← Back to House of Commons Debates
Australia-UK Free Trade Agreement: Scrutiny
19 July 2022
Lead MP
Ranil Jayawardena
Debate Type
Ministerial Statement
Tags
EconomyBrexitBusiness & TradeAgriculture & Rural Affairs
Other Contributors: 27
At a Glance
Ranil Jayawardena raised concerns about australia-uk free trade agreement: scrutiny in the House of Commons. A government minister responded. Other MPs also contributed.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Government Statement
The minister announced that the Anglo-Australian trade deal will increase UK-Australia trade by 53%, boost the economy by £2.3 billion, and add £900 million to household incomes over time. The government commits to ratifying this agreement only after it has undergone thorough scrutiny under the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act (CRaG) 2010. This includes a period of six months for external review before the statutory CRaG process begins, totalling seven months of scrutiny by Parliament's end date of July 20th. The government provided two supporting reports to aid in this scrutiny phase: an independent Trade and Agriculture Commission report on April 13th and a Government section 42 report under the Agriculture Act 2020 published on June 6th, both made available to relevant committees prior to their official publication dates. The minister emphasised that although the CRaG process has started, any additional delays would hinder economic benefits for Britain. He maintains that balancing scrutiny and timely implementation is essential.
Anthony Mangnall
Con
Fylde
Question
The MP questioned whether the government still upholds its commitment to extensive scrutiny for the Australia free trade deal, citing specific periods and debates promised by previous ministers. He pointed out discrepancies in meeting these deadlines and requested further delays for proper examination of the agreement.
Minister reply
Minister Jayawardena responded that while extensive scrutiny was provided (seven months total), additional extensions were not warranted as per CRaG guidelines. The minister also noted that Labour had sought to delay other parliamentary business with their own proposed debates.
Torfaen
Question
I am grateful for the granting of today’s urgent question... Members do not have to take my word for it. Yesterday, the Secretary of State was saying that there has been a number of times when her Minister hasn’t been available which would have been useful and other Ministers have picked up the pieces...
Minister reply
I think that, actually, we have a very good deal that the Government should be proud of... It is clear that the Labour party is so focused on process that they are not focused on securing the benefits for the British people of Brexit.
Mims Davies
Con
East Grinstead and Uckfield
Question
The Minister recently joined the second SussExport event at Wiston House, which aimed to boost Sussex trade and our global reach. This is a vital first trade deal... Does the Minister believe that its positive delivery will boost crucial further success, including more jobs, meaning that it can deliver on the SussExport objectives?
Minister reply
My hon. Friend did a great deal to create jobs across the United Kingdom in her previous role and she continues to bang the drum for her constituency... I am very pleased that we have now secured trade agreements with 71 countries around the world, covering trade worth £800 billion.
Question
This deal will punish the food and farming sectors—that is not my conclusion; it comes from the Government’s departmental advice... Why would they press ahead with the prospect of job losses, higher food bills and fewer safeguards on food standards? This deal should be halted until we get answers.
Minister reply
I see that the hon. Gentleman is in his usual mood... I am very pleased that we have now secured trade agreements with 71 countries around the world, covering trade worth £800 billion.
Question
What assessment has my hon. Friend made of the impact on agriculture of this deal, with reference to our need to maintain our domestic food production as a strategic sovereign capacity?
Minister reply
My hon. Friend is rightly thoughtful in this area... I assure the House that the Trade and Agriculture Commission said that the deal does not require the United Kingdom to change her existing levels of statutory protection in relation to animal or plant life, or health, animal welfare and environmental protections.
Question
... The fact that the Government are trying to ratify the treaty through the CRaG process before that is surely problematic... I beg the Minister to reconsider his foolish urgency on this matter, delay CRaG by 21 days—that would not delay the ratification of the treaty, because the implementation legislation is still needed—and give us a debate.
Minister reply
I do not think that seven months is rushing anything. This agreement can be ratified only once Parliament has scrutinised and passed the implementing legislation in the usual way.
