Trade (Australia and New Zealand) Bill

Indicates that the reasoned amendment has not been selected for debate.

She questioned the democratic process surrounding the trade agreements, expressing concern about a lack of full votes on objectives and access to negotiating texts. She highlighted that there are no guarantees for Parliament regarding these aspects.

He argued that direct negotiations between Parliaments would be impractical and ineffective, suggesting instead that plenipotentiary powers should be used to negotiate trade deals followed by thorough engagement with Parliament.

He noted that professional services' ability to trade without requalification is a significant export opportunity for the UK. He emphasised the mutual benefits of such agreements.

He pointed out that individual career and economic opportunities will be enhanced through these trade deals, not just business benefits. He stressed the mutual growth of economies and personal development.

He raised concerns about the lack of specific data on economic impacts for Welsh sectors, particularly hill farming. He questioned whether the British Government would publish detailed sectoral impact assessments.

He echoed similar concerns about data granularities and potential negative impacts on livestock production in Wales, Northern Ireland, and certain parts of Scotland.

He raised specific concerns about the impact on the Northern Irish beef and lamb sector, questioning what steps would be taken to ensure that this trade deal does not negatively affect them.

She expressed nervousness among farmers in her constituency but also welcomed the deal. She asked for further assurances about support for farmers over the next 15 years.

She highlighted her concern for small tenant farmers in her constituency, emphasising their critical role not only in food production but also in preserving farming heritage.

She reiterated concerns about environmental sustainability and fair competition for UK farmers. She suggested that weaker regulations could undercut small farmers who are trying to lead on sustainable methods.

He responded that New Zealand's Labour-Green coalition prioritises environmental sustainability, challenging the notion that trade agreements would undermine such standards.

He inquired whether concurrent-plus powers had been conceded by the UK Government, reflecting ongoing concerns about devolved powers.

The speaker criticises the inadequate scrutiny of trade agreements with Australia and New Zealand, lack of support for exporters and farmers, weak climate change commitments in the deals, poor labour standards, and insufficient devolved administration involvement.

Acknowledges the International Trade Committee's frustration over the Government’s attitude towards scrutiny but expresses hope for an improved process moving forward.

Congratulates Nick Thomas-Symonds on his book and takes comfort from the Prime Minister's recent commitment to improving the scrutiny process with the National Farmers Union.

Questions whether support for UK farmers should be focused domestically rather than through international agreements and raises concerns about Irish Republic beef competing against Australian imports into the UK market.

References a Politico article indicating that officials warned the new Prime Minister that trade deals with Australia and New Zealand would negatively impact UK farmers.

Offers support for the points raised by Nick Thomas-Symonds.

Raises concerns about the impact of trade deals on the NHS, emphasising that profit should not be prioritised over patient care.

Expresses concern about changes to procurement rules and suggests an amendment requiring secondary legislation for compliance according to trade deals rather than at the whim of Ministers.

Mr. Mark Garnier supports the bill, acknowledging the economic benefits of the trade deals with Australia and New Zealand but criticises the process of scrutiny. He points out that the ratification process through CRaG is meaningless if Parliament cannot hold a debate to scrutinise the deals properly.

Mr. Anthony Mangnall, in an intervention, highlights that roll-over trade agreements provide opportunities for improvement and cites the example of South Korea where discussions were already underway to improve the agreement following a letter sent by South Korea.

Mr. Lloyd Russell-Moyle suggests that passing CRaG before enabling legislation is unusual and raises concerns about the risk of breaching international agreements, indicating a need for different scrutiny processes.

Mr. Angus MacNeil acknowledges Mark Garnier's points and expresses frustration with the scrutiny process, emphasising that better scrutiny is necessary to ensure proper parliamentary oversight.

Raises concerns over lack of scrutiny in the Trade Bill, pointing to financial losses for agriculture and food-related sectors (£94 million per year from Australia and £145 million from New Zealand). He criticises environmental standards and mentions that Scotland's farmers face significant challenges without proper protections. Drew also questions the Government’s claims about benefits, such as reduced prices on everyday items like Tim Tams, surfboards and boots, arguing these do not address critical issues.

