Upgraded Free Trade Agreement with the Republic of Korea
Chris Bryant Excerpts(2 days, 17 hours ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister of State, Department for Business and Trade (Chris Bryant)
The United Kingdom and the Republic of Korea have concluded negotiations on an upgraded free trade agreement. Building on the work of the previous Secretary of State for Business and Trade and the Minister of State for Trade Policy and Economic Security, the new FTA builds on our existing agreement, which we carried over from the European Union and which came into force in 2021.
The agreement will support this Government’s mission to deliver economic growth by making it faster, cheaper and more predictable to do business with the Republic of Korea—a country with which the UK’s trade totalled £15.8 billion in 2024. The Republic of Korea is the world’s 12th largest economy, with a dynamic import market projected to grow by 26% in the next 10 years. We have protected and expanded key market access and agreed measures that will reduce barriers to trade. The deal reflects our shared ambition to strengthen ties while reinforcing our commitment to a rules-based trading system that promotes high standards. By concluding the agreement, the UK has also future-proofed its trading relationship with a key partner and reinforced its influence across the Asia-Pacific, a region forecasted to account for 10% of global growth by 2035.
We have secured continued tariff-free access for British business across 98% of Korean tariff lines in key industrial strategy growth sectors, including advanced manufacturing and life sciences, as well as key sectors such as food and drink. Both established exporters and new entrants will be able to trade on a stable, predictable footing, ensuring that renowned UK goods remain competitive in the Republic of Korea’s expanding market, supported by a trade framework tailored for British supply chains.
The UK is a services powerhouse, with Department for Business and Trade modelling estimating that services exports could increase by £400 million annually as a result of this agreement in the long run. Building on £1.1 billion worth of UK financial and insurance exports to the Republic of Korea in 2024, the agreement strengthens access to the Republic of Korea’s expanding financial market. The UK has secured meaningful commitments on data localisation and transparency, allowing British financial services firms to enter and operate in the Korean market with confidence. The agreement includes unprecedented commitments that strengthen UK insurers’ ability to provide a range of specialist insurance products to Korean clients.
The deal secures unmatched Government procurement opportunities in the Republic of Korea’s Sejong City, which procures an average of £46.2 million-worth of goods and services annually, as well as expanded access for UK advertising firms for public contracts. It also ensures fairer access to and use of public telecoms networks and services for UK suppliers by limiting the conditions placed on them when seeking access in the Republic of Korea. This will benefit suppliers across industries that rely on telecoms networks to provide their service, further supporting economic growth.
Our services exports are supported by a new and ambitious digital commerce chapter. This chapter is designed to support the 70% of services trade between the UK and the Republic of Korea that is now conducted digitally. This underscores the UK’s commitment to tech-driven trade, creating a more dynamic and future-ready environment for British businesses. We have also agreed commitments that promote and improve compatibility and interoperability of AI governance and policy frameworks. In practice, this means reducing unnecessary barriers so that the UK’s and the Republic of Korea’s businesses can use each other’s technology more easily and at lower cost. By strengthening co-operation with the Republic of Korea’s world-leading AI sector, the UK is delivering on its national AI strategy and showing its ambition to lead global conversations on safe, fair and innovative AI.
There will be streamlined access to import/export documents, simplified licensing rules and authorisation processes, and greater promotion of the use of English language and e-trade documents. Access to critical information such as financial regulations has also been improved. Collectively these reduce administrative burdens and allow British service suppliers, investors, and small and medium-sized enterprises to fully seize the opportunities offered by this dynamic market.
Simpler ways to qualify for tariff-free market access will make supply chains more resilient. This includes updated rules of origin that simplify how businesses prove where their products come from, reducing paperwork and speeding up processes. UK exports to the Republic of Korea supported around 92,000 jobs in 2020. Leading employers and business representative organisations such as Deloitte, the Society of Motor Manufacturers & Traders, and the Confederation of British Industry have welcomed the deal as a vital protection for the competitiveness of British goods and the thousands of jobs they support.
The upgraded agreement marks the Republic of Korea’s strongest set of commitments to date for agrifood exporters, including an upgraded provision for co-operation on animal welfare and a new article on antimicrobial resistance. The deal provides certainty for traders by ensuring that both the UK and the Republic of Korea can protect their biosecurity, while putting in place enhanced commitments, structures and processes that will allow us to avoid unnecessary trade barriers. These changes will help to protect supply chains from disruption and ensure that administrative processes remain predictable for UK business.
The FTA will also deepen the strategic relationship between our two nations, building on the Republic of Korea’s recent and significant inward investment into the UK. To support this, the deal introduces new co-operation pathways in critical areas such as innovation, gender equality and supply chains—the UK’s first dedicated chapter of its kind—to reinforce our shared commitment to future-facing collaboration. We have also embedded values on fairness and sustainability through collaboration on workers’ rights, through measures that address bribery and anti-corruption and through upgraded commitments in support of our ambitious environmental and climate goals.
We will now go through the steps to prepare this treaty for signature, and I look forward to updating the House further on this agreement in due course.
[HCWS1171]
Industry and Exports (Financial Assistance) Bill
Chris Bryant ExcerptsMonday 15th December 2025
(2 days, 17 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Industry and Exports (Financial Assistance) Bill 2024-26 View all Industry and Exports (Financial Assistance) Bill 2024-26 Debates Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister of State, Department for Business and Trade (Chris Bryant)
I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time.
We want businesses to grow, innovate, expand, invest, find new markets here and overseas, develop new products and new services, and bring them successfully to market. That often requires two forms of financial support from Government: grants and loans. That is why the Bill builds on two different Acts of Parliament: the Industrial Development Act 1982, which provides grants to industry in the UK, and the Export and Investment Guarantees Act 1991, which enables financial support by means of investment finance.
Of course, as Trade Minister, I am ambitious about trying to get more UK companies to export. It is a shame that only one in 10 British businesses exports, compared with three out of 10 French businesses and four out of 10 German businesses. If we could match the ambition of other countries, that would be a significant boost to the UK economy.
Gareth Snell (Stoke-on-Trent Central) (Lab/Co-op)
Will the Minister give way?
Gareth Snell
It’s nice to be loved, isn’t it, Madam Deputy Speaker? I congratulate the Minister on bringing forward the Bill. On exports, the world-leading ceramics industry in Stoke-on-Trent tells me that there used to be a fund that allowed companies to get help with the cost of going to trade expositions or being part of trade delegations, and that meant they could take their wares around the world to try to get those all-important exports. That fund no longer exists. If that fund could be brought back, I know that ceramics companies in Stoke would appreciate the opportunity to export, as this country is trying to do. Will the Minister look at that?
Chris Bryant
There are funds. Especially when there is a new free trade agreement, as in relation to India at the moment, we help lots of businesses. Businesses in the beauty industry, which I know my hon. Friend knows a lot about, have gone to a recent exhibition in India, because under the FTA, India will be taking the tariff down from, I think, 20% or so to zero. That is a big opportunity for British businesses. There are sometimes funds available.
I will look at how the ceramics industry in particular is treated. As my hon. Friend knows, I would like to establish stronger support for the ceramics industry in general, because we should be proud of it. As he also knows, I am looking at the presents that we as Government Ministers give to other Government Ministers; we could be a bit more ambitious about ensuring that they are things that people really want, and perhaps they could come from one of our creative industries, such as ceramics.
Free trade agreements can get rid of tariffs, and that is a very important way of enabling more exports, but we can also often do a great deal by getting rid of the non-tariff barriers that exist in many countries. Export ambition, even from companies that would like to export, often needs financial assistance. That is precisely what UK Export Finance is there for.
Chris Bryant
The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) was there first, and then I will take an intervention from the hon. and learned Member for North Antrim (Jim Allister).
Jim Shannon
I welcome what the Minister has said; he has clearly underlined that all parts of the United Kingdom can benefit. As the Minister will know, we are very fortunate in Northern Ireland to have a very strong agrifood sector, which promotes itself wherever it can across Europe, across the mainland and further afield. The defence sector is also active, and the Government help to create extra procurement and extra apprenticeships is very welcome. However, there are also small and medium-sized enterprises, which are mostly involved in engineering, and this group of businesses could do more. I ask the Minister, very kindly, whether he could give us an idea of what can be done for them. We want to encourage them to be involved and to export.
Chris Bryant
The hon. Member is absolutely right that the vast majority of the companies we will be talking about are SMEs—88% of the companies that benefit from UK Export Finance are SMEs. We are bringing forward this Bill because we are getting to the limit of what is allowed under current legislation and we need to expand that. I have specifically spoken to UK Export Finance about looking at new ways to support SMEs. The retail banking sector in the UK also sometimes needs to understand better how it can support small and medium-sized enterprises to export around the world. One of the things that I have been trying in my own small way is to do a supermarket sweep when I have been abroad for trade missions: to see whether Rose’s lime marmalade, Walker’s biscuits, Marmite, Irn-Bru or Penderyn whisky—or whatever it may be—is available around the world. The more we can encourage businesses to export, the more likely they are to prosper.
One of the advantages in Northern Ireland in particular is that, because of the Windsor framework, it has an opportunity to enter into an EU market much more readily than elsewhere. One of the sadnesses of Brexit is that 16,000 fewer businesses in the UK now export, and that is largely because they have given up on Europe. That is one of the things I radically want to change.
Chris Bryant
I can see the hon. and learned Gentleman is practically pregnant with a question.
Jim Allister
It is always good to hear about a rise in the availability of financial assistance to industry. In the context of Northern Ireland, the Minister has referred to the Windsor framework. One of its drawbacks is that Northern Ireland is subject to EU state aid rules. In my constituency, I have a large bus manufacturer that sells buses to Germany. Can I seek an assurance from the Minister that that company, for example, will not be disadvantaged by the cap in state aid rules in comparison with a competitor bus manufacturer in another part of the United Kingdom where there is not a state aid limitation?
