Category: Speeches

  • Grant Shapps – 2023 Statement on Industrial Action and Minimum Service Levels

    Grant Shapps – 2023 Statement on Industrial Action and Minimum Service Levels

    The statement made by Grant Shapps, the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, in the House of Commons on 10 January 2023.

    With permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to make a statement on industrial action and minimum service levels.

    Nurses, paramedics and transport workers are called key workers for a reason. They truly are the lifeblood of this country; every person sitting in this Chamber is grateful for the work they do and I know everyone will agree that we cannot do without them. The Government will always defend their ability to withdraw their labour.

    However, we also recognise the pressures faced by those working in the public sector. Yesterday I invited union leaders in for talks across Government, and I am pleased to say we have seen some progress. We want to resolve disputes where possible, while also delivering what is fair and reasonable to the taxpayer. At the moment, all households are struggling with the repercussions of high inflation caused by covid and Putin’s barbaric invasion of Ukraine, and the Government are absolutely focused on tackling that.

    Granting inflation-busting pay deals that step outside of the independent pay review settlement process is not the sensible way to proceed and will not provide a fair outcome. We will instead continue to consult to find meaningful ways forward for the unions, and work with employers to improve the process and discuss the evidence that we have now submitted. In the meantime, the Government also have a duty to protect the public’s access to essential public services. Although we absolutely believe in the right to strike, we are duty-bound to protect the lives and livelihoods of the British people.

    The British people need to know that when they have a heart attack, a stroke or a serious injury, an ambulance will turn up, and that if they need hospital care, they have access to it. They need to know not only that those services are available, but that they can get trains or buses—particularly people who are most likely to be the least well-off in society.

    I thank those at the Royal College of Nursing, who, during their last strike, worked with health officials at a national level to ensure that safe levels of cover were in place when they took industrial action. They kept services such as emergency and acute care running. They may have disagreed, but they showed that they could do their protest and withdraw their labour in a reasonable and mature way. As ever, they put the public first, and we need all our public services to do the same.

    A lack of timely co-operation from the ambulance unions meant that employers could not reach agreement nationally for minimum safety levels during recent strikes. Health officials were left guessing the likely minimum coverage, making contingency planning almost impossible and putting all our constituents’ lives at risk. The ambulance strikes planned for tomorrow still do not have minimum safety levels in place. That will result in patchy emergency care for British people. This cannot continue.

    It is for moments such as this that we are introducing legislation focusing on blue-light emergency services and on delivering on our manifesto commitment to secure minimum service on the railways. I am introducing a Bill that will give the Government the power to ensure that vital public services will have to maintain a basic function, by delivering minimum safety levels to ensure that lives and livelihoods are not lost. We are looking at six key areas, each of which is critical to keeping the British people safe and society functioning: health, education, fire and rescue, transport, border security and nuclear decommissioning. We do not want to use this legislation, but we must ensure the safety of the British public. During the passage of the Bill, we intend to consult on what an adequate level of coverage looks like in fire, ambulance, and rail services. For the other sectors covered in the Bill, we hope to reach minimum service agreements so that we do not have to use the powers—sectors will be able to come to that position, just as the nurses have done in recent strikes.

    That is a common-sense approach, and we are not the first to follow it. The legislation will bring us in line with other modern European countries such as France, Spain, Italy and Germany, all of which already have these types of rules in place. Even the International Labour Organisation—the guardian of workers’ rights around the world to which the TUC itself subscribes—says that minimum service levels are a proportionate way of balancing the right to strike with the need to protect the wider public. The first job of any Government is to keep the public safe, and unlike other countries, we are not proposing to ban strikes, but we do need to know that unions will be held to account.

    Opposition Members who object to minimum safety levels will need to explain to their constituents why, if they had a heart attack, stroke, or life-threatening illness on a strike day, there were no minimum safety standards in place—[Interruption.] I can see that they do not want to hear it, but they will also need to explain why their leader, the right hon. and learned Member for Holborn and St Pancras (Keir Starmer), has already promised—without hearing any of these details—to stand in the way of this legislation and to repeal minimum safety levels, which are in the interests of their constituents, are in place in every other mature European democracy and neighbouring country, and would protect lives and livelihoods in this country. That is the difference between a Conservative Government who take difficult decisions to protect the welfare of our nation, and the Opposition, who too often appear to be in the pay of their union paymasters. I commend this statement to the House.

  • Diana Johnson – 2023 Comments on Windrush Lessons Learned Review

    Diana Johnson – 2023 Comments on Windrush Lessons Learned Review

    The comments made by Diana Johnson, the Chair of the Home Affairs Committee and the Labour MP for Kingston upon Hull North, in the House of Commons on 10 January 2023.

    Dame Diana Johnson (Kingston upon Hull North) (Lab)

    The Home Affairs Committee has spent a great deal of time looking at the Windrush scandal and the work of Wendy Williams, including a visit to the compensation scheme unit in Sheffield, because we remain very concerned about that scheme and we reiterate our call for it to be given to an arm’s length body outside the Home Office. Very worrying are reports that the Government are planning not to take forward the recommendations on the migrants commissioner or the recommendations on the extension of the powers of the independent chief inspector of borders and immigration, who is currently the only inspector in Government who cannot publish his reports without the permission of the Home Office, and only one out of 23 of his reports has been published on time. That comes alongside the delays in the appointment of a new modern slavery commissioner. Can the Minister confirm today that the particular recommendations around the independent chief inspector of borders and immigration will be taken forward quickly by the Government?

