NHS costs, food standards and intellectual property rights must be protected in any deal by the UK to join a major international trade agreement, a Lords committee has told ministers in a new report.
The peers have warned signing up to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), whose members include Australia, Japan, Mexico and Canada, could lead to higher charges for medicines which would mean bigger bills for the health service.
In its report, UK accession to the CPTPP: Scrutiny of the Government’s Negotiating Objectives, published today, the committee argues the benefits of accession will be dependent on the extent to which the government may be able to secure opt outs as part of the accession process.
It says that while the Government has set out specific red lines, they lack detail, and no indication is given of likely obstacles.
READ MORE: Easier for ballerinas to come to UK than lorry drivers, MPs told
The report adds that in some areas, such as on safeguarding the right regulate to achieve climate aims, no commitments or red lines are included.
On food standards, it raises fears on whether the CPTPP’s approach are at odds with the UK’s current precautionary approach, under which domestic restrictions on the use of antibiotics and levels of pesticides can be imposed.
“Food imports produced to lower standards could risk undercutting UK farmers and undermining the UK’s food standards regime,” it says.
“The committee welcomes the government’s commitment to uphold the UK’s food standards but urges it to articulate how it will seek to manage divergent regulatory approaches.
“Safeguards need to be in place to ensure that imports of foodstuffs and other goods are of the quality and safety that British consumers expect.”
On climate change, the Lords report calls on the Government to ensure its right to bring in legislation on climate change rights is maintained and to set out its plans for ensuring that CPTPP membership does not lead to greenhouse gas-intensive agricultural practices in other CPTPP countries, which could undermine the UK’s environmental standards.
The Lords committee says that while there are potential economic benefits to the UK joining the CPTPP, much of the benefit depends on the future expansion of the CPTPP, and how successfully the agreement can serve as a platform for co-operation and UK influence in the Asia-Pacific region.
READ MORE: Cummings revelations on Johnson's Brexit ignorance are truly shocking
It says that based on the existing membership, the Government only expects a 0.08% increase to GDP over 15 years.
“Other potential future adherents – such as South Korea and Thailand – offer greater potential,” says the report. “However, the two actual applicants after the UK have been China and Taiwan, raising both economic and strategic questions that the UK government should answer. “
On intellectual property, the committee notes that the rules of the CPTPP agreement directly conflict with the European Patent Convention, which “raises the prospect of significant economic damage to the UK’s patent industry”.
Baroness Hayter, chair of the House of Lords International Agreements Committee, said: “Overall, we found that immediate economic benefits of CPTPP membership are limited, but the agreement may open opportunities for collaboration and deeper relations in the Asia-Pacific region.”
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