Question
There are huge opportunities from the Australia trade agreement for the ceramics industry in Stoke-on-Trent... Does my hon. Friend agree that it is vital that we get on with delivering that and delivering the jobs and opportunities for industries in the midlands and the north?
Minister reply
My hon. Friend has done great work at the Department for International Trade and I am delighted that he has championed the Potteries today... He is absolutely right that this deal, unlocking the benefits of Brexit, will secure new opportunities for businesses across his region and beyond.
Mark Hendrick
Lab Co-op
Preston
Question
... This procedure should allow Parliament 21 sitting days to scrutinise the final text. It is disgraceful that adequate time has not been allocated for proper parliamentary debate in this Chamber... What sort of precedent does this set for the scrutiny of trade agreements?
Minister reply
Officials from my Department and the Secretary of State have given evidence to three separate parliamentary Committees on six occasions since the Australia deal was signed in December. There is clearly a lot of scrutiny and this Government are making themselves accountable to the British people through Parliament... The Constitutional Reform and Governance Act allows the Commons to resolve against ratification.
Alicia Kearns
Con
Rutland and Stamford
Question
... What am I meant to say to farmers across Rutland, Melton, the Vale and Harborough villages when they ask why I was not given the chance to have my say in a debate on this important trade deal?
Minister reply
My hon. Friend champions food production... The Secretary of State has long talked about the opportunity, as has the Foreign Secretary, for food production across the United Kingdom in seeking new eaters around the world.
Sarah Green
Lib Dem
Chesham and Amersham
Question
The Minister can extend the period for parliamentary consideration by another 21 days. UK farmers are facing ongoing labour shortages, rising costs, and exacerbated issues due to the cost of living crisis; what protections have been put in place to ensure that imported food meets high animal welfare standards?
Minister reply
The Trade and Agriculture Commission (TAC) states that the FTA does not require the UK to change its existing levels of statutory protection in relation to animal or plant life or health, animal welfare, and environmental protection. Moreover, the TAC says the agreement goes beyond WTO rights and obligations by requiring both the UK and Australia to aim for high standards of protection in their environmental and animal welfare laws.
Question
Welcoming the free trade agreement with Australia and its swift implementation, will the Minister commit to a multilateral trade agreement between all four CANZUK countries as soon as possible?
Minister reply
The Government have secured trade deals with 71 countries worth £800 billion. Additionally, the UK is applying for accession to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), which includes Australia, New Zealand, and Canada.
Question
The Minister is not addressing the issue of adequate scrutiny given by this House. How will we get proper scrutiny?
Minister reply
The process under the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act (CRaG) provides for parliamentary disapproval of treaties, as introduced by the previous Labour Government.
Question
Given that China poses a systemic challenge to UK interests and is benefiting from Australian exports, will the Secretary of State support China’s application to join the CPTPP?
Minister reply
The challenges posed by those who do not play by the rules should be faced head-on. The Government are seeking to join the CPTPP first and believe that like-minded nations playing by the rules should trade more.
Hilary Benn
Lab
Leeds South
Question
The Government broke their promise of a debate on this agreement, setting a bad precedent. Will there be a commitment to debates for future trade deals?
Minister reply
We will seek to accommodate requests for debates from the Committee if parliamentary time is available. The Secretary of State stated that she felt the agreement could benefit from “general debate”, but business managers have not been able to schedule it before the CRaG period ends on 20 July.
Question
What support do UK farmers and food producers receive so that they can fairly compete given the absence of conditionality or equivalence language in the agreement?
Minister reply
The deal does not require the UK to change its existing levels of statutory protection related to animal welfare and environmental protection. The Trade and Agriculture Commission (TAC) has reassured this.
Clive Efford
Lab
Eltham and Chislehurst
Question
Will there be a proper scrutiny for future trade deals, especially regarding concerns about the lowering of standards in food production and farming?