    Miss Dines

    I do not accept that there is any delay or difficulty in rising to the challenge but, as the right hon. Lady knows, the Government cannot comment in relation to leaks. The Government must be judged on what they actually do, not on worries about what journalists say might be happening. Let us wait a modest amount of time to see what the Government actually do. We must judge the Government’s record on delivery, not on speculation in The Guardian.

  • Alison Thewliss – 2023 Speech on Windrush Lessons Learned Review

    Alison Thewliss – 2023 Speech on Windrush Lessons Learned Review

    The speech made by Alison Thewliss, the SNP MP for Glasgow Central, in the House of Commons on 10 January 2023.

    Alison Thewliss (Glasgow Central) (SNP)

    Whitehall sources have been quoted in The Guardian as saying:

    “The Williams review is not set in stone”.

    It would be a betrayal of that review and of those affected if there is to be no migrants commissioner, no reconciliation events and no extra powers for the independent chief inspector of borders and immigration. The Windrush compensation scheme has been painfully slow, with at least 23 people known to have died while their claims were being processed. So will the Minister confirm that none of the planned changes will affect the already ineffective compensation scheme and that the claims still outstanding will be concluded at the earliest opportunity? What confidence can those who do us the honour of coming to these islands for sanctuary, for work, for study and for love have in this Government when the UK Tory Government ignore the terrible injustices of Windrush, fail to learn the lessons and double down on attacking their fellow human beings?

    Miss Dines

    The hon. Lady should not believe everything she reads in the paper because there is no end date to Wendy Williams’ appointment, she continues to review and the Government take her views very seriously. I do not accept the premise of the “delay”. These issues are dealt with sensitively. It is important not to have a knee-jerk reaction and rush. Detailed, fundamental work needs to be done and Members must judge the “delay”—or the progress, as I would rather say—by the fact that there is a 59% success rate and so much money paid out. What is important is that the engagement, which has improved over the past three to six months, has meant a dramatic increase in the number of those taking up the scheme. There is always more to do and the Government will not say that they are doing everything right, but they are 100% committed and I do not accept that there is delay or a willingness to ditch, as is implied, the independent reviewer, whose work is so important.

  • Grant Shapps – 2023 Speech to the Atlantic Council at its Global Energy Forum

    Grant Shapps – 2023 Speech to the Atlantic Council at its Global Energy Forum

    The speech made by Grant Shapps, the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, in Abu Dhabi on 14 January 2023.

    The UAE seems to be playing some part in my fate.

    Last year, I found myself just 100 kilometres away from here.

    But, far from the beaches and the skyscrapers of Abu Dhabi and Dubai, it felt like a different world.

    There, in the middle of the desert, I saw a sparkling sea of a different kind.

    The deep blue shine of millions of photovoltaic panels in the sun, generating hundreds of megawatts of renewable electricity.

    Panels which will eventually become part of one of the largest solar plants in the world.

    I had little idea then that fate would return me here only a year later as the Minister responsible for energy.

    Today, some things remain the same; the UAE is still right at the cutting edge in generating low-cost solar power on a frankly stunning scale. Right here in Abu Dhabi, they’re breaking fresh records in solar technology at Al Dhafra and Shams.

    But much has changed, and not just for me.

    In many ways, we find ourselves in a different world.

    The last time this forum convened, Putin’s barbaric invasion of Ukraine was just beginning.

    Now, we face a winter which, for many in Europe, is overshadowed by concern about falling energy supplies and rising prices…

    …a winter when households have had to think twice before turning up the thermostat…

    …when factories have been forced to pause production…

    …when inflation has rocketed…

    and growth has slowed.

    It is also a winter that comes at the end of a year that saw flooding in Pakistan…

    …heatwaves in the UK…

    …and bomb cyclones in the US.

    A year when we began to feel the likely impacts of climate change in earnest.

    There is much about the last twelve months that I could not have foreseen back then.

    And looking forward to 2023, the future is far from clear; I certainly wouldn’t want to make too many predictions.

    But – putting matters of predestination aside – there’s one thing we can be sure of: energy matters now more than ever.

    So where do we go from here?

    Perhaps we are best off starting with the ways that world has changed for the better in 2022.

    Off our Eastern coast, we completed Hornsea Two – the world’s largest offshore wind farm.

    There, you will find over a hundred turbines.

    At their very highest point, they are a dizzying 200m above the stormy seas below.

    For those of you who have visited the Zayed Sports City Stadium, that’s almost the height of two football pitches stacked on top of each other.

    Just a single rotation of one of these turbines generates enough electricity to power a home for 24 hours.

    But Hornsea Two is far from our first success – because we’re home to the world’s second, third, and fourth largest wind farms, too.

    Today, all of them are capturing the high winds of the North Sea, in a year when we beat our record for wind power generation three times.

    And across the Atlantic in California, we’ve witnessed another extraordinary achievement.