[Intervention] Noted that Australia needs to clarify its definition of whisky, which could affect Scottish exports.

[Intervention] Suggests that tree planting by the SNP government is a bigger concern for upland farmers in Scotland than trade deals.

[Intervention] Asks Drew Hendry whether he supports free trade agreements with Australia and suggests that restrictions are part of any deal, questioning the idea of 'free' trade.

[Intervention] Expresses fear over importation of food products produced in ways illegal here, such as deforested land and systems relying on live animal transport.

[Intervention] Argues that including climate terms in every trade deal is unnecessary, as countries like Australia and New Zealand are already committed to international agreements.

Paul Beresford supports the new trade deal with Australia and New Zealand, arguing that it will revive British car sales in these markets due to reduced tariffs. He mentions his personal connection to both countries and discusses how previous trade restrictions led to professional emigration to the United States. He provides an example of a small gin distillery benefiting from increased exports under this agreement. Beresford acknowledges potential competition but advocates for easing regulations on British farmers to ensure they can compete effectively.

Wilson counters MacNeil's arguments, emphasising that the trade deal offers benefits to consumers despite potential increased competition for UK producers. He argues that reducing costs and unnecessary regulations can help UK producers be more competitive post-Brexit.

Garnier intervenes to point out the growing markets in south-east Asia, developing countries and Australia/New Zealand, suggesting that these trade agreements are beneficial for GDP growth.

Beresford mentions the potential export opportunities to Australia, emphasising the importance of UK manufacturing and car industries in these trade agreements.

Supports the bill as it reflects positively on UK's ability to sign trade agreements. Emphasises export opportunities for machinery, professional services, food producers and farmers. Highlights need for better scrutiny processes and access to Ministers during negotiations.

Questions the potential impact of trade deals on farming, expressing concerns over the protectionist measures taken by Qatar and Saudi Arabia. Raises doubts about the ease of work visas for UK businesses.

Mr. Spellar argued that trade deals with Australia should be prioritised due to historical relationships, shared values, and mutual interests in security and intelligence cooperation. He emphasised the need for fair trade alongside free trade, highlighting China's failure to adhere to World Trade Organisation commitments. Mr. Spellar noted the benefits of trade throughout history but also acknowledged potential negative impacts such as job displacement. He stressed the importance of strong labour standards and workers' rights in international agreements. The speaker advocated for mutual recognition of qualifications between countries and a more flexible approach to visa restrictions, allowing skilled workers from Australia and New Zealand to move freely.

Expressed concerns about the imbalance in the UK-Australia trade deal, highlighting threats to beef and sheepmeat sectors. Called for stronger safeguards against excessive imports and stressed the importance of animal welfare standards.

Agreed that trade deals should be balanced, citing Wales as an example to illustrate how different interests would lead to varied outcomes.

Suggested the need for regular food security reports under the Agriculture Act 2020, aligning with concerns about future trade deals' impacts.

Expressed worry that current trade agreements lack proper consultation and scrutiny, potentially setting a detrimental precedent for future negotiations.

She criticised the UK Internal Market Bill, stating that it does not work in the interests of Scottish farmers and undermines devolution. She highlighted how the bill allows UK Government Ministers to make secondary legislation on procurement without further consent from the Scottish Parliament, leading to a loss of oversight. Anum Qaisar also expressed concerns over the lack of scrutiny for trade deals and their potential negative impact on constituents, especially Scottish farmers who are already facing various challenges such as uncapped energy prices and labour shortages. She mentioned that concessions on animal welfare and environmental standards in these trade deals could harm local producers by allowing lower-quality produce to undercut them.

[INTERVENTION]: He supported Anum Qaisar's concerns about the lack of respect for devolution within the UK Union and the imposition by the UK Government on Scottish Government in devolved areas. MacNeil highlighted that such a situation would not occur in the European Union, where there is mutual respect.