Chris Bryant
This is one of the problems with Brexit, isn’t it? It has provided a variety of different sets of rules for different parts of the United Kingdom, and that was always one of its inherent problems. Northern Ireland voted against Brexit, and we are now trying to make it work as best we can. The hon. and learned Gentleman is absolutely right. Of course there are going to be problems under state aid rules for some businesses in Northern Ireland. That is why we are trying to do two things at the same time: to ensure that the Windsor framework is adhered to, but also ensure that we have a single UK internal market.
The Bill is short—it just manages to get on to a second page—but it does some important things. First, it increases the Industrial Development Act limit on financial assistance from £12 billion to £20 billion. Secondly, it raises the amount that the Secretary of State may increase the limit by from £1 billion to £1.5 billion. That is something he can do four times under the 1982 Act. Thirdly, the Bill amends the Export and Investment Guarantees Act 1991 to increase the commitment level from roughly £84 billion to £160 billion. Fourthly, the Bill allows the limit to be increased by increments of up to £15 billion by secondary legislation. Finally—this is perhaps the single most important and most useful thing to the ordinary punter out there—it changes the 1991 Act so that the limit is expressed in pounds sterling. In other words, it will be in common parlance, rather than referring to special drawing rights, which I think has confused an awful lot of people for a long time.
I will give just a few examples of why all of this matters. Some £14.5 billion of UK Export Finance support last year was used to support 70,000 jobs, adding £5.4 billion to GDP in the UK, including across several key industrial sectors such as clean energy, advanced manufacturing, life sciences and automotive.
Rosie Wrighting (Kettering) (Lab)
I am pleased to hear the Minister explaining what the Bill will do and how it will contribute to business, but in the creative industries and particularly in fashion, young designers struggle to access international markets and export finance. What are we going to do to support creative industries such as fashion so that we do not lose them in the UK?
Chris Bryant
That is an extremely good point. The creative industries are, of course, one of the eight key industrial sectors that we are keen to promote. The music export growth scheme is specifically intended to ensure that a wide variety of acts are able to tour around the world. We need to sort out with the European Union the issue of British acts being able to tour effectively and cost-effectively around Europe, but bands from Scotland, Wales and every part of England have been able to access that finance, and it is a key part of what we do.
As for fashion, I know that you try to do your bit, Madam Deputy Speaker—as, I am sure, do all Members who want to promote British fashion—but it is important to note that the Department for Culture, Media and Sport provides support for NewGen. A fair amount of London Fashion Week is supported by either the Department for Business and Trade or the DCMS, and many NewGen designers have gone on to achieve great success in the market. We also try to ensure that we have a presence in other fashion weeks, such as those in Paris and New York, and we provide other finance as well. There is a wide variety of measures, some of which are covered by the Bill, but I can assure my hon. Friend that the creative industries are very much part of what we are considering. I was struck by, in some—oh, I am not allowed to refer to those matters until tomorrow.
Sir Edward Leigh
Believe it or not, more than 30 years ago I was a Minister for fashion and regional policy. These things go round in a circle, and I warn the Minister —with some experience of this—that many companies were caught in a sort of Catch-22: if they were too successful, the Department of Trade and Industry would not let them be helped, and if they were not successful enough, there was always a risk that they might go bust. How is the Minister going to hit the sweet spot and make sure that we direct the money to where it is most needed?
Chris Bryant
Well, I hope that I can find the right hon. Gentleman’s sweet spot, as he is such a dedicated follower of fashion. He has made a very fair point. This is the classic problem for Governments when it comes to any industrial support, whether it is a loan or a grant: if the business is so successful, why does it need additional financial support? That is why, because of the structure that we have created through those two Acts, UK Export Finance actually makes money for the British Government. It is based on loans being made at normal rates, and sometimes it manages to lever in retail finance as well, which is a particularly important part of its work. However, when we provide a grant we have to ensure that it is intended to achieve a set series of aims. For instance, the £128 million—I think—that has been given to BioNTech is specifically designed to develop two new R&D hubs producing 400 new highly paid jobs in the life sciences sector, and also, incidentally, to tackle skin conditions and melanoma, which are among the subjects on which it is working.
The right hon. Gentleman is right to say that a difficult moment often arises, but one of the complaints I have received from quite a few sectors is that the UK can be a bit slow about deciding when we are going to support someone, and I want to be able to speed up that process as much as possible. As I said to the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) and the hon. and learned Member for North Antrim (Jim Allister), I think the key to much of what we are trying to do involves supporting SMEs. Of course there will be massive contracts, such as the $3.5 billion expression of interest that we have allowed for the building of the new Dubai airport so that British businesses will be able to put in for some of the ensuing tenders—perhaps for hangar doors, the building of additional facilities, maintenance services or architectural designs. However, 88% of what we are talking about in respect of UK Export Finance is for SMEs.
I will make two more points, and then I will come to a close. Through existing provisions in the Industrial Development Act, the British Business Bank’s northern powerhouse investment fund II has directly invested £115 million in more than 300 small businesses. Similarly, in the midlands, the midlands engine investment fund II has launched a £400 million fund to drive sustainable economic growth by supporting innovation and creating local opportunity for new and growing businesses.
I am getting a feeling from the Chamber that everyone will be supporting the Bill. I think that, broadly speaking, it has cross-party support, and I think it important that we get it on the statute book soon enough to be able to provide that support for the businesses in the UK in the next financial year, so that we can prosper, grow the economy and protect jobs.
Chris Bryant
I thank colleagues for everything that they have had to say. I am not sure whether it was Reagan or Bush, but one of them went to France and said that the trouble with the French economy was that there was no French word for “entrepreneur”. It was repeated by a Conservative Secretary of State for Wales, who went to Wales and said that there is no word in Welsh for “entrepreneur”—that was a bit ironic.
I will try to do something extraordinary, Madam Deputy Speaker, by answering the questions that have been put to the Government. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear!”] I don’t think it will catch on. I will start with the questions put by the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for West Worcestershire (Dame Harriett Baldwin). Her first question was about whether I can guarantee that no commercial finance will ever be used where UKEF finance is involved. The strict answer to that is no. However, UKEF’s mission is
“to ensure that no viable UK export should fail for lack of finance or insurance from the private sector.”
My hon. Friend the Member for Leyton and Wanstead (Mr Bailey) made the key point about cohering power. That is precisely what UKEF is able to provide. Sometimes, particularly under export development guarantees, UKEF funding can help to extend capacity or terms—that is an important part of what it does. It is not that there will never, ever be commercial finance and UKEF funding, but obviously we are not trying to supplant commercial funding. We are also aware, of course, that financial services are one of the key things that we do around the world. We are trying to shift our FTAs towards dealing not just with goods but with services, because that is where some of the added value is for the UK.
Several hon. Members have asked about regional disparities. Those are one of the key things we have charged UKEF with, and I know that it is keen to address them. I have a long list in my briefing notes of different parts of the country in which UKEF funding has been supportive or where there have been grants, but I will not lay them all out now.
The shadow Minister asked about new markets. That is often precisely what we are looking for: new markets for individual exporters and new markets for the UK in general. One area in which we have set aside money was specifically in relation to Ukraine, where the reconstruction will be one of the most important things for UK businesses to be involved in over future years. It will be difficult to get the insurance necessary to be able to provide that simply on the open market, which is why UKEF funding is particularly important.
The shadow Minister said that we should not export to companies that could do us harm. She is absolutely right about the side-stepping of sanctions on Russia. We have frequent discussions about that, and UKEF is particularly keen on carrying out due diligence on it. It is why we must constantly revise how we implement our sanctions regime, to ensure that it is doing damage to the Russian Federation’s economic advances.
Chris Bryant
Yes, but I am not sure that the hon. Gentleman was here for the rest of the debate. [Interruption.] Oh, he was sitting on the Front Bench—I do apologise.
David Reed
I thank the Minister. Just on a point of clarification—I am sure that this will be hammered out in Committee—we have heard about the assistance that the Government have given over the past 15 months to UK Steel, Jaguar Land Rover and others, but it is important to talk about the significant cyber element. Jaguar Land Rover was hit by a big cyber-attack, and we saw a step change when the Government stepped in and essentially made British taxpayers the insurance company. Does the Minister see any risk in the Bill, and what message does it send to adversaries such as Russia, which he just mentioned?
Chris Bryant
On cyber, financing and JLR, I might have to correct myself in writing to the hon. Gentleman if I get what I say wrong, but as far as I am aware, I am not sure that JLR has drawn down any of the finances from UKEF that we made available. We thought it was important to ensure that the guarantee was there so that the company was able to proceed. That would be of assistance not only to JLR, but to the extended supply chain, much of which needed to deliver precisely on time, because of the way the automative industry now works, and they did not have large stocks of things that they were keeping against the day when they might be called up by JLR.
We certainly do not want to be the insurer of last resort for everybody who gets into a cyber-security problem. That is why the Government have a cyber-strategy, and we are keen to ensure that businesses take that part of their responsibility seriously. We have seen the dramatic effects that it can have on the UK economy when that goes wrong; this is a serious point. I have seen no evidence that what happened at JLR was specifically related to Russia, but we must maintain vigilance on all these matters.
The shadow Minister’s final question—I am not leaving any of them out—was about how we make sure that posts know about UKEF. We have heard already from two of our trade envoys that posts are extremely well aware of the existence of UKEF, and of how completely transformative that can be when a business is seeking to expand into a particular market. I would say that the problem is that sometimes not enough businesses in the UK are aware of UKEF, which is one of the things I have been talking through with UKEF senior management.
I know that my hon. Friend the Member for Chelsea and Fulham (Ben Coleman) has been doing a magnificent job, because I have seen video footage of him on the “News at 10” in Togo, speaking in French. We are glad that we have such a linguist in our team, and he is right to raise some of the issues in relation to the EU. We want frictionless trade. That is what we were promised, and we are going to try to achieve it as far as we possibly can. Sometimes that will mean that we align as much as possible with the European Union, rather than diverge for the sake of divergence. Of course it means that we need to get more mutual recognition agreements in place. There is a series of industries where I would like to achieve that, not least architecture.