    Just a month ago, scientists at the Laurence Livermore National Laboratory announced one of the most significant energy breakthroughs in living memory.

    Aiming 192 high-powered lasers at a tiny spherical capsule just 2mm wide, they were able to harness the same reactions that power the sun and stars to demonstrate fusion ignition, proving what until now had only existed in theory and paving the way towards what could be one day a near-limitless source of energy for the future. And back in the UK, we’re taking leaps of our own.

    We’re not just developing our very own fusion power plant, a ‘spherical tokamak’ on the site of an old coal power station in the Midlands. We are also operating the Joint Energy Torus, the most powerful fusion facility in the world and taking the lead in regulating and commercialising fusion technology, working out the best way to get it out of the lab and into the real market place, and into the world.

    These are stories of entrepreneurs and innovators, working together to deliver clean, secure energy for millions, and jobs for thousands more.

    Stories that tell us that the fates of energy security, net zero, and the economic growth are inseparably intertwined.

    Dependable supplies of fossil fuels, particularly natural gas, have a crucial role to play in easing the energy transition, which we just heard about in the discussion on stage.

    But it is only by harnessing the power of transformative green technologies that we can build a global energy system that is fit for the future.

    Whether that’s in the UK, where we’re developing small modular reactors which promise to make nuclear easier, faster, and cheaper… and we have been running them in the sea for the last six days.

    …or here in Abu Dhabi, where operations have begun at the Barakah nuclear power plant, the first nuclear power plant not just in the UAE but in the whole Arab world, expected to deliver up to a quarter of the nation’s electricity needs when fully up and running…

    …and where, last week, ADNOC announced $15bn to accelerate its decarbonisation strategy, investing in everything from energy efficiency and electrification to carbon capture.

    Now yesterday, I signed a Clean Energy Memorandum between the UK and the UAE to promote energy security and investment between our two nations.

    Agreements like this matter. Because when it comes to climate change, the whole world has a stake. And none of us should have to settle for less.

    So working together really matters…

    …to deliver a low-carbon future that isn’t just more secure and more prosperous…

    …but a future that is fairer is a future I think that is worth fighting for.

    Our International Climate Finance has already provided an astonishing 58 million people with improved access to clean energy since 2011.

    But we are delivering on our pledge to double it up to at least £11.6bn from 2021, reaching tens of millions more.

    Because the Green Industrial Revolution must not leave anyone behind.

    After all, you can’t just shut down your power stations and be done with it, leaving millions without energy or employment.

    That’s where Just Energy Transition Partnerships come in. They are mobilising billions to support the transition from coal power to clean growth in key economies like South Africa and Indonesia.

    And, by investing in new green energy supplies, electric vehicles, and hydrogen, they are providing security and opportunity for communities across these countries.

    Ladies and gentlemen, I have to say it is fitting that we are here in the UAE, 2023’s COP28 President elect Sultan Al Jaber and his great leadership and speech this morning. Because it is here that we are seeing and building on the extraordinary progress that has been made since Glasgow, built on in Egypt, but this year we will have to see those real developments, in this stocktake COP taking place in November and December.

    We face challenges the likes of which no generation has ever faced before.

    Let me just take you briefly back to that solar sea in the desert that I talked about visiting last year.

    Today, they’re building the tallest solar tower in the entire world.

    Concentrating the heat reflected by tens of thousands of moving mirrors onto a single point, it will be a shining a beacon hundreds of meters above the ground – and a lighthouse above the blue beneath.

    Innovations like these -creating powers in new ways –  must  be an inspiration for us all, guiding us towards a better energy technology of tomorrow.

    But none of this can be done alone. None of it can be done alone.

    I have talked today about fate, not just my fate but also your fate – or our joint fates.

    And I said before that we could only be certain of one thing: energy matters more today than it ever has done in the history of humanity.

    In the face of great challenges, we have no oracles to turn to…

    …nor do I have any Delphic maxims to offer.

    But, without climbing the steps of Mount Parnassus, or any other high mountain, I think there is one thing that we can be absolutely sure of…we will succeed as humanity in doing this.

    One thing I can’t be certain of is my fate, other than to say, I know the UAE will continue to be a big part of it and I can predict with absolute confidence that I will be back here in December. I look forward to seeing you all at COP28. Thank you very much.

  • James Cleverly – 2023 Statement on the Execution of Alireza Akbari

    James Cleverly – 2023 Statement on the Execution of Alireza Akbari

    The statement made by James Cleverly, the Foreign Secretary, on 14 January 2023.

    The execution of British-Iranian Alireza Akbari is a barbaric act that deserves condemnation in the strongest possible terms. Through this politically motivated act, the Iranian regime has once again shown its callous disregard for human life.

    This will not stand unchallenged and we will be summoning the Iranian Charge d’Affaires to make clear our disgust at Iran’s actions. Our thoughts are with Mr Akbari’s family.

  • James Cleverly – 2023 Statement Warning Iran Not to Execute Alireza Akbari

    James Cleverly – 2023 Statement Warning Iran Not to Execute Alireza Akbari

    The statement made by James Cleverly, the Foreign Secretary, on 13 January 2023.