Minister reply
The deal removes tariffs on all British exports to Australia and offers flexible rules of origin allowing businesses to use imported parts while qualifying for nil tariffs.
Alistair Carmichael
Lib Dem
Orkney and Shetland
Question
Will the Minister take back a message that the House needs a debate and vote, given the promises made during trade Bills' passage? Will all advice be published to inform the debate?
Minister reply
The deal goes further than Australia has ever gone in giving services companies access to its market, securing benefits for UK businesses. The House has had six months of scrutiny.
Bill Esterson
Lab
Sefton Central
Question
Why have the Government not used seven months to bring a debate to the Floor, given promises made during trade Bills' passage?
Minister reply
The Government are open to scrutiny and disagree with the premise that post-ratification scrutiny is inadequate. The Minister questions why SNP Members oppose this agreement.
Stephen Flynn
SNP
Aberdeen South
Question
Is it the lowering of food standards, is it a couple of pence off a bottle of wine, or is it perhaps a colossal 0.08% of GDP growth that should most excite the people of Scotland about the fact that we left the European Union in order to sign this trade deal?
Minister reply
Once again, SNP Members demonstrate that they are anti-trade. I do not think they have ever supported a trade deal in the House, but they will correct me if I am wrong. These are the figures that should excite the people of Scotland, and indeed the people of our whole United Kingdom, given that the UK internal market is Scotland’s biggest trading partner. This deal will increase trade with Australia by 53%, boost the economy by £2.3 billion, and put £900 million into the pockets of people across the United Kingdom.
Derek Twigg
Lab
Widnes and Halewood
Question
We have heard criticism today not just from the Opposition Benches but from the Government Benches—and I say to the hon. Member for Totnes that in my years in this House I have heard few such forensic and detailed assessments of the way in which the Government are ignoring the importance of scrutiny and democracy. The Minister, and the Government, did promise that there would be scrutiny by the House—that was made very clear—so may I ask the Minister why he thinks it is a good idea for the House not to scrutinise and debate this trade agreement before the Government ratify it?
Minister reply
This House, and the Committees of this House and indeed the other place, have already had six months to scrutinise the agreement, and they will have had seven months by the end of the period.
Dave Doogan
SNP
Angus and Perthshire Glens
Question
This deal was signed in December 2021, and Parliament has never had an opportunity to scrutinise it properly and vote on it prior to ratification. The Secretary of State for International Trade has bottled it twice at the Select Committee, and she has clearly bottled it today, which is why the Minister is here: he has already admitted that this is not his brief. What is it that the Government do not get? Why are they opening up Scottish farmers to a country that is 30 times larger than the United Kingdom? Although the Trade and Agriculture Commission has said that we do not have to review our standards, it is not our standards we are worried about; it is Australian standards.
Minister reply
I am not sure that that question really made sense, but let me try and draw some points from what the hon. Gentleman said. The truth is that the Government gave a commitment that the CRaG process would be followed. As I made clear earlier, the Government said that we would seek to accommodate a request for a debate, but that that was subject to the availability of parliamentary time. If the hon. Gentleman wants to read other words into what was said, that is up to him, but that is what the record shows.
Helen Morgan
Lib Dem
North Shropshire
Question
When I have spoken to farmers in my constituency, they have said that they are very concerned about the deal. They have used phrases such as “sold out” and “bargained away”. They want us to come here and represent their views, because they feel that this deal sets a precedent for all the future trade deals that will come along. It is important for us to have the opportunity to reflect their concerns in this place, and I ask the Minister to reconsider.
Minister reply
I am delighted to represent some great farmers as well, in North East Hampshire. Across the United Kingdom, our famers need to have the opportunities to export to the world. For instance, some meats are twice the price in Asia as they are in Europe. The ability of our farmers to access these new markets through CPTPP, of which Australia is a core member, is a great opportunity, which we should be seizing.
Question
We have not had an opportunity to discuss this deal in detail with the Minister, either in Committee or on the Floor of the House, and there are many other deals on the table. Will this be the form for the future, or will we be addressing the matter after today?