The hon. Member for Maidenhead (Mr Reynolds) gave the traditional single transferable EU speech from the Liberal Democrats. I agree with large chunks of what he was saying, but not with his final premise. As I say, within the parameters of what we have, we want to deliver frictionless trade as much as possible. Everybody in my Department laughs at me, but I often refer to floristry. There are florists in every constituency in this land, and if it costs more to bring flowers in from Europe than it did in the past, that is a problem for lots of small family businesses up and down the land. That is why sorting out sanitary and phytosanitary measures over the next few months is an important priority for the Government. He asked whether the target of 1,000 SMEs is ours or that of the previous Government—it is our target as well. We want to be ambitious about that.
The hon. Gentleman asked about spending decisions and accountability. If only he knew somebody on the Business and Trade Committee to whom he could talk about questions of UKEF. Oh no, he’s on it—I’d completely forgotten, Madam Deputy Speaker! I am sure there are plenty of means for him, but I gently say to him that in my experience, the whole system of accountability of expenditure in the House is pretty shabby. It is not my job to write how we should change that in the future, but he might come up with some suggestions and put them to others.
My hon. Friend the Member for Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland (Luke Myer) said that I had not aged a day since I was last a Minister under Queen Victoria, but I think he inadvertently misled the House; I hope at some time that he will be able to correct the record. He is absolutely right about arbitrary figures. There are arbitrary figures, and previous Acts of Parliament did not allow us to amend them to update them sufficiently in line with inflation—we need this primary legislation to do that.
My hon. Friend is also right about the steel industry. I assure him that our steel strategy will come out in the new year. It will be very clear about how important we think the steel industry is to the UK, and about having a sovereign capacity in the UK for a variety of different forms of steel manufacture. As I told the House last Thursday, I was in Brussels last Wednesday to meet Commissioner Šefčovič to talk about the EU steel safeguards, and to make sure it is understood that we are not the problem for the EU and the EU is not the problem for us, so we ought to be able to come to some agreement in that space. We know that our steel safeguard runs out at the end of June. We need to make sure that we have adequate measures in place thereafter, and we will do so.
My hon. Friend the Member for Newton Aycliffe and Spennymoor (Alan Strickland) talked about the importance of exports, in particular for businesses in his own region. To give cite just one statistic, UKEF provided a £590 million loan for SeAH Wind UK, which is building an offshore wind factory in Teesside. It will create 750 jobs by 2027 and will assist the UK steel industry, so my hon. Friend is absolutely right and I agree with him.
My hon. Friend the Member for Leyton and Wanstead, who is another of our magnificent trade envoys, asked more questions than the shadow Minister—I am not sure whether he is auditioning for some other post. He is absolutely right about the importance of our critical minerals strategy. Our relationship with Africa will be essential to deliver on that; other countries are seeking to make inroads there, and we cannot leave that be. He asked how the updated UKEF strategy fitted with what we are doing today. Well, the new strategy simply cannot exist without the extension of the financial provisions that we are introducing through the Bill.
My hon. Friend also talked about the cohering power, which is very important. He said that I could read his views—I know can, because he gave me a letter only 10 days ago, which I have read and officials in the Department are reading as well. I am enormously grateful to our trade envoys, in particular those who provide clear reports when they come back from visits about the things that we have achieved. They are achieving those things as part of the UK team. In the new year, I want to vitalise the whole House so that all Members, who often know the businesses in their communities better than anybody else—certainly better than any Government Department—bring people to us who might be thinking about exporting in the future, so that we can strengthen that opportunity.
This Bill is about enabling Scottish indie acts like corto.alto and Young Fathers, and Wales’s the Bug Club, to tour the world. It is about funding low-carbon hydrogen production. It is about helping Superior Wellness to sell hot tubs and spas around the world. It is about enabling 3TOP Aviation to expand its sustainable aircraft services into new markets. It is about helping SRT Marine Systems to sell its maritime surveillance in Indonesia and Kuwait. It is about enabling UK businesses to get contracts to help build the new Dubai airport. It is about enabling BioNTech to open two new research and development hubs. It is about helping Kindeva in Loughborough and Clitheroe to develop new respiratory inhalers. It is about enabling a new multibillion-pound car battery factory, creating 4,000 jobs. It is about Scotch whisky and salmon, and Welsh whisky; aircraft engines and wings; life sciences and advanced manufacturing. It is about jobs and our prosperity, so I hope that all right hon. and hon. Members will support the Bill tonight.
Question put and agreed to.
Bill accordingly read a Second time.
Industry and Exports (Financial Assistance) Bill (Programme)
Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 83A(7)),
That the following provisions shall apply to the Industry and Exports (Financial Assistance) Bill:
Committal
(1) The Bill shall be committed to a Committee of the whole House.
Proceedings in Committee, on Consideration and on Third Reading
(2) Proceedings in Committee shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion two hours after their commencement.
(3) Any proceedings on Consideration and proceedings on Third Reading shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion three hours after the commencement of proceedings in Committee of the whole House.
(4) Standing Order No. 83B (Programming committees) shall not apply to proceedings in Committee of the whole House, to any proceedings on Consideration or to proceedings on Third Reading.
Other proceedings
(5) Any other proceedings on the Bill may be programmed.—(Jake Richards.)
Question put and agreed to.
Industry and Exports (Financial Assistance) Bill (Money)
King’s recommendation signified.
Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 52(1)(a)),
That, for the purposes of any Act resulting from the Industry and Exports (Financial Assistance) Bill, it is expedient to authorise the payment out of money provided by Parliament of any increase attributable to the Act in the sums payable under or by virtue of the Industrial Development Act 1982 or the Export and Investment Guarantees Act 1991 out of money so provided.—(Jake Richards.)
Question put and agreed to.
Oral Answers to Questions
Chris Bryant Excerpts(6 days, 17 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Will Stone (Swindon North) (Lab)
The Minister of State, Department for Business and Trade (Chris Bryant)
Without our small businesses, we as a country are nothing, which is why we have published the first small business strategy in 10 years. We are going to change the law to tackle late payment, unlock billions to support businesses to invest, and revitalise the British high street.
Olly Glover
Love Beer Brewery in Milton in my Oxfordshire constituency of Didcot and Wantage supplies fantastic ale for events and a number of local pubs. However, its viability is threatened by the freeze of income tax thresholds and the increase in beer duty. Its monthly beer duty costs are now between £1,500 and £2,000, and if its owner did not have a day job, it probably would not be able to survive. In that context, will the Minister say a bit more about what else the Government can do to support small businesses and small breweries such as Love Beer in Milton?
Chris Bryant
When I visited those at the de-alcoholisation unit at another brewery, the Budweiser factory just outside Newport, last week, they said that one of the really important things was being able to diversify, because of changing drinking habits in the UK. However, they also want the British Government to focus on making sure that businesses have access to capital and that people pay their bills on time. When we introduce legislation, as we intend to do later this year, which will tackle the problem of late payments, that will make a dramatic difference. It will be the most important piece of legislation in the UK in this field for 25 years.
Sally Jameson
Clean Power Hydrogen, a small business in my constituency, is a UK leader in the manufacturing of membrane-free electrolysers for green hydrogen production. It employs about 60 people in Doncaster, and it has the ability to expand that to hundreds by 2035. Will the Minister set out what he and his Department are doing to support companies such as Clean Power Hydrogen in Doncaster and across the country?
Chris Bryant
I congratulate my hon. Friend on being a great defender of the businesses in her constituency. We are delivering targeted catalytic public investment in our clean energy industries. Some people see climate change as an economic challenge for us, but we see it as an economic opportunity in this country, because it is about future jobs. That is why we are so different from the political parties on the other side of the Chamber.
Mr Dhesi
Slough is a dynamic and innovative business hub, but as we enter the festive period, retail, hospitality and leisure businesses, for example, are under immense pressure. Although businesses, particularly small and medium-sized enterprises, welcome the support measures that have already been introduced, what specific immediate actions are the Government taking to boost the high street and ensure that Slough businesses not only survive but thrive?
Chris Bryant
As my hon. Friend knows, I know a bit about Slough, because my brother is a headteacher there—and I am sure he has been helping out some of the pubs. The most important point is that we fully acknowledge that it has been a very difficult few years for the hospitality industry across the whole of the UK. That is one of the reasons we set a target of 50 million international visitors to the UK by 2030. If we are to do that, we have to make sure that pubs survive. My hon. Friend will know that, when the Conservatives left office last year, they had no plan to replace the covid recovery funds and no plan to meet the coming cliff edge in the revaluation of business rates. That is why it is so important that we have put in £4.3 billion to protect businesses and provide transitional relief.
Will Stone
Will the Minister outline what work he is doing with the Ministry of Defence to support our defence SMEs, given the situation in Ukraine at the moment?
Chris Bryant
The single most important thing is that we have a defence industrial strategy. We should always have had a defence industrial strategy, because as many of us will know, up and down the land there are small and larger businesses that rely on the support they get from providing for the MOD. When I was in Auckland a few days ago, I was able to speak to the New Zealand navy about buying British frigates, which would be made in Rosyth. I very much hope that we will be able to get that over the line. We are determined as a Government to use these industrial opportunities in the MOD to deliver good jobs across the whole of the UK.
Dame Harriett Baldwin (West Worcestershire) (Con)
Last month in Business and Trade questions, I asked the Secretary of State to show some backbone and stand up to the Chancellor and say, “No more business taxes”. But he did not: far from permanently lower business rates, small and medium-sized businesses on our high streets are experiencing enormous rate hikes. Will the Minister apologise to those retail and hospitality businesses who feel so misled?
Chris Bryant
No, because I want the hon. Lady to apologise for what the Conservatives did to the British economy and British businesses. Why is it that, following the Brexit that they delivered to this country, only one in 10 British businesses are exporting, whereas three out of 10 French businesses and four out of 10 German businesses export? It is because they gave us a Brexit which, frankly, was not fit for purpose. That is precisely what we should be changing.