    The Iranian regime should be in no doubt. We are watching the case of Alireza Akbari closely.   Iran must not follow through with their brutal threat of execution.

  • Stephen Kinnock – 2023 Speech on Windrush Lessons Learned Review

    Stephen Kinnock – 2023 Speech on Windrush Lessons Learned Review

    The speech made by Stephen Kinnock, the Labour MP for Aberavon, in the House of Commons on 10 January 2023.

    The reality is that this Government’s treatment of the Windrush generation is surely one of the most shameful episodes in our post-war political history. The Windrush community played a pivotal role in rebuilding Britain. We all owe them a debt of honour and gratitude but, instead, consecutive Conservative Governments have treated them with utter contempt. First, they were victimised under the hostile environment policy, and then they were let down by a poorly administered compensation scheme, under which just 1,300 people have been awarded compensation when the Government originally estimated that 15,000 should be eligible. Now it is reported that the Government are set to betray the Windrush generation once again by U-turning on their commitment to implementing all 30 recommendations in Wendy Williams’s lessons learned report.

    In September 2021, the then Home Secretary, the right hon. Member for Witham (Priti Patel), restated her aim to put right the wrongs of this sorry affair, yet today we find the Government are rowing back on some of their commitments, including by refusing to hand additional powers to the independent chief inspector of borders and immigration and by scrapping reconciliation and community events.

    Why are the Government so terrified of scrutiny? Their toxic combination of incompetence and indifference is failing the Windrush generation, just as it is failing the country as a whole. Given that Wendy Williams says that only eight of her recommendations have been implemented, will the Minister tell me today how many of the Williams recommendations have been implemented and how many the Government are ditching, as is widely reported by the media?

    Why have thousands of the Windrush generation still not received any compensation at all? On the 75th anniversary of the Windrush landing, are the Windrush generation being betrayed by this Government once again?

    Sarah Dines

    This Government are absolutely not betraying the Windrush generation. Successive Governments of all colours have failed to step up to the mark, but this Government are stepping up. The Windrush generation are rightly identified as British and have the right to be in this country, and this remains separate from the many narratives that have been written.

    The hon. Gentleman knows that the Government do not comment on leaks. What I can say is that we have matched the scale of Wendy’s challenge with the scale of our ambition and delivery. Wendy acknowledges that our ambition to achieve genuine cultural change requires ongoing reflection, which is what we are doing. The Home Office has provided regular updates on the good progress, and the statistics bear out the hard work that is happening.

    I am afraid that the narrative is simply not quite right. I remind the House that 4,558 claims have been received, and the total compensation offered is £59.58 million, of which more than £51 million has already been paid. Fifty-nine per cent. of claims have a final decision and, as a lawyer in my previous profession, I know that that is quite a high number. The Government are absolutely committed to righting this injustice.

  • Sarah Dines – 2023 Statement on Windrush Lessons Learned Review

    Sarah Dines – 2023 Statement on Windrush Lessons Learned Review

    The statement made by Sarah Dines, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Office, in the House of Commons on 10 January 2023.

    Since the injustices of Windrush came to light, there has been a concerted effort across the Home Office to right the wrongs suffered by those affected. That work continues, and the Department is making sustained progress on delivering on the recommendations of the Windrush lessons learned review of 2020 and the commitments made in the comprehensive improvement plan of 2020. In her report last year, the independent reviewer Wendy Williams concluded that 21 of her recommendations had been met or partially met. She acknowledged that the scale of the challenge she had set the Department was significant and that change on that scale takes time.

    We have made progress in delivering against Wendy Williams’s recommendations. In October 2022, the Home Office established the Office for the Independent Examiner of Complaints, and Moiram Ali was appointed as the independent examiner following a public appointment recruitment process. The Home Office has also held over 200 engagement and outreach events across the country, and the Windrush help teams have attended over 120 one-to-one surgeries to help people apply for documentation.

    As of the end of October 2022, the Home Office has paid out or offered £59.58 million of compensation to Windrush victims. The “Serving Diverse Communities: Acting on Our Values” learning package was launched across the Home Office in June 2022, starting with recommendation 24 on learning for senior civil servants and recommendation 29 on diversity and inclusion. The learning package for recommendation 6 on the history of the UK and its relationship with the rest of the world has been designed and is undergoing final review prior to implementation.

    I am pleased that the independent reviewer of Windrush progress has concluded that there are several areas in which very good progress has been made, but she rightly holds the Home Office to account for areas and recommendations where sufficient progress has not yet been made. She concludes that there can be “no doubt” that the Department has risen to the “daunting challenge” she set us.

    We know there is more to do. Many people suffered terrible injustices at the hands of successive Governments, and the Department will continue working hard to right the wrongs and to deliver a Home Office worthy of every community it serves.

  • Elliot Colburn – 2023 Parliamentary Question on Domestic Burglaries

    Elliot Colburn – 2023 Parliamentary Question on Domestic Burglaries

    The parliamentary question asked by Elliot Colburn, the Conservative MP for Carshalton and Wallington, in the House of Commons on 10 January 2023.

