.”
Liberal Democrat international trade spokeswoman Sarah Olney accused the PM of being “seemingly hellbent on risking UK prosperity”.
Ministers were also committing to “ensure high standards” and protections were maintained for consumers and workers, while “not compromising” on environmental, animal welfare and food standards.
UK negotiators would work to ensure that measures are in place to prevent hikes in medicine prices for the NHS, as the Government said the service “will not be on the table”.
“The NHS is not, and never will be, for sale to the private sector, whether overseas or domestic,” the document said.
Trade Secretary Liz Truss maintained a tough stance ahead of the negotiations, warning the UK will “strike (a) hard bargain” and is prepared to “walk away if we need to”.
Woody Johnson, the US ambassador to the UK, welcomed the publication, adding: “Lots of work to do – let’s get started.”
Here’s a round up of the big issues between us and a US trade deal – and where the UK stands on them
The NHS
Not on the table. They repeat, not on the table.
Genuinely, they repeat variations on the following paragraph in the document at least three times.
“The NHS will not be on the table. The price the NHS pays for drugs will not be on the table. The services the NHS provides will not be on the table. The NHS is not, and never will be, for sale to the private sector, whether overseas or domestic.”
This was sort of inevitable. Johnson learned pretty quickly in the election campaign that even the merest hint of a threat to the public ownership of the NHS was enough to make the British people very, very nervous indeed.
Whether it stands up in the future is anyone’s guess – but for the purposes of this trade deal, it appears one of the most lucrative potential markets for US firms will remain closed.
Chlorinated chicken and hormone beef
Again, both of these appear to have been taken off them menu.
Of course the real issue with ‘chlorinated chicken’ was not the chlorine itself, but the conditions the chickens are kept in that mean they need to be cleaned with chlorine before they’re safe to eat.
Some thought there might be a way around this when people started talking about “lactic acid washed chicken” last week.
But at least as far as these initial trade negotiations are concerned, that’s not the case.
It reads: “Any agreement will ensure high standards and protections for consumers and workers, and will not compromise on our high environmental protection, animal welfare and food standards.”
The digital tax
Some thought the trade deal might include a carve-out for US firms in the digital services tax.
The tax has been strongly opposed by Washington, which has said any such tax would be discriminatory and inappropriate.
But a government spokesman said there would be no change to the policy on a digital services tax.
So what are we going to talk about?
WHISKY!
Well, tariffs – but they’re quite well illustrated by whisky.
Currently, the US levies about £451 million in tariffs on UK exports every year.
And that figure has increased following a ‘tit-for-tat’ dispute between the EU and US over goods like Scotch whisky and US bourbon.
International Trade Secretary Liz Truss told MPs she pressed US trade representative Robert Lighthizer last week for an “urgent settlement” ahead of trade talks.
The World Trade Organisation last year gave the US the green light to impose tariffs on up to 7.5 billion dollars (£6.1 billion) of goods from the European Union as retaliation for illegal subsidies the bloc gave to plane-maker Airbus, and these tariffs will include Scotch whisky.
The EU hit back by placing tariffs on US goods, including bourbon whiskey.
Former Scotland secretary David Mundell said the 25% duty applied to Scotch whisky was a “cloud on the horizon” of any UK-US trade talks.
And Ms Truss said: “This is a major issue for our excellent Scotch whisky producers and also other producers such as Walkers Shortbread and cashmere producers as well.
“I raised this issue again with (US trade representative) Lighthizer again when I saw him last week.
“I want to see an urgent settlement of the Airbus-Boeing dispute so we can remove these retaliatory tariffs on things like bourbon, Harley-Davidsons and Florida orange juice as well as our excellent products here in the UK.
“And I am urging as an early part of these trade negotiations removal of existing tariffs to show good will towards the negotiations.”
Former international trade secretary Liam Fox said UK exports to the US currently attract £500 million in tariffs.
He added: “The removal of which would be an immediate boost to the UK economy.
“But that the opportunity’s even greater because we’re currently involved in retaliatory tariffs as a result of the EU-US steel dispute and we are subject to tariffs that the US never wanted to apply to the UK.
“And as we separate ourselves from the European Union we can remove ourselves from the ensnarement of that which will enable us to remove many other tariffs which will beneficial to consumers and businesses on both sides of the Atlantic.”
