.png?trim=0,0,0,0&width=1200&height=800&crop=1200:800)
Keir Starmer’s recent efforts have led to important trade deals with the US and India, and with an EU deal still to come, these agreements are a big step forward for the UK.
While Starmer’s progress has sparked both optimism and scepticism, broader questions remain: Can the deal with Trump truly be considered a triumph, or is it more a case of damage limitation? And what of the fine print?
The prime minister deserves credit for securing deals with three of the biggest markets in the world. The benefits will be small but real – and the potential of better access to the Indian market could be great in the longer term.
I would rather have a government that can pragmatically and competently secure small gains in Britain’s interest than one showboating its distaste for Trump.
In an exclusive Q&A with Independent readers, I tackled your questions surrounding the deal’s economic impact, its political implications, and its place in the ongoing saga of Britain’s evolving global trade strategy post-Brexit.
From the possible benefits to the UK workforce to broader negotiations with the EU, the discussion covered a range of topics that touch on the very heart of the UK’s future on the global stage.
Here’s what you asked during the “Ask Me Anything” session – and my responses to your questions.
Q: Could this deal realistically be branded as a Brexit triumph?
Jimmy
A: I don’t think so. It was made possible by Brexit, but the final accounting is that we lost more, economically, by leaving the EU than we gained by this exercise in damage limitation.
Q: Are the Tories criticising the deal out of genuine concern or frustration over their own past failures?
Sophieeeeeee
A: It was striking in the House of Commons last night that sensible Tory MPs such as Julian Smith and Mark Pritchard welcomed the US deal, praising Keir Starmer and Peter Mandelson.
Kemi Badenoch made a mistake, I think, in criticising both the India and US deals. As you say, they are precisely the kind of deals that she and the Tory government were desperate to do, and she ends up opposing deals that add (however incrementally) to British prosperity. Even Nigel Farage said the US deal was “heading in the right direction”.
Q: What are the tangible benefits of this deal to the average UK and US person?
MattAllenby
A: The benefits are marginal, but real. They are particularly relevant to workers at Jaguar Land Rover and other car companies, which is why Starmer went to Solihull for the announcement.
It is fair enough to say that the benefits seem vague, partly because many of the details have yet to be negotiated, but partly because the general benefit is slightly lower prices than we would otherwise have.
That is one reason why free trade is never as popular as it should be, while protectionism seems attractive. The only silver lining for those of us who believe in free trade is that Trump is conducting a real-life experiment in demonstrating that tariffs mean higher prices and fewer jobs for the country that imposes them on its imports.
Q: Do the Trump and India deals weaken the UK’s bargaining power with the EU?
BBenB
A: No, I think that is one of Starmer’s more impressive achievements. He was told that he had to choose between the US and the EU, and he has shown that he can do a deal with both. Obviously, the US and India deals would have to be scrapped if we wanted to rejoin the EU, but until a British government reaches that point, which could be a decade away (or never), it makes sense to do pragmatic deals elsewhere.
Q: Will we get steroid beef and chlorinated chicken or not?
Jamie
A: The UK government is absolutely clear that our food standards will not change. Hormone-treated beef and chlorinated chicken will continue to be banned from the UK. That said, plenty of US beef meets UK standards, so it is an opportunity for American farmers. In order to allay fears of British farmers, US exports to the UK will be subject to quota limits that will be only gradually increased.
Q: Won’t most people be more concerned with the voting system and local government funding than a deal with Trump, given his track record?
Neil Martin
A: I agree that Trump is not a reliable partner, but this agreement has been written down and published. The details have yet to be negotiated, but that negotiation will be done by teams of officials who will be guided by the published terms. And the bottom line is that reducing Trump’s tariffs is good for Britain – not a huge benefit, but worth having.
As for the voting system, I would say definitely not; and local government funding ought to be of a higher priority for British voters than it is.
Q: Are these trade deals aimed at marginalising China, and does trade with India suggest an imminent conflict in Yemen?
Paul T Horgan
A: I think that some of the commentary about Donald Trump co-opting Britain into his trade war against China has been overdone. There are clauses in the agreement about ensuring the security of supply chains and protections against forced labour, which are aimed at preventing Chinese content going to the US through the UK, which seems reasonable enough.
As for Yemen, I think the case for keeping the Red Sea open is independent of an India-UK trade deal!
Q: Why is the media calling it a deal when it’s just a non-binding outline for future negotiations?
EdwinH
A: The answer to your question is: because journalists report these things using normal English, in which “deal” means an agreement, even if there are legal texts still to be negotiated. I think most of the reporting has been clear that what was announced yesterday was an agreement in principle on the main points. I don’t think there is much prospect of the US going back on its commitment to abolish tariffs on steel and aluminium and to cut tariffs on cars, which are the most important points.
Your point will also apply to the EU-UK agreement that will be announced on 19 May: this too will be only a “heads of agreement” document, but again the main points will in effect be decided at that point. Most trade agreements are like this, and the parties usually follow through on the high-level agreement, so I think it is justified to call this “general terms” document a deal.
Q: Why is this being presented as a great deal when the UK has made significant concessions with unclear benefits?
mindful
A: Your question reminds me of the cartoon by Morten Morland of Trump pushing Starmer into the water, rescuing him and shaking his hand. Yes, this is all Trump’s fault: he has damaged the British economy (and damaged the American economy even more). This deal reduces some of that damage. So the deal is worth having, but we shouldn’t have been attacked in the first place.
“Standing up to Trump” would be a fine but pointless gesture, the price of which would be paid by British people struggling with the cost of living.
Q: Why did Starmer bend the knee just to return to the original situation, undermining trust and showing little interest in closer EU relations?
Luca Migo
A: I think things are both worse and better than you think. Keir Starmer “bent the knee” (that is, behaved politely and pragmatically) to come some way back towards the initial situation. We will still be worse off than we were before Trump became president, but we are better off than we were at the start of this week.
As for the EU, the terms of an EU-UK agreement will be announced on 19 May. None of this is perfect, but it is a huge negotiating triumph to complete three trade agreements with three huge markets in two weeks. They all make us slightly better off – the EU deal is the most important – but they are all worthwhile.
Q: Will streamlined customs paperwork be put in place to speed up UK-US imports and exports?
John Moore
A: There is a section of the agreement that talks about increased digitisation of import-export paperwork (it calls it “digitalisation”), but I suspect that this is more a matter of speeding up the move to paperless working that is happening anyway.
These questions and answers were part of an ‘Ask Me Anything’ hosted by John Rentoul at 3pm BST on Friday 9 May. Some of the questions and answers have been edited for this article. You can read the full discussion in the comments section of the original article.
For more insight into UK politics, check out John’s weekly Commons Confidential newsletter. The email, exclusive to Independent Premium subscribers, takes you behind the curtain of Westminster. If this sounds like something you would be interested in, head here to find out more.