    Elliot Colburn (Carshalton and Wallington) (Con)

    Carshalton and Wallington residents are deeply concerned about burglaries. I welcome the Metropolitan police’s commitment to attend all burglaries, but will my right hon. Friend outline what his Department is doing to ensure that those who are arrested receive appropriate sentences?

    Dominic Raab

    My hon. Friend is absolutely right. I can tell him that domestic burglary has actually fallen by half since 2010, and the Metropolitan police’s operational tenacity is one element of that. On sentencing, the maximum sentence is 14 years. That is obviously an individual decision for judges, but I can also tell him that since 2010 the average sentence has increased by nine months, from 22.6 months to 31.6 months. There has been a step change and an increase in sentences for burglary, as well as the measures we are taking on police and law enforcement.

  • Government Explainer to the UK/Australia Trade Deal

    Government Explainer to the UK/Australia Trade Deal

    The explainer issued by HM Government on the UK/Australia trade deal on 9 December 2022.

    Trade Bill overview

    The Trade (Australia and New Zealand) Bill enables the ratification and implementation of the UK’s free trade agreements (FTAs) with Australia and New Zealand.

    These agreements deliver an important benefit of leaving the European Union (EU) – the UK’s ability to conduct its own independent trade policy. They support economic growth and will benefit all the nations and regions of the UK.

    Specifically, the Bill will give the government the powers it needs to:

    • extend duties and remedies to suppliers from Australia and New Zealand in domestic law for procurement covered by the FTA
    • amend the domestic procurement regulations to bring them in line with commitments in the Australia agreement
    • make changes to stay compliant over the lifetime of the agreement, for example updating the names of government entities if these change in future

    Once the FTAs take effect, businesses and citizens all around the UK can start to feel the benefits, including:

    • a projected £2.3 billion boost to the UK economy from the Australia FTA and £800 million from the New Zealand FTA
    • the elimination of all tariffs on UK goods exports to Australia and New Zealand, from cars, chocolate, Scotch whisky and fashion to buses, excavators and ships
    • flexible rules of origin which mean UK businesses can use some imported parts and ingredients and still qualify for the new 0% tariffs when exporting to both countries
    • removal of UK import tariffs on goods from Australia and New Zealand including favourites such as wine, swimwear, surfboards, boots, manuka honey and kiwi fruits – paving the way for UK consumers to get more choice, quality products and lower prices
    • cheaper access to ingredients, materials and components from Australian and New Zealand for UK manufacturers – such as hydraulic power engines and pressure reducing valves from Australia and make-up and biscuit ingredients from New Zealand
    • unprecedented access to the Australian market for UK services, going further than Australia has in any other such deal, meaning businesses from architecture and law to financial services and shipping will be able to compete in both places on an equal footing
    • advanced digital provisions which allow UK tech and services firms, creative industries and many other sectors to break into new markets in Australia and New Zealand, including securing the free flow of data
    • making business easier through the use of electronic contracts and signatures
    • dedicated chapters to support small businesses and help them access opportunities in Australia and New Zealand
    • guaranteed rights for UK investors to invest across the Australian economy and a reduced need for them to pass investment review checks in both Australia and New Zealand
    • access for British companies to bid for Australian government contracts worth around £10 billion per year on an equal footing with Australian firms, including major infrastructure projects, financial and business services
    • new rules making it easier for Brits to live, travel and work in Australia and New Zealand.

    Read more about the benefits of the UK-Australia FTA and the benefits of the UK-New Zealand FTA.

    While the focus of the Bill is narrow, there are still many common misconceptions around the UK-Australia and UK-New Zealand FTAs, which are addressed below.

    Agriculture

    Myth: Providing generous market access to Australia and New Zealand will undercut the UK’s farming industry. The UK market will be flooded with foreign imports.

    Reality: Increased imports from Australia are more likely to displace imports from the EU – the source of 230,000 tonnes of UK beef imports in 2020 – than to hurt UK farmers.

    With respect to sheep meat and beef in particular, it is unlikely that large volumes will be diverted to the UK from lucrative markets in Asia, which are geographically closer to Australia. More than 75% of Australian beef and 70% of Australian sheep meat exports in 2020 went to markets in Asia and the Pacific.

    For the first 15 years of the New Zealand FTA there will be no new sheep meat access to the UK for New Zealand unless its WTO sheep meat quota into the UK reaches 90% utilisation. We do not believe this is likely to happen.

    Furthermore, we import far more beef from the EU than from New Zealand, all at 0% tariff and with no quotas.

    In addition, the government is committed to encouraging people to support British produce. 81% of retail beef sales in the UK are under the British logo (according to the National Beef Association) and several major high street retailers have committed to only using 100% British beef, notably Aldi, Morrisons, Marks and Spencer and Waitrose.

    Myth: UK farmers will not be protected by these free trade agreements.

    Reality: Both agreements include safeguards for the most sensitive parts of the UK farming community.

