Trade Bill

The claim put about by some that the Trade Bill somehow signs the UK up to lower food and environmental standards, or even 'sells off the NHS' is, I'm afraid, wholly untrue. 

Despite its name, the Trade Bill is a so-called "continuity Bill" designed to enable the free trade agreements that the EU had signed with third countries before the UK exited to be transitioned. Crucially, it cannot be used to implement new free trade agreements with countries such as the US. 

Upholding Standards

Here in the UK we have high environmental and food standards, and I believe we must not compromise on them. The Government takes the same view and has specified that in all our trade negotiations. This Bill does nothing to change that central principle.

We remain firmly committed to upholding our high environmental, food safety and animal welfare standards outside the EU and the EU Withdrawal Act will transfer all existing EU food safety provisions, including existing import requirements, onto the UK statute book. 

Although future trade agreements are outside the scope of the Trade Bill, the Government has made a clear and absolute commitment to uphold the UK’s high animal welfare, environmental, food safety and food import standards in any future free trade agreement. I know Ministers do not intend to compromise the UK’s domestic welfare production standards either and I welcome the creation of the Trade and Agriculture Commission to advise the Secretary of State on protecting these standards while capitalising on trading opportunities.

Without exception, all animal products imported into the UK under existing or future free trade agreements from all trading partners, including the EU and others, will have to meet our stringent food safety standards, as they do now. The UK’s independent food regulators will continue making sure that all food imports into the UK comply with those high standards.

I am glad that the Government is amending the Trade Bill to put the Trade and Agriculture Commission on a statutory footing and confirming that the body will produce a report, to be laid in Parliament at the start of each 21-day scrutiny period, on the impact on animal welfare and agriculture arising from each new free trade deal. The Commission will advise the Secretary of State on whether free trade agreements are consistent with domestic levels of protection for animal and plant life and health as well as animal welfare and the environment. 

I understand that Ministers are not seeking to include human health as part of the Commission’s remit because that advice is best delivered from other and better qualified bodies and such advice could also risk duplication of effort from existing groups providing similar functions.

What does this Bill do?

As noted above, the Trade Bill is a "continuity Bill". It enables the 40 free trade agreements that the EU had signed with third countries before the UK exited to be transitioned.

In other words, its functions are largely distinct from the Government’s future trade agreements programme. 

In addition, in leaving the EU, the UK will be acceding to the World Trade Organisation’s Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA) in its own right. The Bill’s provisions will make sure the UK can implement procurement obligations under the Agreement, ensuring continued access to £1.3 trillion per year of global procurement opportunities for UK businesses. 

The Bill will also facilitate the creation of a new Trade Remedies Authority (TRA), to deliver a new UK trade remedies framework, which among other things will include protections for UK businesses from unfair trade practices or unforeseen import surges.

Future Trade Deals

As I say, the process of negotiating future trade deals is not primarily a matter for the Trade Bill. However, I want to reassure you that there will be opportunities for both the public and Parliament to consider, contribute to and scrutinise negotiations for future free trade agreements. 

Public consultations will run ahead of all negotiations. Ministers have also committed to provide Parliamentarians, British citizens and businesses with access to the information they need on trade negotiations.

NHS

The suggestion from some that the Trade Bill somehow puts the NHS 'on the table' or 'at risk' is untrue. The NHS will never be on the table in any trade deal and that includes the price we pay for drugs.

The principle of healthcare being provided free at the point of need, regardless of ability to pay, is fundamental to who we are as a nation, and it is not up for negotiation. 

The NHS is already protected by specific carve outs, exceptions and reservations in these trade agreements. 

In future trade agreements the Government has made a clear and absolute commitment that the NHS will not be on the table. Indeed, I note Ministers have made clear they will ensure rigorous protections are included for the NHS in all trade agreements to which the UK is party, whether transitioned from an EU context or as a result of future negotiations.

Scrutiny

Some have raised concerns about Parliamentary scrutiny and whether MPs can have any say in respect of future trade deals. They will.

The Government is committed to engaging with Parliament throughout the negotiation of future trade agreements. It has clearly demonstrated this during discussions on the Japan trade agreement and ahead of negotiations with the United States, Australia and New Zealand.

Parliament will retain, through the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act (CRAG) process, the right to block any treaty from being ratified. That is because Free Trade Agreements cannot by themselves change UK law. The CRAG process allows Parliament to scrutinise agreements for 21 sitting days, provides for a report on the agreement from the relevant Select Committee as well as the option for debates on the agreements and the power for the Commons to restart this 21-day period if it is not satisfied.

Parliament also retains the right to reject any domestic implementing legislation necessary for a trade treaty.  By blocking any legislation, should it be required, it can also block ratification.