Trade leaks show Trump has already pushed us into a more damaging Brexit


03 December 2019

Boris Johnson knows his Brexit deal is worse for the UK economy - but Trump is calling the shots. That is clearly revealed in a set of leaked papers detailing trade talks between US and UK officials over the last three years.

The documents show how the US administration has already successfully bullied Britain into taking a harder Brexit position, which is good for Trump’s geopolitical games and US big business, but bad for Britain’s economy and British welfare. The US wants the UK to adopt US standards and regulations so that it is easier for US corporations to move into the UK market, and for that they need the UK to break with EU standards.

From the very first meeting, the papers show US officials speaking dismissively of any reason for the UK to "take on all the EU's 'dirty laundry'" [1]. They even threaten that if the UK continued to push certain EU positions in international forums [2] – something the UK is still bound to do – it could undermine negotiations on a US trade deal.

Papers from the time of Theresa May’s ‘Chequers plan’ [3] are illuminating because the Trump administration is clearly furious at May’s promise of long-term alignment with EU standards which would prevent the dilution of British food regulations which US agribusiness hopes to benefit from. US negotiators saw this as a “worst case scenario” [4] and threatened to raise it with Trump ahead of his UK visit.

The most recent papers [5] make clear that the US is still hammering home the same message. This echoes comments that Trump has made, confirming this was not an off-hand comment but a deliberate, long-term tactic on the part of the US administration.


One of the most significant changes which Johnson made to May’s Brexit deal was a weakening of the alignment to EU standards, suggesting US bullying worked. But it is particularly worrying that economic modelling seen by the trade officials showed this was likely to be good for the US, but much less so for “UK welfare and GDP gains.” [6].

Beyond the issue of Brexit, the US dominates the talks in these papers at every level. They dictate what should be discussed, what they want included in a trade deal, how the deal should be done, and explain the meaning of terminology to their UK counterparts. The power imbalance is clear.

In fact, modelling also showed a trade might not be good for the public at all – both here and in the US, saying “benefits tend to filter through to company profit margins rather than a full pass-through rate to consumers” [7].

We need to stop this toxic trade deal:
 

 


 


Notes

[1] p22 issuu.com/wdmuk/docs/1_official_20sensitive_20first_20uk-us_20trade_20a/1?ff

[2] p35 issuu.com/wdmuk/docs/5_official_20sensitive_20fifth_20uk-us_20trade_20a/1?ff

[3] issuu.com/wdmuk/docs/4_official_20sensitive_20fourth_20uk-us_20trade_20/1?ff

[4] p26 issuu.com/wdmuk/docs/4_official_20sensitive_20fourth_20uk-us_20trade_20/1?ff

[5] p2 issuu.com/wdmuk/docs/6_official_20sensitive_20sixth_20uk-us_20trade_20a/1?ff

[6] p99 issuu.com/wdmuk/docs/5_official_20sensitive_20fifth_20uk-us_20trade_20a/1?ff

[7] p79 issuu.com/wdmuk/docs/4_official_20sensitive_20fourth_20uk-us_20trade_20/1?ff

Blog

Scotland: Good Food Nation or Fast Food Nation?

 

The politics of food is maturing in Scotland, with progressive proposals for a 'right to food' and for Scotland to become a 'good food nation'. But the UK government's plans for a post Brexit internal market across the four nations of the UK, plus a trade deal with the US, could threaten these positive moves towards healthy, sustainably produced food. 

Beware the rose-tinted spectacles and don’t bank on a fossil free COP26 just yet

Reports that the UK government may not accept sponsorship from fossil fuel corporations are falsely optimistic.

The glass is still half full: the second revised draft of the negotiation text for the UN treaty on transnational corporations and human rights

The United Nations’ (UN) process of creating a Legally Binding Instrument (LBI) to regulate the activities of transnational corporations (TNCs) and other business enterprises reached another stage on 6 August in the publication of the