    The UK-Australia deal includes:

    1. Tariff-rate quotas – these last up to 10 years, depending on the product, and automatically apply higher tariffs to imports above a certain volume threshold (known as the quota). Additionally, on sheep meat, if volume thresholds under tariff-rate quotas are consistently filled in years one to 10, the UK can periodically reduce the volume thresholds of the quotas or safeguards by 25%.
    2. Product-specific safeguards – these have a similar effect from year 11 to year 15 of the agreement, imposing high tariffs – of 20% for beef and sheep meat – above a volume threshold. If the product-specific safeguards for sheep meat are triggered in this period, the UK can periodically reduce the volume thresholds of the quotas or safeguards by 25%.
    3. General bilateral safeguard mechanism – this applies to all products and will provide a temporary safety net for UK producers threatened with serious injury from increased imports as a result of tariff liberalisation under the FTA.  This protection will last for a product’s tariff liberalisation period plus 5 years in order to allow domestic industries time to adjust.

    The UK-New Zealand deal includes:

    1. Tariff liberalisation for sensitive goods staged over time to allow time for adjustment.
    2. Tariff-rate quotas and product-specific safeguards for a range of the most sensitive agricultural products, including beef, sheep meat, cheese, butter and apples. These measures will limit the volume of duty-free imports permitted and, in the case of beef and sheep meat, will be in place for 15 years.
    3. A general bilateral safeguard mechanism for all products, providing a temporary safety net for producers threatened with serious injury from increased imports as a result of tariff liberalisation under the FTA. For beef, the transition period is 15 years. For sheep meat, the transition period is 20 years. This will allow the farming sector significant time to adjust.

    Even after these protections expire, the UK will still be able to apply global safeguards under the WTO, as we have with steel.

    Myth: These FTA deals will not help British farmers export their goods.

    Reality: Australia is one of the most important destinations for UK food and drink exports and this trade deal will bring opportunities to boost exports from every part of the UK, in a sector which contributes £120 billion to our economy.

    UK food and drink exports to Australia have more than doubled in the last decade. They will benefit from the elimination of tariffs on all products, including biscuits, whisky and gin (previously 5%) and cheese (previously up to around 20%).

    The deals will also immediately remove all tariffs on UK exports to New Zealand, including food and drink such as gin (up to 5%), chocolate (5%), pork (5%) and wine (5%). UK exporters will be able to do business at lower costs and gain an advantage over international rivals in the New Zealand import market, a market which is expected to grow by around 30% by 2030.

    The agreements also prioritise helping more small businesses sell their goods to Australia and New Zealand for the first time. This could help resolve the barriers frequently cited by food and drink exporters, such as complex labelling and sanitary and phytosanitary requirements.

    Animal welfare and food safety

    Myth: Australia and New Zealand’s lower food safety and animal welfare standards will mean lower-quality produce ends up on UK shelves.

    Reality: All food and drink products imported into the UK will continue to have to comply with our rigorous import requirements as well as UK food regulations.

    For example, hormone-treated beef is banned in the UK and will not be allowed to enter the UK market. The Food Standards Agency and Food Standards Scotland will continue to protect our food standards.

    Imports of animal products are also covered by the Sanitary Agreement and the UK’s imports regime.

    Both FTAs contain stand-alone animal welfare chapters and non-regression clauses. These mean the partner countries pledge not to lower their animal welfare standards to undercut each other.

    The independent Trade and Agriculture Commission (TAC) report on Australia concluded that unsafe Australian products were unlikely to be imported in most cases and that there were safeguards in the deal to maintain animal welfare and environmental standards.

    The TAC examined concerns about mistreatment of animals, mistreatment of the environment and dangerous practices with pesticides, with chairman Prof Lorand Bartels saying they were “just not well-founded, or they were a bit exaggerated or misunderstood”.

    The TAC’s report on New Zealand concluded that the UK-New Zealand FTA would not require the UK to change existing levels of statutory protections. In the case of environmental matters, the FTA goes beyond existing WTO obligations. The TAC added that New Zealand would not be able gain a trade advantage by lowering its standards of protection.

    The TAC examined concerns relating to antibiotic usage, pesticide usage and climate change and the report concluded that in all cases, including New Zealand’s use of pesticides banned in the UK, it was not a cause for concern. On pesticides, the report concluded the FTA did not reduce the UK’s existing rights under WTO law to regulate imports. It also gave the UK “enhanced rights under the FTA to ensure that New Zealand does not fail to ‘endeavour’ to maintain high levels of environmental protection”. The TAC also said it did not consider it likely that New Zealand’s existing pesticide rules would put it in breach of this obligation.

    Myth: Australia and New Zealand do not care about animal welfare.

    Reality: Maintaining our high standards is a red line in all our trade negotiations. Australian animal welfare standards are higher than many other countries around the world and are in some cases higher than those in the EU.

    RSPCA Australia worked closely with the Australian government to develop improved animal welfare guidelines and standards in 2016. The new standards are in the process of being enshrined in state and territorial law.

    Australian RSPCA-approved farms have animal welfare standards closer to the UK’s than current Australian legislation, including bans on tethering, hot-iron branding, sow stalls and veal crates and provide similar enrichments for meat and layer chickens.

    New Zealand is a global leader in animal welfare and shares the UK’s commitment to further improving and advancing our already high animal welfare standards. Both governments have a longstanding recognition of the sentience of animals. The Animal Protection Index ranks both New Zealand and the UK highly compared with others around the world across a range of animal welfare indicators.

    The UK and New Zealand already have a Veterinary Equivalency Agreement, meaning we trust and recognise many of their animal health standards as equivalent to the UK.

    Environment and climate change

    Myth: These trade deals do not contain environmental safeguards.

    Reality: The Australia FTA:

    • provides a vehicle for working with Australia to strengthen its policy response to the climate crisis
    • commits the UK and Australia to work collaboratively on climate change and reaffirms their commitments to upholding all their obligations under the Paris Agreement
    • ensures neither Australia nor the UK can deviate from their environmental laws to gain an unfair advantage in trade and investment

    Under the FTA, the UK and Australia will work together to:

    • combat illegal logging
    • control trade in products which contribute to the depletion of the ozone layer
    • prevent pollution from shipping and cooperate on addressing marine litter, including plastics and microplastics
    • promote conservation (including of sharks, turtles, seabirds)
    • tackle subsidies that contribute to overfishing, and enforcement to deter illegal fishing
    • conserve biodiversity and to tackle illegal trade in wild flora and fauna

    The New Zealand FTA:

    • sets new benchmarks on a range of issues, going beyond the precedent in several areas and supporting both UK and New Zealand efforts in important areas, from transitioning away from fossil fuels to deforestation and sustainable fisheries
    • contains the most comprehensive environmental goods list with liberalised tariffs in any FTA to date, with tariffs removed on products such as electric vehicles and wind turbine parts
    • includes ambitious commitments to end electricity generation from unabated coal, take steps to eliminate fossil fuel subsidies where they exist, and pursue an ambitious phasedown of hydrofluorocarbons
    • includes commitments to tackle environmental challenges such as illegal wildlife trade (including in ivory), air pollution, marine pollution and litter, and promote biodiversity, sustainable agriculture, and the transition to a circular economy
    • affirms our commitments to implement multilateral environmental agreements, including the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement and preserves the UK’s right to regulate including for net zero

    Myth: By signing this trade deal with Australia, the UK is encouraging poor agricultural practices, especially in relation to forests.

    Reality: Both the UK and Australia have committed to combating illegal logging and related trade, an issue of critical importance to the preservation of our natural environment and biodiversity.

    The environment chapter with Australia recognises the importance of sustainable forest management and strengthens bilateral cooperation and information-sharing.  We have also agreed provisions on promoting and cooperating on the transition towards a circular economy and reducing waste. These go beyond the terms of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, alongside cooperation on further areas including air quality and marine litter.

    Australia has also recently signed up to the Glasgow Leaders’ Declaration on Forests and Land Use at COP26 which includes a pledge to end deforestation by 2030.

    Australia has been reforesting rather than deforesting. The UK would be able to raise the issue of deforestation with Australia in the FTA’s Environment Working Group.

    Impacts of the deals

    Myth: Australia and New Zealand benefit more from these deals than the UK does.

    Reality: Australia and New Zealand are priority markets and valuable strategic partners in strengthening and increasing a UK network of trade agreements. By removing barriers, we generate more trade with Australia and New Zealand than if we had no agreement.

    These new partnerships with Australia and New Zealand are expected to increase bilateral trade by 53% and 59% respectively in the long run. They are expected to boost the UK economy by £2.3 billion and £800 million when compared to projected levels of GDP in 2035. The UK-Australia deal goes further than Australia has ever gone before in giving access to services companies. This means UK services from architecture and legal to financial services and shipping will be able to compete in the Australian market on a guaranteed equal footing.

    This could increase exports of UK services to Australia, which were worth £5 billion in 2020. UK investors will also benefit from more access than ever before to opportunities in Australia, with guaranteed rights to invest across the Australian economy. The majority of UK investments will no longer need to be reviewed by the Australian Foreign Investment Review Board – saving time, saving money and cutting red tape for UK investors.

    The UK-Australia deal is mutually beneficial in the long run, boosting both economies by £2.3 billion each when compared to projected levels of GDP in 2035.

    The UK-New Zealand trade relationship was worth £2.5 billion in 2021; the agreement is expected to significantly increase this by the equivalent of around £1.7 billion in the long run.

    Myth: These FTAs do not boost UK exports, only Australian and New Zealand exports into the UK.

    Reality: UK exports to New Zealand are estimated to increase by £0.7 billion, and UK imports from New Zealand are estimated to increase by £1 billion when compared to projected levels of trade in 2035.

    In terms of estimated growth in gross value added (GVA) in absolute terms, the largest contributions come from expansions in the manufacture of machinery (0.11% or £46 million) and motor vehicles (0.24% or £43 million).

    Services sectors are estimated to make the strongest contribution to the estimated growth in GVA as a result of the agreements, especially in terms of:

    • wholesale and retail services (0.04% or £105 million)
    • public services (0.03% or £82 million)
    • other services – transport, water, dwellings (0.03% or £82 million)

    UK exports to Australia are estimated to increase by £6.2 billion, when compared to projected levels in 2035 in the absence of the FTA.

    The agreement includes immediate tariff-free access on £2.3 billion worth of UK exports. 98% of estimated tariff reductions will come into immediate effect, on UK exports such as cars, Scotch whisky and ceramics. Once staging is complete, in year 6 of the agreement, 100% of UK exports will be eligible for tariff-free access.