Mr Djanogly supports the Australian and New Zealand free trade agreements, arguing that they are a positive step for the UK post-Brexit. He emphasises the importance of negotiating independent trade deals and highlights benefits such as procurement provisions, professional services cooperation, and import of young talent. Mr Djanogly also notes that despite concerns about short-term figures, the deal represents a huge opportunity with potential future growth in trade. He mentions examples of local businesses benefiting from the agreement. Additionally, he addresses food and meat imports, suggesting that there is sufficient time for harmonisation and questioning the likelihood of Australia switching markets to the UK given its current consumption patterns. Mr Djanogly further argues that this deal sets a strategic foundation for UK's accession to the CPTPP and critiques the scrutiny process, advocating for reform.

She argues that the Bill undermines parliamentary democracy, devolved powers, and high UK standards. She cites concerns from farmers about rising costs and worries about undercutting by cheaper imports. She calls for more scrutiny and transparency on future deals.

He supports Sarah Green's speech, suggesting that better consultation could have secured a deal with wider support. He notes the importance of bringing along regional devolved Governments.

He agrees that transparency is lacking and criticises the Government for deliberately avoiding proper scrutiny, affecting both regions of the UK and individual constituencies.

She supports the Bill, prioritising support for farmers and producers in Meon Valley. She notes that it does not affect national strategic interests but advocates for more scrutiny of future deals to reassure people.

He suggests the importance of addressing food security concerns through an annual report from the Minister for Farming, Fisheries and Food. He highlights the benefits to exporting businesses.

Raises concern over the lack of parliamentary engagement on the Australia deal, emphasising the failure to deliver economic benefits as promised during Brexit campaign. Points out that other deals have largely been rolled over from EU agreements and highlights the importance of full debate and scrutiny.

Intervenes to question the future status of the trade deals if Scotland becomes independent or UK rejoins EU. Suggests that parliamentary input could have helped in negotiating better terms.

Intervenes to highlight that the Government's approach has been a 'tick-box exercise', turning roll-over deals from EU into so-called successes. She argues that Australia was an opportunity for better deal-making but the government fell short.

Expresses concerns about meaningful vote on trade deals, highlighting negative impact on farmers and environment. Emphasises forecast uncertainty and potential undermining of UK's world-leading environmental standards.

Highlights the lack of focus on food security from the UK Government, expressing concern over competition with exporting countries while basic payment is reduced. Questions the impact on Devon's farmers due to increased imports.

He criticises the government's handling of trade deal negotiations with Australia and New Zealand, arguing that it lacks proper scrutiny, transparency, and parliamentary debates. He raises concerns about inadequate analysis, lack of protection for UK products' geographical indicators, and insufficient resources for the Trade and Agriculture Commission. Despite supporting increased trade, Thomas emphasises the need for a more robust scrutiny process in future deals.

Intervenes to press Gareth Thomas on whether Labour would implement a more meaningful scrutiny process if they were in power, suggesting pressure for immediate change.

Intervenes to highlight that promised trade union representation on the Trade and Agriculture Commission has not materialised, reinforcing concerns about its effectiveness.

Acknowledges Thomas's focus on agricultural issues but notes potential advantages for British industry from the agreement. Emphasises industrial context of his constituency.

Griffith supports the bill by highlighting historical ties between Britain, Australia, and New Zealand, as well as economic benefits like job creation and export opportunities. He addresses NHS concerns, stating that free trade agreements do not affect healthcare services in the UK.

Beresford interjected to argue against adding protections to the agreement as it could hinder its free trade nature. He supports the bill by emphasising economic benefits and historical ties.

MacNeil criticises the government for their approach to running a union. He questions the effectiveness of the trade agreement, suggesting that it would take many more similar deals to recover from Brexit's economic damage.

Western inquires about the potential negative impacts on local farmers and asks if a full economic impact assessment has been undertaken by the Government.

Mangnall interjected to request a debate under CRaG process with a votable motion at the end, following the Committee's report on the New Zealand free trade agreement.