![]() |
Could this sight prove overly-tempting to a Post-Brexit Britain? - Img: Steven Depolo |
British food safety regulations, which are currently aligned
with those of the European Union, have been susceptible to change since the
Brexit vote in June; which, as we’ve noted before, could mean Britain ends up re-writing its food safety laws once it
eventually does leave the EU in a couple of years’ time. Following Theresa May’s
announcement that
Britain will be leaving the European single market; and on the day of Donald
Trump’s Presidential inauguration,
some consider
it likely that many British industries will, in the coming months, venture
beyond the Pond in search of new, global markets.
Such a move would certainly bolster Britain’s political ties
with the United States; especially with President-elect Trump’s claim
last week that Britain will be ‘front of line’ when it comes to US foreign
trade deals (diverging from Barack Obama’s contrary assertion
in September). However, whilst such news could be economic manna for a United
Kingdom seeking new trade frontiers, many speculate that Trump’s promise also comes
with an unspoken understanding: namely, that, in return for its open-arms
approach, the United States will get to call the shots when agreeing the terms
of such a partnership.
And that, for the likes of Samuel Lowe, campaign leader for Friends of the Earth, means Britain
may be ‘forced into concessions it would never normally make.’ Indeed, as the Guardian
reports,
former deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg warned on Monday that pushing through a
trade deal with the US too quickly could entail ‘harsh compromises on issues
such as environment and food safety.’
But what grounds are there for such speculative claims? Well,
bits and pieces. Whilst there are many foreign markets open to the UK, existing
political and cultural ties with the United States, accompanied by the lack of
a language barrier, could mean British negotiators would be particularly eager
to secure ties with Trump’s America, given its appearing to offer a more
comfortable option for British businesses than most others – meaning greater
concessions than usual could, potentially, be made.
Furthermore, the relatively short two-year deadline for
striking a deal may also play a role in forcing Britain into concessions, as
has been widely reported this week.
Finally, industry itself seems to be moving to accommodate
regulatory change. Just this week, a number of British meat exporters travelled
to Washington D.C. ‘to receive training on meeting US regulatory requirements
for beef and lamb imports.’ As Dr Phil Hadley, head of global supply chain
development at the Agriculture & Horticulture Development Board (AHDB) Beef
& Lamb, explained,
“The dynamic US market offers significant opportunities for UK beef and lamb at
a time when it’s particularly important for us to develop new markets alongside
ensuring we maintain demand in existing markets.”
However, there does remain some cause for optimism in the
British outlook moving forwards. Negotiations, after all, are hard to forecast.
One of the defining characteristics of Trump’s election
campaign was his anti-regulatory stance; which runs quite contrary to Britain’s current approach under EU
laws, as well as the apparent attitudes of British consumers today. We have written before, for example, on the differences between McDonald’s chips in the UK
and the US, which contain fewer additives by virtue of consumer demand rather
than legal necessity. However, in a post-Brexit Britain, it’s entirely
plausible that a large portion of the consumer base – comprised of a British
populace which is adjusting its identity to fit the global mold – could also
change its preferences and consumption habits. Indeed, with a generally
pro-business government stance emerging
to complement such social change, the implementation of looser regulations
could well reflect the desires of the new United Kingdom anyway: making the
trade concessions about which the media has reported this week perhaps less
dramatic than they appear.
So, there are many vantage points from which to approach the
question of whether or not Britain’s likely trade talks with the US will yield
big concessions from UK negotiators. Still, beyond the negotiations debate, it
is clear that Britain will, in a much wider sense, change in the coming years. For
better or worse remains to be seen; but change it certainly will.
James Stannard
James has a Bachelor’s degree in History and
wrote his dissertation on beef and protest. His heroes list ranges from Adele
to Noam Chomsky: inspirations he’ll be invoking next year when he begins a
Master’s degree in London.
0 comments:
Post a Comment
Please leave your comments and we will post them as soon as possible