Asked by: Bill Esterson (Labour - Sefton Central)
Question to the Department for International Trade:
To ask the Secretary of State for International Trade, pursuant to the Answer of 9 November 2020 to Question 111493, what assessment she has made of the potential adverse trade effects that may be brought to the WTO by UK funding for virtual tradeshow access.
Answered by Greg Hands - Minister of State (Department for Business and Trade)
There is currently no evidence of the impact made through funding or attending virtual trade shows - adverse or otherwise - published by either UK industry or other nations, on which to make an assessment at this time.
Asked by: Bill Esterson (Labour - Sefton Central)
Question to the Department for International Trade:
To ask the Secretary of State for International Trade, pursuant to Answer of 9 November 2020 to Question 111493 on Trade Affairs: Internet, what assessment she has made of the potential effect on UK trade of other countries funding access to virtual trade shows.
Answered by Greg Hands - Minister of State (Department for Business and Trade)
There is currently no evidence of the impact made through funding or attending virtual trade shows - adverse or otherwise - published by either UK industry or other nations, on which to make an assessment at this time.
Asked by: Bill Esterson (Labour - Sefton Central)
Question to the Department for International Trade:
To ask the Secretary of State for International Trade, what discussions she has had with the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy on the effect on businesses of not being able to attend tradeshows abroad.
Answered by Graham Stuart
My Rt hon. Friend the Secretary of State for International Trade meets Cabinet colleagues on a regular basis to discuss a range of issues, including the effect of the pandemic on business.
Asked by: Bill Esterson (Labour - Sefton Central)
Question to the Department for International Trade:
To ask the Secretary of State for International Trade, what assessment she has made of the implications for her policies of the findings of the Which? report entitled National Trade Conversation, published 11 November 2020.
Answered by Greg Hands - Minister of State (Department for Business and Trade)
The Government engages with all evidence and we are committed to ensuring the voice of the consumer is represented in trade policy. We have committed to maintaining the consumer standards that the UK public currently enjoys.
The Department has worked with Which? as they have undertaken the National Trade Conversation, including sitting on the Advisory Group established as part of the programme and my personal involvement in the launch event for the Research Report.
The work of Which? represents a valuable addition to our understanding of how consumers engage on trade and their core interests and values.
Asked by: Bill Esterson (Labour - Sefton Central)
Question to the Department for International Trade:
To ask the Secretary of State for International Trade, what funding has been delivered as part of the Tradeshow Access Programme to date in financial year 2020-21.
Answered by Graham Stuart
The Department for International Trade (DIT) entered this financial year with a full calendar of agreed events to be supported by the Tradeshow Access Programme with a budget of £6.5 million.
Regrettably, most of the events have since been cancelled due to the impact of COVID-19.
Asked by: Bill Esterson (Labour - Sefton Central)
Question to the Department for International Trade:
To ask the Secretary of State for International Trade, whether WTO rules permit subsidies being paid to businesses taking part in online trade shows.
Answered by Greg Hands - Minister of State (Department for Business and Trade)
The WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (ASCM)?applies to trade in goods only and prohibits two types of subsidies – those contingent on export performance,?and those contingent on the use of domestic over imported goods.?All other subsidies may be permitted, but if another WTO member can show that they have caused adverse trade effects, they can raise a dispute with the WTO dispute settlement body and seek removal of the subsidy or impose countervailing duties.
Asked by: Bill Esterson (Labour - Sefton Central)
Question to the Department for International Trade:
To ask the Secretary of State for International Trade, when she plans to answer the letter of 23 September 2020 from Adam Mansell of UK Fashion and Textiles.
Answered by Graham Stuart
The response to this letter was sent to UK Fashion and Textiles on Tuesday 27 October.
Asked by: Bill Esterson (Labour - Sefton Central)
Question to the Department for International Trade:
To ask the Secretary of State for International Trade, what assessment she has made of the potential merits of maintaining anti-dumping duties on imports of bicycles originating from the People's Republic of China after the end of the transition period.
Answered by Ranil Jayawardena
In preparation for the end of the transition period, the Department for International Trade has assessed whether the EU anti-dumping measure on bicycles should continue to apply after the transition period. This was done through a Call for Evidence process, which was a technical exercise based on objective evidence from businesses, validated through reputable publicly available sources.
Each measure was considered against set criteria. Based on current evidence, this measure does not meet the criteria and that’s why the Department has determined that the measure should not continue to apply after the transition period. British consumers would bear the brunt of higher prices if anti-dumping measures were unnecessarily retained.
British bicycle producers can, of course, appeal this decision and provide the Department with further information if there are changes to domestic market share before the end of the transition period.
Asked by: Bill Esterson (Labour - Sefton Central)
Question to the Department for International Trade:
To ask the Secretary of State for International Trade, if she will publish the economic modelling of the comparison between the EU-Japan trade agreement and the UK-Japan trade agreement.
Answered by Greg Hands - Minister of State (Department for Business and Trade)
The economic modelling in our impact assessment compares the impact of the agreement against a baseline where the UK does not have an agreement with Japan. This is the most appropriate baseline to compare impacts against because, without this agreement, at the end of the transition period the UK and Japan would revert to a trading relationship without a trade agreement. The Parliamentary Report sets out changes in the agreement from the EU-Japan trade agreement to the UK-Japan agreement and a description of their expected impacts.
Asked by: Bill Esterson (Labour - Sefton Central)
Question to the Department for International Trade:
To ask the Secretary of State for International Trade, whether she has made an assessment of the implications for her policies of the recommendations on the scrutiny of international trade negotiations in the report report of the Global Economic Governance Programme entitled UK scrutiny of international trade agreements.
Answered by Greg Hands - Minister of State (Department for Business and Trade)
Parliament will be able to conduct scrutiny at every stage of the process in a way that is appropriate and proportionate to the British constitutional context.
In the United Kingdom, the power to negotiate and enter into treaties are prerogative powers held by HM Government. That said, we have gone well beyond the statutory framework for the scrutiny of treaties set out in the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010.
Our approach strikes the right balance between allowing Parliament to scrutinise our trade policy effectively, and maintaining the ability of HM Government to negotiate with agility in the best interests of the United Kingdom. We have, of course, considered the approach of other international systems, including the United States, but comparisons must focus on countries that use the Westminster model to draw meaningful best practice that is appropriate to our constitutional arrangements.
When similar parliamentary democracies are compared to the United Kingdom, it is clear our practice is very strong and entirely appropriate to our constitutional arrangements. For example, as the report the Hon. Gentlemen refers to states, the United Kingdom is one of the few jurisdictions to publish impact assessments at the outset of negotiations.