Minister reply
The Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 is the statutory footing on which treaties are looked at and ratified and provides for a scrutiny period. To ensure that the House has the opportunity to look at future deals, we have made additional offers, as the House has had on this occasion. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for International Trade appeared before the International Trade Committee recently, and she and the Committee were able to follow up these questions and others. My right hon. Friend the Leader of the House also wrote to the Committee on 18 July to confirm that there would not be a debate before the summer recess owing to intense pressure on the parliamentary timetable.
Question
The Minister laughed when Brexit was mentioned earlier, but it is no laughing matter for the Scottish seafood sector, which has been hammered by Brexit, and it is no laughing matter for farmers who have no access to labour to pick the fruit and veg in their fields. The Government’s own impact assessment on this free trade agreement shows that the British agriculture, forestry and fishing sector will lose £94 million a year and the food processing sector will lose £225 million a year. Given how important Scotland is to the overall UK food and drink sector, when will we see the publication of an impact assessment that shows the actual impact in Scotland of that hit of more than £300 million a year?
Minister reply
I sometimes fear that some Opposition Members have a permanent sense of humour failure. The facts about the deal are these. It will deliver the benefits of trade to people, businesses and communities in every corner of our United Kingdom: this is how we level up the country. As I have explained, it is expected to increase trade with Australia and put money into people’s pockets, including the pockets of people in Scotland. It means that 100% of tariffs on British exports have been eliminated—and that includes Scottish businesses, which now have guaranteed access to the Australian market, and indeed the ability, across industry, to bid for public sector contracts worth about £10 billion. This is a great opportunity for businesses across Scotland and our whole United Kingdom; and let me just remind the hon. Gentleman that we have secured the best deal that the European Union has ever secured with anyone—a zero-quota, zero-tariff deal.
Richard Foord
Lib Dem
Honiton and Sidmouth
Question
Jilly Greed farms near where I live in Devon. She is a co-founder of Ladies in Beef, and this is what she wrote about the trade deal: “This is like Christmas all over for Australia. There are currently 3,700 tonnes of product coming in from Australia. The agreement will increase it to 45 times that in 15 years.” Are the Government afraid that the true extent of the damage to west country farmers from this trade deal would be laid bare by full parliamentary scrutiny?
Minister reply
I welcome the hon. Gentleman to this place, even though I perhaps disagree with some of his principles. None the less, I hope that I will convert him to the cause, because of the opportunities that lie ahead for farmers in the west country and beyond. The truth is that this deal secures new opportunities for those farmers to export to the world. It is part of a plan, as my hon. Friend the Member for Peterborough mentioned, that secures access to the CPTPP, and that involves the new trade deals that we are negotiating right now in the Gulf, which the NFU has welcomed, and India.
Question
I just dinnae like this deal, on top of which it sets a dangerous precedent for our future trade deals with nations such as India, Mexico and Canada, where we will be dealing with far more sensitive products such as eggs, pork and chicken meat. Why is the Minister pressing ahead with it without the promised scrutiny?
Minister reply
Asked and answered, Mr Speaker.
Shadow Comment
Anthony Mangnall
Shadow Comment
The shadow criticised the lack of sufficient scrutiny given to the Australia free trade agreement since leaving the EU, noting previous commitments by the government to provide robust parliamentary oversight similar to processes in Canada and New Zealand. He highlighted that despite these assurances, the CRaG process began prematurely before the International Trade Committee had completed its report or had a chance to debate with the Secretary of State. The shadow urged for an additional 21 days delay post-CRaG to ensure proper scrutiny as requested by the Liaison Committee and other Members across the House. He also demanded that every future free trade agreement should be subject to thorough parliamentary scrutiny.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy
About House of Commons Debates
House of Commons debates take place in the main chamber of the House of Commons. These debates cover a wide range of topics including government policy, legislation, and current affairs. MPs from all parties can participate, question ministers, and hold the government accountable for its decisions.