Of course there are problems for lots of businesses up and down the country, but I note that every single time we ask the Conservatives, “Where is the money to come from to pay for improving the NHS and putting our public services back on their feet?” they always say it will come from some random budget. [Interruption.] Just as when the shadow Business Secretary, the hon. Member for Arundel and South Downs (Andrew Griffith) was the Financial Secretary to the Treasury for Liz Truss, he wanted us to—
Dame Harriett Baldwin
I did not hear an answer to my question. To add insult to injury to the retail and hospitality businesses on our high streets, the letter that has gone out from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government about the change in business rates gives completely different information from the guidance on the Treasury website. The difference means thousands and thousands of pounds. Will the Minister commit today to getting in touch with his Cabinet colleague to ensure that those letters are corrected?
Mr Speaker
I think my throat will manage. The hon. Member should not worry.
Chris Bryant
Well, I will find some hearing aids for the hon. Lady, because she refused to listen to the answer I was providing. Basically, when the Conservatives left government, they had not provided a single penny to make sure the cliff edge would not affect every single small business in this country. That is the problem they should be apologising for. [Interruption.] I cannot hear what she is chuntering, so I probably need a hearing aid, too. Of course I am happy to look into the letters she is talking about, but, really, the Conservatives need to get with the programme. Even the leader of the Conservative party now admits that Brexit was a “shock” on a level with covid and the economic crisis—but it was a self-inflicted shock.
Mr Gagan Mohindra (South West Hertfordshire) (Con)
Businesses of all sizes across my constituency are struggling due to the strain of Labour’s increases to national insurance contributions and the pressures created by the Employment Rights Bill. Many tell me they are questioning their viability or even considering relocating overseas. Will the Minister set out what steps the Department will take to support entrepreneurship and ensure that businesses choose to invest and grow here in the UK, rather than being driven overseas?
Chris Bryant
Look, we want to back British entrepreneurs and investors. That is why we addressed some of the key issues in our small business strategy, which we published earlier this year, in particular late payments. The Conservative Government refused to tackle that in any serious way across their 14 years. It is why we are also looking at access to finance. One thing we know about a business is that if it exports, it will be more resilient, more likely to grow and more successful in future years. To enable that, I asked UK Export Finance this week not just to focus on big contracts around the world, but to ensure that it provides specific support for SMEs.
Chris Law (Dundee Central) (SNP)
The Scottish Chambers of Commerce has said that this Labour Budget
“falls short of reassuring business owners”
and that SMEs in Scotland are being left “on the brink”. I have met a range of businesses in the Scottish whisky and hospitality sectors and the crucial energy industry, and this Budget is a missed opportunity to reverse cack-handed Labour policies, such as national insurance contributions, which are hurting our SMEs. Will the Minister explain to Scottish businesses why Labour has gone out of its way to let them down so badly?
Chris Bryant
First of all, we have given £5 billion more to the Scottish Government; I sometimes just wish they would stop whining and moaning, and get on with delivering what they can with the budget that we provided to them. Secondly, I have met the Scotch Whisky Association frequently since I came into this post at the beginning of September. It is delighted that we are delivering trade deals around the world. The trade deal with India, in particular, will reduce tariffs in India from 150% to 75% and, in 10 years, to 40%. That will make a radical difference to the ability to export Scotch whisky around the world.
Chris Bryant
Look, the single most important thing is that everybody, including the Liberal Democrats and the Conservative Government, when they were in power, knew that after the revaluation in 2021—on the back of covid—there would be significant increases when a new revaluation came in 2024. Everybody was aware of that. At the same time, everybody recognised that there was a cliff edge, because not a single penny had been set aside to provide transitional relief following the general election. We provided relief last year, we provided £4.3 billion of relief this year, and that is why there is a very strong future for our hospitality sector under Labour.
Ruth Jones (Newport West and Islwyn) (Lab)
Alan Gemmell (Central Ayrshire) (Lab)
The Minister of State, Department for Business and Trade (Chris Bryant)
We are championing investment across every nation and region. At the recent regional investment summit and Wales investment summit, we showcased the strengths of our world-leading sectors and secured billions in private investment and commitments. We are making the UK the best place to start, scale and invest, while cutting unnecessary regulation so that businesses can innovate, create jobs and help rebuild our economy.
Andrew Ranger
As someone with a long and proud career in the hospitality industry before being elected to this place, I know—as we all do—that the sector plays a vital role for our high streets and communities. It brings people together, provides crucial local jobs and boosts economies. In Wrexham alone, over 1,200 people are employed in the sector. Alongside measures announced in the Budget and already this morning, will the Minister set out what the Government are doing to support the beer and pubs sector as part of their plans to revitalise our high streets, strengthen local economies and safeguard hospitality jobs in Wrexham and beyond?
Chris Bryant
My hon. Friend refers to his long and proud career in the industry. It can’t have been that long, because he is so young—[Interruption.] I am being nice.
One thing I have felt very strongly about for a long time is that the hospitality industry in the UK needs to consider a job in the industry as a proper, honourable career. All too often they are seen as jobs that are only done by a few people for a couple of months before they go on to university or whatever. We need to completely change that. That is why as a Minister in the Department for Culture, Media and Sport I tried to ensure that we have proper centres of excellence for hospitality in the UK so that it is a career that is available for people for the whole of their lifetime.
My hon. Friend will know of the work that is being done in Wales via Pub is the Hub to help rural pubs diversify. I think that is really important, and we are committed to ensuring that it continues.
Alan Gemmell
My constituency is home to NATS—the good kind, helpfully, because NATS is the UK’s leading provider of air traffic control services. It employs 5,000 people around the country and 500 in Central Ayrshire, and exports its world-class expertise around the world. Will the Minister meet me to discuss that great British success story and how we can continue to champion it?
Chris Bryant
I agree with my hon. Friend that gnats— I would not want to cast aspersions on any other kind, obviously—can be a terrible problem in Scotland.
The aviation industry in the UK is an important sector and is part of one of the key sectors that we have identified in the industrial strategy. We want to ensure that all our advanced manufacturing prospers. It was good to see significant extra investment in GE Aerospace in Nantgarw, made only the other day, and I am happy to meet my hon. Friend to see how we can drive forward our ambitions in the sector.
Wera Hobhouse (Bath) (LD)
The Minister mentioned earlier the disaster of Brexit, and I will add the loss to the UK economy of £250 million a day in tax revenue, according to research from the House of Commons Library. We Liberal Democrats want the Government to focus on a golden opportunity to grow the economy by considering a new customs union with the EU. Is it not time that the Government look at a new customs union with the EU? We will be told that there are deals with India and New Zealand that would be in peril. [Hon. Members: “There are!”] Those are nothing compared with the lost trade with the European Union.
Chris Bryant
Far be it from me to agree with a Lib Dem but, broadly speaking, I do. The truth is, as the Leader of the Opposition has now admitted, Brexit was a self-inflicted shock—and not just a small shock. It is as if the Conservatives decided to throw the three-bar electric fire into the bath while it was plugged in and they were sitting in it. The hon. Lady is right: it is a 4% drop in productivity, a 15% drop in trade and a £100 billion hit to our GDP, and there are 16,000 fewer businesses now exporting into Europe. I am sorry but they are not Cinderella—instead, we are having to clear up the mess left by the ugly sisters.
Wendy Chamberlain (North East Fife) (LD)
I always appreciate the Minister’s optimism, but I was with my local chamber of commerce a few weeks ago and it did not have the same views on how the Government are doing with growing the economy. I heard from a hospitality business in my constituency that costs for next year will go up by £150,000. They will not make it through next year. I understand and can perhaps predict what the Minister will say, but surely we need to consider some key measures, because we are hearing from across this House that hospitality is in crisis.
Chris Bryant
We are looking at all those issues in the round. We need to ensure that there is the support that people need in a variety of different ways. Some of that is about ensuring that bills get paid on time and some is making sure that those businesses have the access to finance that they have historically found difficult. We need to build on the successes and enable people to diversify more. That is precisely what our Department is there to help with. If the hon. Lady has people who want to meet me, I am happy to do that, but I can assure her that we are determined to drive economic growth.
Andrew Griffith (Arundel and South Downs) (Con)
Five Lib Dem Lords a-leaping. That is all it took for the Liberal Democrat party to throw every British business under the bus and expose them to the unimaginable liability of infinite tribunal payouts. It is hard to think of a more anti-growth, anti-job measure. On Monday, the Liberal Democrat spokesman was against, on Wednesday they were for and goodness knows where they will be tomorrow. Does the Minister agree that British business would have an entirely fair case to dismiss the lot of them?
Chris Bryant
The hon. Member seems to have lost the plot, frankly. Let me just point something out to him: what was average growth under the Tories? It was 1.5%. What is it under Labour? It is 2.2%. Which is higher? It is higher under Labour than the Tories. Average employment in the UK under the Tories was 73.8%. What is it under Labour? 75%. Which is higher? It is higher under Labour. Average inflation under the Tories was 3.2%. Under Labour, it is 1.8%—better off under us. I will just say on rights that we do not create a healthy and wealthy society if we ignore the rights of workers.
Andrew Griffith
Lyndon B Johnson said the first rule of politics is to learn how to count. The Government lost the vote in the House of Lords last night on the unemployment Bill because 144 of their own peers did not want anything to do with that Bill. One Labour peer has already resigned to join the exodus to Dubai. Tony Blair would never have brought forward this Bill because he understood the importance of growth. Will the Minister now accept the sensible compromise passed in the other place last night and today give British employers and workers the certainty they need for business to grow?
Chris Bryant
I can count; the hon. Member cannot. Let me remind him: growth under the Tories was 1.5%, and growth under Labour is 2.2%. Which is higher? It is higher under Labour, isn’t it? Why did we lose the vote last night? Because of 25 Tory hereditary peers. Why on earth would that be? Why do we think they might not be willing to support Labour? Look, it is absolutely clear that it is business that builds economic growth, but we cannot create a wealthy nation if we do not tackle poverty, and we cannot tackle poverty unless we grow the economy—just like a prosperous business cannot be built on the backs of the workers, and that is what we will never do.
Sarah Olney (Richmond Park) (LD)
Thank you, Mr Speaker—I appreciate you giving me the time.
I listened carefully to the Minister’s response to my hon. Friend the Member for Bath (Wera Hobhouse). Some £90 billion is being lost every year in tax receipts, 20,000 small firms have stopped all exports to the EU and 33% of currently trading businesses are experiencing extra costs. The Prime Minister’s chief economic adviser has recommended a customs union with the EU. The Deputy Prime Minister has also suggested that countries within a customs union tend to see stronger economic growth, and the Minister agrees, so what is his Government going to do about it?
Chris Bryant
We are going to get the best possible deal that we can out of the European Union. That is one of the reasons that I was in Brussels only yesterday alongside Nick Thomas-Symonds, the Minister for the Cabinet Office. We are getting a better deal from the European Union. We want to ensure that we have frictionless trade with the EU—that was what was promised by the ragtag and bobtail of that lot on the Conservative Benches —and that is what we will deliver. But I say to the hon. Member that in all earnestness we had a manifesto commitment, and that is what we will stick by.
Mr Speaker
As the Minister knows, we do not normally use names, and he will not be doing it again.
Bobby Dean (Carshalton and Wallington) (LD)
The Minister of State, Department for Business and Trade (Chris Bryant)
I apologise on behalf of the Secretary of State, who is striking deals in the United States of America. In recent weeks, we have announced £2.5 billion of investment in the UK’s first small modular reactor site at Wylfa, launched a critical minerals strategy and done a deal with the US on pharmaceuticals.
Mr Speaker, in true Christmas spirit, I can assure you as Trade Minister that there is no tariff on gold, frankincense or myrrh, and Santa Claus can travel freely without a visa—although apparently, he knows when you’ve been bad or good, so be good for goodness’ sake!
Bobby Dean
Thank you, Mr Speaker. As you probably know, south London is wonderful, but you may not know that it is one of the UK’s largest regional economies. Last week my local council, the London borough of Sutton, launched its economic growth plan, inviting businesses to take advantage of opportunities in the area. Will the Minister meet me and the local council leader to connect the business community with all the opportunities that exist in my borough?
Jayne Kirkham (Truro and Falmouth) (Lab/Co-op)
Andrew Griffith (Arundel and South Downs) (Con)
Labour’s steel strategy was originally promised in spring 2025, but yesterday we learned from a written ministerial statement, snuck out without Ministers coming to the House, that the strategy will now not be published in 2025 at all—it is more likely to be spring 2026. We have no steel strategy after 18 months, there is no sight of the US tariff agreement on steel that the Prime Minister claimed to have on 8 May, and no deal with the Chinese owners of British Steel. Will the Minister give the sector the Christmas present that it wants and publish the steel strategy?
Chris Bryant
It is a bit of a cheek, isn’t it, the Conservatives coming and talking about a steel strategy when they had absolutely no strategy and did not even choose to go and visit some of the steelworks that we are talking about. There will be a steel strategy. The Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Chris McDonald) has been having discussions with trade unions and industry, both downstream and the producers, and we will be producing a comprehensive steel strategy very soon. I am happy to deal with the tariff issues if there is a little time later.
Michael Payne (Gedling) (Lab)
Justin Madders (Ellesmere Port and Bromborough) (Lab)
Chris Bryant
I pay tribute to my hon. Friend’s work in the Department; he is much missed, particularly by many of the civil servants and those who worked with him. I am happy to sit down with him and discuss whether we can bring forward specific proposals that would redress that imbalance.
Alison Griffiths (Bognor Regis and Littlehampton) (Con)
Dr Lauren Sullivan (Gravesham) (Lab)
The loss of the Gravesend to Tilbury ferry has had a detrimental impact on our high street, with businesses reporting a fall in footfall. Will the Minister meet me to advise on any potential capital revenue grants that could unlock growth in this area and the wider Thames estuary?
Chris Bryant
I am very happy to meet my hon. Friend. The high street is a really important part of ensuring that we have economic growth across the whole of the United Kingdom, rather than just in some parts of it. One of the things we have been looking at is the fact that when a high street has a cinema, that often makes it a place that people want to go to, and it gives a sense of pride in place. That is why the Pride in Place investment that we have made is so important.
Rebecca Smith (South West Devon) (Con)
Chris Bryant
I backed the national minimum wage. Because I have been here since the time of Queen Victoria, I remember a time when the Conservative party—backed by the Lib Dems, incidentally—held out completely against the idea of a national minimum wage. If we are going to build successful businesses in this country, it is important that we have a national minimum wage that really pays the bills and enables people to put food on the table for their kids.
Liam Byrne (Birmingham Hodge Hill and Solihull North) (Lab)
May I welcome the deal with the United States to set zero tariffs on pharmaceutical exports? Together with the British Business Bank’s investment of £100 million in biotech, that is a real boost. However, the US offer was for just three years, whereas the price adjustment we have promised for the NHS is permanent. When the Secretary of State met the Secretary of Commerce and the United States Trade Representative in America last night, what assurance did he get that the Americans will not come back and reimpose tariffs on UK pharmaceuticals in three years’ time?
Chris Bryant
I completely agree with the Chair of the Business and Trade Committee; this is a really good deal in many ways, not least because, as somebody who has benefited from medical advances that have happened in the past few years—I received immunotherapy that had been licensed only a week before I went to the GP with my stage 3 melanoma in 2019—I know how important it is not only that the UK has a strong life sciences sector, but that people can access those drugs through the system in the UK. I think this is a good deal. I am afraid I cannot answer his precise question about what conversations the Secretary of State had last night, because I was having discussions with another country about another deal, which we might be able to announce very soon.
Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)
I welcomed with interest the Minister’s earlier comments about support for the aviation sector. Let me give an example of how Brexit is damaging aviation in my constituency. CAE trains pilots, but at the moment it cannot bring in all the examiners it needs, so instead it has invested in Vienna. When will the Government decide that they need to join Lib Dem calls for a customs union?
Chris Bryant
I have already said that we will not be joining Lib Dem calls, but we will try to sort out all the issues about frictionless trade that exist. The hon. Lady is right about the aviation industry. It was a delight for me to be able to go to Dubai and help support the bid from Airbus and Rolls-Royce to be able to sell planes that are 30% made in the UK to airlines around the world. The aviation industry is a really important part of our manufacturing base, and we will support it.
Rachel Taylor (North Warwickshire and Bedworth) (Lab)
I got the chance to do some essential Christmas shopping on small business Saturday last week. I bought cakes from Gayton’s and a wreath from the Flower House, and I managed to get in my Christmas turkey order at Bates in Atherstone. Can the Minister tell us what extra support he will provide to small retail businesses in North Warwickshire and Bedworth and across the country?
Lincoln Jopp (Spelthorne) (Con)
The Minister’s magnificent waistcoat reminds me that last night I was at the grand opening of Tulip Treasures Florist on Shepperton high street in my constituency. Will the Minister wish young Rhiannon, who is taking that brave step, every success in her endeavours?
Chris Bryant
I wish Rhiannon every success in her endeavours, not least because one of the problems provided by Brexit affects florists up and down the country. Some 80% of the flowers sold by florists in the UK come from, or through, the Netherlands, and when we sort out our sanitary and phytosanitary measures deal—which we hope to do very soon—it will be much more affordable for florists to be able to survive in this country. Of course, it is good to support British tailoring as well.
Matt Western (Warwick and Leamington) (Lab)
The UK-US economic prosperity deal was very welcome for the automotive sector, but there are some challenges for that sector. The current quota of 100,000 units and the quarterly thresholds are particularly difficult for small-volume and micro manufacturers, such as Aston Martin, McLaren and Morgan. What conversations are taking place between the US and the UK on those details?
Jessica Morden (Newport East) (Lab)
Last week I met Community union representatives representing steelworkers across Wales, including in Llanwern— I draw attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. They support the welcome movement on energy costs, and they know that the Government are working on procurement and that there will be a steel strategy, but the most urgent ask is on the EU’s steel import quotas and tariffs. Can the Minister please give us an update on those?
Chris Bryant
My hon. Friend is quite right to raise the issue of Llanwern; sometimes we focus on some of the other steelworks in the UK, but this is about the whole sector. I met Commissioner Šefčovič yesterday; we are very much on the case of trying to sort out precisely where we land with the EU safeguard, but we also need to ensure that the UK has a steel safeguard after the end of June. We will do everything we can to ensure that we have a strong and prosperous steel sector across the whole of the UK, including in Llanwern.
Chris Webb (Blackpool South) (Lab)
Last weekend I attended Waterloo Road’s first ever winter wonderland Christmas lights switch-on, which was a fantastic celebration in the spirit of small business Saturday in the most deprived ward in our country. Those businesses told me on Saturday, as they have done many times, that they have been left behind for too long, and that the high street is suffering. Will the Minister meet me to discuss what we can do to support our high streets in the most deprived areas of this country?
Sean Woodcock (Banbury) (Lab)
The Minister has rightly congratulated Lando Norris and McLaren on their victory in the Formula 1 championship at the weekend. Motorsport brings in an estimated £9 billion to the UK economy, along with high-skilled jobs, cultural soft power and so on. Will the Minister join me in commending the sector on its contribution to the wider UK economy, and perhaps join me in visiting one of the Formula 1 or motorsport teams in my constituency?
Chris Bryant
My hon. Friend makes a very good point: advanced manufacturing and the creative industries come together in this area, because it is also about broadcasting. Those are two of the sectors in our industrial strategy that we are very keen to motor on with, and one or other of us in the ministerial team will be very happy to meet my hon. Friend’s constituents.