    Duties of up to 5% will be eliminated on UK exports to Australia such as cars, whisky, some pharmaceutical products, motors, clothing and even Christmas decorations. Tariffs of up to around 20% on UK agri-food products such as cheese will also be eliminated.

    Based on historic trade flows, the total annual tariff reductions on UK exports to Australia are estimated to be £115 million at entry into force and £116 million in year 6. This is without considering potential increases in UK exports to Australia resulting from this agreement.

    Myth: We should be focussing on deals with bigger trading partners, such as the US or the Indo-Pacific region, as they will bring the biggest trade benefits.

    Reality: Both Australia and New Zealand are important partners in the Asia-Pacific region. These deals with both Australia and New Zealand complement the UK’s accession to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP). Australia and New Zealand are both leading members and have supported the UK’s bid for membership.

    These agreements will give the UK access to new supply chains and enable UK businesses to use Australia and New Zealand as a launchpad into Asia.

    These trade agreements are an important part in realising the government’s ambition to putting the UK at the centre of a network of modern deals spanning the Americas and Indo-Pacific.

    Myth: There has been no consideration of the impact these deals will have on UK nations and regions.

    Reality: These FTAs will deliver benefits to people, businesses and communities throughout the country and support economic growth.

    Playing to the strengths of all UK nations and regions, they:

    • benefit Scotland’s financial services industry
    • allow easier market access for engineering services firms in the West Midlands
    • provide new opportunities for Welsh fintech companies in Cardiff and Newport
    • help carmakers support thousands of jobs in the North East of England
    • cut tariffs for Northern Ireland’s textiles exporters

    The following table shows the projected GDP benefits for each part of the UK for each FTA:

    Nation or region Benefit from Australia FTA Benefit from New Zealand FTA
    East Midlands £90 million £20 million
    East of England £140 million £35 million
    London £400 million £130 million
    North East £65 million £15 million
    North West £189 million £55 million
    Northern Ireland £20 million £5 million
    Scotland £120 million £35 million
    South East £295 million £85 million
    South West £130 million £35 million
    Wales £60 million £15 million
    West Midlands £195 million £50 million
    Yorkshire and the Humber £100 million £25 million

    Parliamentary scrutiny

    Myth: The UK government has not fulfilled its obligations on scrutiny for these FTAs.

    Reality: Since the passage of the Japan FTA in Autumn 2020 the government has put in place more opportunities for Parliament to scrutinise free trade agreements.

    In the case of the Australia FTA, the government has exceeded its statutory obligations, passing the agreement text to Parliament almost 6 months before the start of the official Constitutional Reform and Governance Act (CRaG) scrutiny period in June 2022. The TAC report was passed to the IAC and ITC on 8 April – a week after it was received and in advance of its publication on 13 April 2022.

    In addition:

    • the full economic case and objectives were published at the start of the negotiations
    • full updates were provided at the end of every negotiating round
    • the full text of the treaties, including economic impact and explanatory documents were published as soon as possible after the agreements were signed
    • the Trade and Agriculture Commission and Food Standards Agency have independently reviewed the trade deals and reported on the impacts
    • the International Trade Select Committee has also undertaken a review of the trade deals

    We continue to review arrangements, ensuring they remain fit for purpose.

    Myth: The UK government has not accommodated requests from Parliament to scrutinise trade deals.

    Reality: CRaG provides an effective and robust framework for scrutiny of treaties that require ratification, including free trade agreements. While formally legislated for in 2010 under the previous Labour government, its origins date back almost 100 years.

    Under CRaG, the government must lay relevant treaties before Parliament for 21 sitting days before it can ratify them. Parliament has the power to prevent ratification and the House of Commons can do so indefinitely.

    In line with this government’s commitment to transparency, we have gone well beyond the statutory requirements of CRaG and provided comprehensive information to Parliament to support its scrutiny of our trade policy approach.

    In addition, no trade agreement can, of itself, alter our domestic legislation. Any changes to UK legislation that are required for our trade agreements will therefore need to be scrutinised and passed by Parliament in the usual way.

    The Lords Constitution Committee recommended in its 2019 report on scrutiny of treaties that:

    • existing parliamentary mechanisms, supported by the work of the designated treaties committee, should be sufficient to provide effective scrutiny
    • mandates for treaties should not be subject to parliamentary approval
    • the UK Parliament should be able to conduct scrutiny of our agreements in a way that is appropriate and bespoke to the UK constitutional context

    Devolved administrations

    Myth: The devolved administrations (DAs) have had no say in the negotiations of these trade agreements.

    Reality: While treaty-making powers are reserved and only the UK government can negotiate and ratify trade agreements, the DAs have been engaged regularly and extensively throughout trade negotiations.

    For example, in relation to the negotiations with Australia:

    • the Chief Negotiator/Deputy Chief Negotiator held discussions with their DA counterparts approximately 25 times over the course of negotiations
    • written information was shared with the DAs in devolved areas of competence
    • there were rolling policy discussions at official level – every chapter team held discussions with their DA counterparts at least every 6 weeks
    • ministers discussed the UK-Australia negotiations at the Ministerial Forum for Trade with regular updates and substantive discussion taking place in March and July 2021