A PROPOSED post-Brexit trade deal with the US could allow big American companies to "run riot" in the NHS, campaigners have warned.
Donald Trump's administration has published negotiating objectives for a deal which include demands for the UK to provide full market access for US drug firms and ensure that state institutions – such as the NHS – do not discriminate against American companies when purchasing goods and services.
The document also states the US will be seeking "comprehensive market access" for its agricultural products through the reduction or removal of tariffs and the elimination of "unwarranted barriers" to food and drink imports.
The Department for International Trade welcomed the document, published by the office of US trade representative Robert Lighthizer, as a sign that Washington is keen to start talks soon after Brexit.
Liam Fox's department said the UK would insist on maintaining "high standards for businesses, workers and consumers" in any deal.
READ MORE: Joanna Cherry lambasts UK Government for Eurotunnel shambles
But Labour MP Jo Stevens, a supporter of the People's Vote campaign for a second referendum, said the proposed deal – which also requires the removal of restrictions on transfers of personal data – would turn the NHS into "a playpen for huge US corporate interests".
"Donald Trump's administration has now made it clear just what it will be demanding from the UK in return for a trade deal – and one of those things is that we let big US companies run riot in the NHS," said Stevens.
"One demand of the US is that the NHS pay more to US drug companies and that US drug companies – the very corporations that have caused the opioids crisis in their home countries through reckless marketing and pressure on doctors – get full access to the NHS, long a demand from US mega-lobbyists in the pay of 'big pharma'.
"On top of that, the US government wants to destroy our world-leading data protection rules and allow drugs companies and big US health companies to ship personal data and our health overseas."
READ MORE: Dominic Raab accuses 'dishonourable' EU chiefs of bullying
Stevens also raised concerns about a US call for improved market access for "remanufactured goods exports", which she claimed could allow products containing hazardous materials such as asbestos to find their way into UK stores.
The 18-page negotiating objectives paper has revived controversy over whether the UK will maintain EU-style food safety and animal welfare standards after Brexit.
A Downing Street spokeswoman said: "We have always been very clear that we will not lower our food standards as part of a future trading agreement."
US companies have long complained that EU regulations limit American exports of food products such as chlorine-washed chicken, hormone-boosted beef and genetically modified crops.
Trump's commerce secretary Wilbur Ross warned in 2017 that continued adherence to EU standards after Brexit could act as a "landmine" to UK hopes of a free trade deal with the States.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel