Groups argue that giving parliamentarians more say over trade deals will ensure proper democratic oversight of agreements that could have a big impact on the public
As the Trade Bill returns to parliament today, a coalition of business leaders and non-profits has called on the UK government to back an amendment that would allow for greater parliamentary scrutiny of future trade deals, arguing that greater transparency over trade negotiations will help ensure that climate, nature, and animal welfare considerations are "at the heart" of the UK's post-Brexit trade policy.
Food and drinks giant Nestle, retail chain John Lewis Partnership, chicken producer Pilgrim's Pride, chemicals company BASF, and green business group Aldersgate Group are among a raft of organisations that have signed an open letter to the Prime Minister today urging him to accept an amendment introduced to the Trade Bill last month that would give Parliament a clearer say on the shape of future trade deals.
The group, which also includes a number of green NGOs and trade groups such as the National Farmers Union, WWF, ClientEarth, and Greenpeace, warns the UK will "fall behind" major trading powers, such as the US and EU, if its trade policy does not offer parliamentarians the opportunity to debate and vote on future trade agreements.
"Making sure parliamentarians have a vote would enhance the role of the advisory bodies," the group writes. "It would make sure there is a direct link between the signing of trade agreements and the British public who should benefit from them. And it would bolster the UK's international standing, demonstrating that it is committed to the highest levels of transparency and accountability."
The amendment in question, which was approved by the House of Lords in December, would give MPs and peers a chance to debate and vote on the government's trade negotiating objectives, in addition to creating a dedicated parliamentary committee to provide additional scrutiny during negotiations. It would also guarantee parliamentarians a vote on any final deals.
UK ministers have frequently emphasised the advantages for the UK in setting its own independent trade policy after Brexit, yet there are significant concerns among environmental campaigners and opposition politicians that the new system does not provide enough opportunity for the public and parliamentarians to engage and scrutinise the terms of future trade deals.
While the Trade Bill sets out plans for several channels of engagement, including the creation of a Trade and Agriculture Commission that represents farmers, retailers, and consumers and a number of other new advisory groups, in its current iteration ministers can override recommendations from independent bodies such as the Food Standards Agency.
In addition, campaigners have warned there will be no guaranteed parliamentary debate to establish what the UK government wants to achieve from new trade negotiations and parliament will have no guaranteed vote on finalised trade deals - a lack of scrutiny that activists fear will increase the risk of trade deals being adopted that lead to increased environmental impacts or put British firms at a competitive disadvantage.
Environmental and farming groups have repeatedly warned that the government could agree a trade deal with the US that would allow for the import of products that are produced to lower environmental or animal welfare standards. Similarly, there are wider concerns that without Parliamentary scrutiny the government will face less pressure to introduce clauses into trade deals that encourage countries to tackle deforestation or step up efforts to curb their greenhouse gas emissions.
"There's a lot of focus today on the "genocide amendment", which the government says gives too much power to the courts," Greener UK executive director Shaun Spiers said on Twitter this morning, referencing the ongoing debate over whether the High Court should be able to make a determination of genocide that could be introduced into trade agreements. "The solution: give parliament the right to approve or reject trade deals. Simple, democratic & the way to get public consent to new trade deals!"
👇 We agree with @neil_parish: "The best trade deals are those which carry democratic support and are developed in partnership with MPs, who are able to represent the concerns of their constituents, incl. brilliant local businesses." #TradeBill #scrutiny https://t.co/IqmUFcEQo3 https://t.co/7opYtrjlMj
— Sarah Williams (@sarahw243) January 19, 2021
The government has repeatedly argued that it will not take steps to dilute UK environmental standards or allow the import of controversial products such as chlorinated chicken. However, Ministers have to date rejected calls for greater scrutiny over trade negotiations and the adoption of dedicated non-regression clauses to guard against the watering down of existing standards.