Euan Stainbank (Falkirk) (Lab)
I welcome the 340 jobs at Grangemouth announced this morning as a direct consequence of the investment made by this Labour Government and MiAlgae. In less good news, the National Timber Group went into administration last month, making 500 workers across the country redundant. After five years at NTG, my constituent had her system access cut off, while working, with no warning, no process and no verbal communication. What dialogue have Ministers had with the administrators to ensure that a fair process is followed for NTG employees?
Chris Bryant
I welcome my hon. Friend’s point, which is extremely well made. I am very happy to have a conversation with him afterwards about the precise nature of the discussions that are ongoing.
Finally, I too visited one of my small businesses on small business Saturday, a great cake shop called Only Crumbs. Sadly, under the Tories, that was all we ever got: only crumbs.
Bobby Dean
On a point of order, Mr Speaker. The Minister indicated to the House that the Liberal Democrats were against the national minimum wage in the ’90s. My own memories are hazy, but I am reliably informed that that was not the case, so I hope the Minister will correct the record.
Fairtrade Certification
Chris Bryant Excerpts(6 days, 17 hours ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Dr Rupa Huq (Ealing Central and Acton) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Mrs Hobhouse.
Picture the scene: Downing Street in December and jolly Christmas trees sparkling away. No, it is not “Love Actually”, but the moment—exactly 24 hours ago, I think —that my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow North (Martin Rhodes), other officers of the all-party parliamentary group and I handed in the petition of 22,000 constituents. Such was the volume of names, the petition was in a blue cardboard box, carrying the logo that my hon. Friend described, with the distinctive swirly light-green and blue with a dot connoting a person. It was the Fairtrade logo, which people trust. It is like a kitemark.
When we buy stuff with the Fairtrade logo—bananas or whatever it is—we know what it means. As people have described, there is a minimum price guarantee for the farmer, and there is the Fairtrade premium—the financial bonus for community projects. Certification is a two-way bargain. On their side, the person being supplied has to provide transparent contracts. There are lots of things that these smallholders—they are often tiny farmers—find difficult, like getting finance up front, before the harvest season. Under the Fairtrade scheme, they can get money up front.
The scheme is about people, sustainability and community first, before naked transactional profit. Smallholding farmers can club together and get a lot more access to international markets than they would be able to get on their own. The scheme increases their bargaining capacity. It is also democratic and run on co-operative—I am a member of the Co-operative party—principles. The premium could go to football pitches, tuition fees or classrooms; that is decided by the community.
I do not know whether I am the only one in the room old enough to remember the 1980s and the advert with the man from Del Monte. Do you remember him, Mrs Hobhouse? He was a little bit neocolonialist in his hat and linen suit, and he swooped into a paradise-like community. Well, it was not all paradise, was it? He was on a plantation somewhere or other—it was an unnamed location—stroking his beard and inspecting fruit produce. It was some far-off location—somewhere in sunny climes. He was this western impresario and the community were all there, with their great expectations. In the end, the cliffhanger was resolved with a thumb up—“The man from Del Monte, he say yes!”, as one of the urchin children said. I like to think that in this day and age, it would be a certified, kitemark-able, Fairtrade business and the little urchin would be going to a school provided by this system and enjoying kicking a ball about on a pitch built with these community funds. That is what we would like to think, but it is an uneven playing field, as people have described.
The Minister is wearing a jolly waistcoat himself for this debate. It is very festive—I like it.
The Minister of State, Department for Business and Trade (Chris Bryant)
It is British.
The Minister of State, Department for Business and Trade (Chris Bryant)
I am not sure how long you think I will go on for, Mrs Hobhouse, but I will take that admonition in the way I think it was intended. It is obviously an enormous delight to have you in the Chair, notwithstanding your admonition. It is also a great delight to have this debate, which plays an important role in the Government coming to a view on responsible business conduct.
I warmly congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow North (Martin Rhodes). He would have been my mother’s MP if she was still with us, so I know his patch very well. My grandfather also lived in his constituency when he played for Glasgow Rangers. That was a very long time ago, so I am terribly sorry if my hon. Friend hates Glasgow Rangers—it has nothing to do with me.
My first point is that the world is fundamentally more connected, or even interconnected, than ever. I particularly feel that at the moment, as in the few weeks I have been in the job, I have been to Brazil, Argentina, Germany, Switzerland, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Australia, New Zealand, Spain and, arguably, Singapore— I was also in Brussels yesterday, so there have been quite a few. The truth is that, while in the past people might have only considered a holiday in France or Spain, even under Franco, their opportunities for holiday travel around the world are now much more extensive than ever before.
Exactly the same is true of supply chains. It might well be that the clothes we wear were stitched and made here—although they might have been stitched and made on the other side of the world—but the cotton or silk might have come from another part of the world entirely. The same is true of our furniture, tea and coffee, sugar and bananas. Even the glasses we wear are often not entirely sourced here in the UK. Neither are the medical instruments used when we are operated on by a surgeon, nor the medicines that we receive. All those supply chains are interconnected around the world.
Perhaps the most obvious instance of this is our choice of music. In the past, when we were young, we thought mainly about British music. There was perhaps a bit of alternative music from Latin America, Africa or wherever played by a few DJs late at night, but nowadays K-pop, African music and stuff from all around the world form our earworms.
In many ways, that interconnectedness is a good thing, but it also has potential downsides, because the arc of trade does not necessarily always bend towards justice. Quite often, because of price competition, the arc of trade can lead to quite the reverse—the abandonment of justice. I have always felt that the concept of fairness is a fundamental element of being human. It is why children will often shout and scream, “That’s not fair!” when they are told to go to bed, when they are not allowed to play with their tablet, or when they see their brother or sister staying up later than them.
We need to build on that sense of fairness in international trade. We need to make sure that the arc of trade bends towards justice and fairness. I have therefore always argued that we should strive for free and fair trade, not just free trade. Interestingly, the very word “boycott” springs from a moment in Ireland in the 1880s when a pretty awful land agent called Captain Charles Boycott was turfing people off their property on behalf of a pretty awful landlord. That has entered the language of nearly every country in the world—the concept of wanting to abide by good standards and fairness in trade.
This is why the Fairtrade Foundation is such an important concept. The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) referred to the Christian churches, which have been big supporters of the movement, and led to the Jubilee 2000 campaign and so many other things. When I was training to be a priest, every church I went to had a Fairtrade stall at the back. I have to confess that early Fairtrade Foundation coffee was pretty dire, and now it is a standard part of the offer in Sainsbury’s, Waitrose, Tesco and Aldi—in every single supermarket. It is great that a complete transformation has happened because of the dedication of a large number of people working on an entirely voluntary basis.
Sarah Olney
I am interested in the Minister’s formulation of free and fair trade. Would he not agree that fair trade is free trade, and that free trade is fair trade? It is about bringing down barriers, which may have been put in place by the larger producers or people with a market advantage. The point is to create a fairer playing field, because that is what free trade is.
Chris Bryant
I suppose, on the whole, I was trying to say that I want to try to take down tariff barriers where I possibly can, so that we can engage in free trade, but that only works when we have fair opportunities underlying it. The hon. Member for Strangford will correct me if I have this wrong, but I think there is a phrase in the Bible about justice and peace kissing one another. Sometimes we strive for justice, but it is not real justice if we do not get peace with it; and sometimes we strive for peace, but it is not real peace if it is not based on justice. That is the combination of Shalom and Tzedek, to use the Old Testament terms, that we are striving for with free and fair trade.
As my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow North said, the Fairtrade Foundation has been around for more than 30 years. It has done an amazing job in certification. Indeed, I think there are now more than 5,000 Fairtrade-certified products in the UK, and many of our constituents search them out every day of the week.
I, too, was approached by the Brew it Fair campaign, which has raised specific challenges around tea, including the living conditions of workers, gender inequality and a series of other issues. I praise it for raising those issues and bringing them to everybody’s attention.
I am delighted that Rhondda Cynon Taff county borough council in my constituency was made a Fairtrade county in 2007. It has therefore had a considerable period of time to roll out these policies. I am sorry to keep referring to the hon. Member for Strangford, but he asked about procurement. Of course, procurement is a key issue. We often have discussions in Parliament about what consumers do, but it is also about what the Government do.
The hon. Member is quite right that we produced a new national procurement policy statement in February this year, which lays out new ways in which people can drive this agenda into procurement, on the back of taxpayers’ money. Similarly, the Procurement Act 2023, which came into force on 24 February this year, has a new central debarment list, which Ministers can put people on if they have been involved in modern slavery. In that way, we can make sure the supply chain is cleaner.
Fair trade is not just about the issues I have mentioned. The International Labour Organisation says that, around the world, 28 million people are in situations of forced labour. I am sure that any of us could cite some of the places where that might be true. Similarly, every minute we are losing forest area equivalent to 11 football pitches, which is a challenge to all our climate change ambitions.
Of course, the impact of climate change will be felt most intensely among the poorest peoples on Earth. To see that, we only have to look at places such as the Carteret Islands, off Bougainville in Papua New Guinea, or the outlying poorer lands of Thailand, where some of the very poorest people are in danger of losing their homes, their livelihoods and their access to clean drinking water. Similarly, a million animal and plant species are threatened with extinction, which is a threat to biodiversity, and whether biodiversity loss happens in our country or in any other country, it is a threat to us all.
There are two other issues that have not been referred to much so far today. The first is corruption. The danger of corruption in some political systems around the world, particularly where there is an authoritarian regime, is intense. That is why it is so important that, under the Bribery Act 2010, we have particular responsibilities to ensure that British businesses trading elsewhere in the world are not able to engage in corrupt practices.
The second issue is displaced people, which is slightly different from the issue of forced labour. I remember visiting Colombia in 2018 with ABColombia, where I was struck by two things. First, as we flew over vast territories, I was struck by how much of the land had been taken for palm oil. That massive agribusiness had effectively displaced many millions of people who had lost their property thanks to the activities of militias and the FARC, and the battle between the two.
Similarly, when I went to El Porvenir and La Primavera, which are not far from Colombia’s border with Venezuela, it was striking how people found it very difficult to make a living when they had been deprived of large amounts of their land—they had effectively been living in a warzone for the best part of 20 years. That is why it was so important that, when Colombia was able to bring about peace with the FARC, it was very keen to bring forward the idea of land reform—that work has never really been completed—so people have access to land again and can make a living.
I have a few principles that influence how I look at all of this as we go through the process of our responsible business conduct review. First, I believe in a seamless garment. Again, I am sorry, but that is another biblical phrase. When Jesus was on the cross, lots were cast for his garment because it was seamless. I think it is important that we look at all these issues together, in the round. As I said, it is not just one issue.
This may seem a slightly flippant way of looking at it, but I was watching “Do they know it’s Christmas?” the other day on a Christmas compilation TV show. Of course, it is great because it is dealing with human rights around the world, the lack of clean drinking water and people starving from famine, but I was struck that only three women were asked to take part in the filming of the 1984 version. That could be a test for anybody, but it was the three members of Bananarama: Sara Dallin, Siobhan Fahey and Keren Woodward. That made the point to me that we need to look at all these issues in the round. Gender inequality, human rights issues, corruption and environmental concerns all need to be addressed in the round when we are looking at the whole of our supply chain.
Secondly, I commend the voluntary efforts. The shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Reigate (Rebecca Paul), referred to how the previous Government recognised them, which is true. I think we have all done that, and we have done it for many years. I doubt that there are many MPs who have not been to some kind of Fairtrade event and shown willing.
I pay tribute to Howies, a Welsh clothing company, because sometimes it is not easy to prosper in this world. It is great that the company is owned by its staff—I, too, am a member of the Co-op—and it says that its
“award-winning men’s and women’s clothing is ethically produced using organic, recycled or natural fabrics wherever possible… we want to be a company that does things differently to others—one that does things honestly, responsibly and quietly.”
I think an awful lot of UK consumers would love to be able to think that, whenever they go into a supermarket or any of the major chains, that would be what influences the company they are buying from, going all the way back to the beginning of the supply chain. In fact, there is evidence to suggest that companies are more successful when they adopt that kind of attitude. Consumers like it, so the companies can prosper. For that matter, it also gives a sense of purpose to everybody who works in the company.
Thirdly, as several Members have mentioned, we do not want a race to the bottom. My hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow North said that if we have worse standards or weaker requirements than elsewhere, the danger is that all the least-ethically sourced stuff comes to the UK. It would be a form of ethical dumping—similar to subsidy dumping or carbon dumping—into the UK. We are very keen that it should not happen, so of course we want to work alongside international comparators.
Fourthly, I am very keen for the UK to have requirements that are both effective and proportionate to the harm being dealt with. I have a question in my mind that was raised with me a couple of weeks ago, at a roundtable involving quite a few of the sorts of organisations we have talked about, including the anti-slavery body. I am not sure that having another annual report that is never read by anyone—including the person who wrote it, possibly—would be either effective or proportionate. Reports are costly for an organisation to produce, and they might not make the blindest bit of difference to whether a consumer or the company takes action on this.
Fifthly, notwithstanding that, section 54 of the Modern Slavery Act 2015 requires large organisations over a certain threshold to publish transparency in supply chain statements, and we provided new guidance on that in 2025. As has already been referred to by the Liberal Democrats, some of that is good, but there is a danger that it is just ticking a box, not driving forward change; and I am far more interested in driving forward change than I am in simply ticking boxes.
My sixth point is—there are not too many more, honestly—[Interruption.] I do not know why you are all laughing. We are engaged in a responsible business conduct review, and this debate is a very helpful part of that; it feeds into what we are hearing from businesses, because we want to make sure that what we eventually come forward with will be proportionate and effective. I was asked specifically whether we will also look at mandatory human rights and environmental due diligence reports. Yes, we are looking at how those would work, what would be most effective, and how they relate to requirements for multinational companies in other countries as well.
Seventhly, since we came to power, we have opened the Office for Responsible Business Conduct, which is a one-stop shop for industry. Again, I am interested in driving change, and sometimes businesses do not know where to turn. Smaller businesses might have no idea how to meet the law or best effect the kind of change we are all looking for. The Office for Responsible Business Conduct has a strong mandate there.
I have already referred to my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow North and the hon. Member for Strangford—who of course is a friend to us all, as we meet him in so many debates. It was great, too, to hear from my hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton West (Warinder Juss) and from the hon. Member for North Herefordshire (Dr Chowns), and from the man from Del Monte—or rather, from my hon. Friend the Member for Ealing Central and Acton (Dr Huq); indeed, the one point she did not make was that it would be quite nice if there were a woman in charge. Maybe one day there will be a woman from Del Monte—although I note that Del Monte went into chapter 11 proceedings in July, so it is not clear what state it is in now. I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Cumbernauld and Kirkintilloch (Katrina Murray).
Many of us have effectively given the same speech, because we all feel quite passionately that we want to get these issues right. I know that many people work in retail in the UK in a whole series of sectors; quite a few of our discussions have been about food and beverages or fashion, but the same is true for furniture and other sectors, too. We simply want to get this right, because our aim here in Government is to ensure that British businesses have an opportunity to export and import, and that this is always based on free and fair trade.
Wera Hobhouse (in the Chair)
I am enormously grateful to the Minister for leaving plenty of time for Martin Rhodes to wind up.
Free Trade Agreement: Turkey
Chris Bryant Excerpts(6 days, 17 hours ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister of State, Department for Business and Trade (Chris Bryant)
The third round of negotiations on an enhanced free trade agreement with Turkey took place in Ankara during the week commencing 17 November 2025.
Negotiations were productive, with positive progress being made in a number of areas:
Trade in services
Constructive discussions were held across financial services, professional and business services, domestic regulation, and entry and temporary stay. The UK set out proposals aimed at giving greater legal certainty and transparency for services suppliers. Both sides explored avenues for regulatory co-operation to support open and stable markets, and continued to narrow outstanding issues and further consolidate text across these chapters.
Trade in goods
Negotiators continued to discuss text proposals and relevant data across trade in goods, with a view to unlocking commercially meaningful opportunities for UK exporters. Significant progress was made on customs and trade facilitation, focused on enabling predictable, transparent and efficient border procedures through enhanced co-operation between customs authorities. On sanitary and phytosanitary measures, both sides continued to discuss practical co-operation to facilitate safe trade in agrifoods while maintaining and upholding the UK’s high standards.
Sustainability and collaboration
Positive exchanges were held on labour, anti-corruption and environment, building on work from previous rounds. Discussions also advanced on good regulatory practice with the shared aim of supporting open, transparent and predictable regulatory environments that reduce unnecessary barriers to trade, and support innovators and SMEs.
Additional areas
Text-based discussions continued on dispute settlement and the enforcement of intellectual property rights. Both sides also worked to refine and clarify respective approaches across Government procurement, state-owned enterprises and subsidies. On trade remedies, officials held further exchanges to build a common understanding of practices and mutual processes.
Economic growth is our first mission in Government and FTAs have an important role to play in achieving this. A stronger trade relationship with Turkey will contribute to jobs and prosperity in the UK, with trade between the two totalling around £28 billion in the four quarters to the end of Q2 2025.
The UK will only ever sign a trade agreement that aligns with the UK’s national interests, upholding our high standards across a range of sectors, including protections for the national health service.
The fourth round of negotiations is expected to take place in early 2026. Ministers will update Parliament on the progress of discussions with Turkey as they continue to progress.
[HCWS1153]
UK-US Economic Prosperity Deal
Chris Bryant Excerpts(2 weeks, 2 days ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister of State, Department for Business and Trade (Chris Bryant)
The UK and US met virtually to continue talks on the UK-US economic prosperity deal during November 2025. Discussions included areas across the scope of the EPD set out in the 8 May general terms, including tariffs and non-tariff barriers, digital and services. Constructive talks continued on US section 232 investigations, including pharmaceuticals and heavy trucks.
Thanks to the EPD, the UK remains the only country in the world to benefit from a preferential 25% rate on steel, aluminium and derivative exports to the US, a special 10% tariff on cars, as well as receiving preferential treatment for lumber products, with the lowest tariff rate of any country in the world at 10%. Other countries face tariffs of up to 50%.
The UK and US will continue negotiations across the range of issues outlined in the general terms for the EPD.
The US is the UK’s largest single country trading partner with a trading relationship worth some £331 billion in the 12 months to June 2025. UK firms employ some 1.2 million US workers while 1.4 million people work here in the UK for American companies. We have £1.2 trillion invested in each other’s economies. The EPD will continue to deliver on saving thousands of jobs, protecting key British industries, and helping to drive economic growth.
[HCWS1108]
Business and Trade Committee
Chris Bryant Excerpts(2 weeks, 6 days ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Liam Byrne
I was very grateful to receive the hon. Member’s email. He is absolutely right. The shutdown of branches all over our country is a really serious problem that creates real risks. One answer is to ensure that we lean in behind the Post Office plans to create banking hubs, not just in a couple of hundred high streets, which is the proposal of the main banks, but in thousands of locations across the country. The Post Office has in place an agreement with the banks until about 2030, but the future thereafter is not clear, so I hope that Ministers can take up this point in the Department for Business and Trade to ensure that we lean into the plans that the Post Office has developed to transform the availability of banking services on thousands of high streets up and down the country.
The Minister of State, Department for Business and Trade (Chris Bryant)
I warmly commend the Committee on producing its report. I take no offence at the demand that there be a separate economic security Minister, even though I think the Culture, Media and Sport Committee demanded, when I was the Minister responsible for tourism, that there be a separate tourism Minister as well—there seems to be a growing theme. I am very glad that the Committee agrees with the Government on the need for mandatory reporting of cyber-attacks. It seems to me that until we have a full understanding of the pattern of the problem that there is in the nation, we will not really be able to seize the opportunity. What shape does my right hon. Friend think the legislation that he proposes might take?
