- Scottish Ministers press UK Government for urgent clarity
Rural Affairs Secretary and Trade Minister have written jointly to
the UK Government to voice the Scottish Government’s concern
about the possibility of the UK Government negotiating a
‘foundational trade partnership’ with the United States of
America, as reported recently in the media.
The letter clearly reiterates the Scottish Government’s
opposition to any derogation of food safety and animal welfare
standards, and asks that Scottish Ministers are fully involved –
and meaningfully engaged in UK Government’s activity in relation
to trading arrangements with the United States.
Ms Gougeon commented: “The interests of Scottish agriculture, and
other sectors, must not be traded away in order to secure a quick
deal with the US, or any country.”
The full text of the letter is below.
10 October 2023
Dear Thérèse and Nigel,
We are writing to highlight the Scottish Government’s serious
concerns about recent media reports of the possibility of the UK
Government negotiating a ‘foundational trade partnership’ with
the United States of America. This prospective arrangement
reportedly covers topics such as digital trade, labour
protections and agriculture. It is particularly concerning that
we are only hearing of this now from the media, and while the
implications of this arrangement are not yet clear, the media
reports will most certainly be of acute concern to our farming
communities and so we have decided to write to you jointly about
this issue.
The Scottish Government recognises the benefits to trade and
investment of building relationships with United States and this
is reflected in Scotland’s Vision for Trade, as well as our plan
for growing Scotland’s exports, A Trading Nation, where the US is
identified as Scotland’s number one priority market. As a result,
we have made clear the value we see in the Department for
Business and Trade’s Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) programme
with US States, and we have engaged constructively so that
Scotland might maximise any benefits that these state-level
agreements offer. For example, the UK and Washington State MoU on
trade cooperation, innovation, and clean energy, which the
Minister for International Trade recently shared with us, is the
most recent illustration of this close working relationship that
our governments have worked hard to establish.
Given this close cooperation on US MoUs, along with our proven
track record of engaging meaningfully and securely across the
suite of UK free trade agreements, we would be extremely
disappointed if it transpired that the UK Government had been
working on plans to deepen the trading relationship with the
United States without any indication, advance notification, nor
involvement of Scottish Ministers, leaving us to learn of this
purported development through the media.
However, it is the potential practical effects of such an
arrangement on Scottish farming and food interests which concern
us the most. As already mentioned, the Scottish Government, and
many of our agricultural exporters, view the United States as an
important destination for our food and drink produce, but we must
not forget that it is our reputation for safety and quality that
makes our exports so highly sought after in the first place. It
would be entirely counterproductive if we were to undermine these
high standards and lose market access elsewhere as the price to
secure a trade deal with the United States. More specifically, we
have concerns around any potential impact this may have on vital
UK-EU trade, and potential increased cost for business directly
and through increased scrutiny from our EU partners.
While, from media reporting, this deal appears to fall short of a
Free Trade Agreement it could be viewed as a bridging step
towards one. Working towards a quick deal, and in light of the
well-known domestic agriculture policy in the United States,
could lead to significant changes to consumer protections,
production standards and the profitability of our vital
agricultural sector if any trade deal enables US agri-food
imports produced to lower standards to be imported into the UK.
Language such as ‘science-based’ approaches or ‘equivalent’
standards is particularly concerning in light of the US use of
such terms in other trade agreements; it would not allow us to
protect our valued reputation for a clean and biosecure
environment for agrifood products.
Specifically, any relaxing of our opposition to hormone treated
beef, GM crops and chlorine washed chicken would be especially
egregious when the red meat sector in particular is already
facing substantial threat from the trade arrangements reached
with Australia and New Zealand and in light of consumer
opposition in Scotland to the use of such treatments. We would
find this completely unacceptable. The UK Government should not
be trading away the interests of Scottish agriculture, and other
sectors, in order to secure a quick deal with the US, or any
country.\
If the Prime Minister’s commitment made to farmers earlier this
year is to be honoured, we would not expect to see any
concessions like this in agriculture.
While we are well aware that the UK Government has a policy of
not commenting on leaks to the media, it is important to
recognise that the content of those reports have nonetheless
already created considerable concern in the agricultural sector.
We therefore suggest that you alleviate those concerns by clearly
reiterating your government’s opposition to any derogation of
food safety and standards and animal welfare standards.
The Scottish Government remains committed to engaging
constructively throughout any negotiation with the United States,
and will continue to do so with regards the MoU programme.
However, this engagement can be too easily undermined when
questions are raised through media reporting of this kind,
particularly if there is any degree of truth to the story. To
avoid this, I ask that you and your officials now commit to
involving Scottish Ministers and officials fully with regard to
the UK Government’s plans for improving trading conditions with
the United States going forward, and so that the veracity of any
media reports can be gauged without creating undue concern
between our administrations.
It is vital that we receive an early response to this letter and
so look forward to receiving clarity from you about this issue as
soon as possible.
Yours sincerely,
MAIRI GOUGEON
RICHARD LOCHHEAD