UK-India Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement: Agricultural Products Report
Chris Bryant Excerpts(3 weeks, 1 day ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister of State, Department for Business and Trade (Chris Bryant)
The UK officially signed its landmark comprehensive economic and trade agreement with India on 24 July 2025, marking the start of a strengthened trading relationship between the two economies. The UK-India trade deal will make trade quicker, cheaper and easier for UK businesses, increasing UK GDP by £4.8 billion and ultimately boosting bilaterial trade with India by £25.5 billion every year in the long run. The deal enables UK businesses to expand into one of the fastest growing markets in the world, delivering the growth mission across the UK and showing the UK’s global commitment to free, fair and open trade.
In order to trigger the ratification of the UK-India trade deal through the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010, the Government have a statutory duty to lay a report before Parliament under section 42 of the Agriculture Act 2020. Today, I am proud to lay this report before the House.
The Secretary of State has sought advice from independent bodies including the Trade and Agriculture Commission, the Food Standards Agency and Food Standards Scotland, and has responded to this advice in the report. Their independent advice concurs with the Government’s assessment that the FTA does not affect the UK’s ability to maintain its statutory protections in relation to human, animal or plant life or health, animal welfare or the environment. The Government will endeavour to bring this landmark agreement into force as soon as possible, while providing for full parliamentary scrutiny.
[HCWS1094]
CPTPP
Chris Bryant Excerpts(3 weeks, 2 days ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister of State, Department for Business and Trade (Chris Bryant)
On 20 and 21 November, I attended the ninth meeting of the Commission of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership in Melbourne, Australia, where a number of issues were considered by CPTPP Ministers.
Please see the joint ministerial statement from CPTPP parties at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/cptpp-joint-ministerial-statement-in-melbourne-21-november-2025 which outlines key outcomes including: Costa Rica accession working group, CPTPP future accessions, the launch of CPTPP-EU and CPTPP-ASEAN dialogues and the CPTPP general review.
As the trade strategy published earlier this year outlines, CPTPP is designed as a living agreement, meaning it is designed to adapt to developments in the wider global economy. It does that through regular reviews of its rules to ensure they are up to date—the CPTPP general review—and through bringing in new economies via the accessions process. More generally, CPTPP provides a platform for a diverse group of major economies to come together and discuss how to deepen and extend the reach of high-standards trade.
Costa Rica Accession Working Group
At the CPTPP Commission meeting in November 2024, CPTPP Ministers, including the UK, formally decided to begin an accession process with Costa Rica, establishing an accession working group.
As part of this, the Government launched a public engagement period that ran from 29 November 2024 until 24 January 2025 to understand business, civil society and public views and insights regarding Costa Rica’s potential membership. This is supporting the Government’s approach to negotiations.
Ministers agreed that Costa Rica’s accession negotiations are near conclusion, and the accession working group will continue discussions expeditiously and report back this December, aiming to conclude the accession process in a timely manner.
Costa Rica’s accession can bring further wins for UK businesses and exporters through further liberalisation of international markets, while also strengthening geo-political ties with key partners.
Future Accessions
The more that CPTPP expands, the greater the economic and strategic benefits to the UK. Expansion of CPTPP brings new economies into the orbit of high standards trade and enhances the opportunities available for British businesses.
To date, nine economies have applied to join CPTPP, following the UK: Costa Rica, China, Ecuador, Indonesia, Taiwan, Ukraine, Uruguay and, most recently, the Philippines and the United Arab Emirates.
CPTPP parties have identified four aspirants that are in line with the Auckland principles—namely, Uruguay, the United Arab Emirates, the Philippines and Indonesia.
Parties have decided to commence an accession process with Uruguay, and will commence with the others in 2026, if appropriate. This will not prevent the consideration and discussion of other accession requests.
To maintain the pace of CPTPP work, in addition to meeting this December, parties intend to meet again in the first half of 2026, with a view to taking further decisions as appropriate.
The expansion of CPTPP remains a priority for the UK, as outlined in the trade strategy, and we look forward beginning the accession process with Uruguay, expanding the reach of high-standards, rules-based trade.
EU and ASEAN dialogues
Earlier this year, CPTPP parties decided to work towards dialogues in 2025 with the European Union and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. These dialogues directly deliver on the trade strategy commitment to further strengthen the crucial relationship between major trade blocs, as well as providing a strategic platform to support an open, rules-based international trade system.
On 20 November, the inaugural dialogues took place in Melbourne, with European Commissioner for Trade Maroš Šefčovič attending in person alongside CPTPP Ministers for the EU-CPTPP dialogue. Statements outlining outcomes have been published on gov.uk.
Discussions were positive, constructive and forward looking. All participants reiterated commitments to the rules-based international system and the importance of ongoing co-operation.
The dialogues also provided an opportunity for participants to explore tangible areas for potential future joint working, including in UK priority areas of digital trade, supply chain resilience, and World Trade Organisation reform. The UK strongly supports the continuation of these collaborations at political and technical levels, delivering on the ambitions discussed in these inaugural dialogues.
CPTPP general review
The UK considers that CPTPP is already a well-functioning, high-standards agreement. None the less, we see this first CPTPP general review as a good opportunity to keep the agreement up to date in certain key areas.
As a result, the UK and CPTPP parties agreed a package of outcomes and next steps from this CPTPP general review, designed to ensure that the agreement delivers for business.
The parties will now commence negotiations from early 2026 on upgrading and enhancing the agreement in the key areas that have been identified, including on some of the UK’s industrial strategy priorities: electronic commerce and trade in services, customs administration and trade facilitation, competitiveness and business facilitation, and trade and women’s economic empowerment.
To further enhance the implementations and operations of the agreement’s high-standards provisions, we will finalise development of further initiatives identified in the general review report, including investment, state-owned enterprises, innovation, gender mainstreaming, economic coercion and market-distorting practices.
The outcomes of the Commission meeting pave the way for increased opportunities for UK businesses, supporting economic growth.
CPTPP is one of the largest free trade areas in the world, and a platform for the UK to collaborate with a diverse group of major economies to extend the reach of high-standards trade. The UK officially acceded to CPTPP almost a year ago, in December 2024, and I welcome the progress we have made with other CPTPP countries during the UK’s first year as a party.
I look forward to keeping the House updated on future CPTPP developments.
[HCWS1084]
Draft Trade Act 2021 (Power to Implement International Trade Agreements) (Extension to Expiry) Regulations 2025
Chris Bryant Excerpts(1 month, 1 week ago)
General CommitteesRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister of State, Department for Business and Trade (Chris Bryant)
I beg to move,
That the Committee has considered the draft Trade Act 2021 (Power to Implement International Trade Agreements) (Extension to Expiry) Regulations 2025.
I have never been so kindly called by the Chair in Committee, Mr Stringer, so thank you very much. It is a genuine delight to sit under your chairmanship.
The draft regulations will authorise the enactment of sections 2(10)(b) and 2(11) of the Trade Act 2021 and extend the power under section 2(1) for a further period of five years. The proposed extension is a vital measure to ensure that the UK can remain flexible and proactive in managing its trade relations with important international partners. By extending the power, the Government will be able to pursue their ambitious trade agenda with minimal interruption.
To provide the Committee with a little more background, the Act was introduced by Liz Truss, but that does not mean it is all wrong. When it received Royal Assent back in 2021 under the previous Administration, the legislation granted the UK Government the authority to implement, through domestic law, trade agreements with countries that previously had such arrangements with the EU before Brexit. That is specified in section 2 of the Act. In practice, under the power in section 2(1), the Act enabled Ministers from the UK Government, as well as those from the devolved Administrations in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, to make regulations via secondary legislation, specifically to address non-tariff elements of such agreements.
Rightful concerns about the scope of the power were expressed in Parliament at the time, including by the Labour party, resulting in the previous Government having to introduce several safeguards, including a sunset clause meaning that the power in section 2(1) will lapse at 11 pm on 31 December 2025 unless extended for up to five years by affirmative statutory instrument, which is what this Committee is about. We believe that such an extension is now necessary for our trade programme.
Any agreement that may have aspects implemented by that provision and that falls within the scope of the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 will still be subject to the usual pre-ratification scrutiny, alongside the Government’s additional commitments to parliamentary transparency and oversight. All the original safeguards that we fought for at the time of the 2021 Act’s passage will remain in place. The draft regulations will have no effect on them.
We will continue to ensure that the power cannot be used to lower UK standards in areas such as the protection of human, animal or plant life, animal welfare, environmental protection, employment and labour rights, data protection, and safeguarding children and vulnerable adults online. Regulations made under section 2(1) of the 2021 Act that affect healthcare services must also uphold the principle of a publicly funded healthcare system. I cannot see a single Member on the Government side who was in the House when the 2021 legislation went through, so I realise I might be telling people ancient history.
Since coming into office, the Labour Government have made considerable progress in negotiating agreements that may require the continued use of section 2(1) beyond its expiry. It is crucial that we retain the ability to implement the outcomes of such negotiations. That is vital not only for businesses operating under new terms, but for maintaining the UK’s reputation as a dependable trading partner.
In practice, the extension could facilitate the implementation of forthcoming agreements with major partners, such as Switzerland, worth some £45 billion in trade, and Türkiye, worth some £28 billion. The agreements, once operational, are expected to deliver substantial economic benefits, open new markets, create jobs and stimulate growth across the UK. Without the power under section 2(1), delivering on our negotiated successes would be significantly more challenging. I am sure no Members of the House want to make that the case.
It is worth noting that the power under section 2(1) has already been used to implement agreements domestically, enabling the passage of statutory instruments on matters ranging from chemicals to roaming charges. The powers may also be needed for the ongoing management of existing arrangements, an example of which is to facilitate changes to the wholesale rates set out in an annexe to the European economic area and European Free Trade Association free trade agreement with the UK.
What I am trying to demonstrate to colleagues, I hope successfully, is the range of circumstances in which the power may be required. Extending section 2(1), therefore, is the most sensible course of action. A five-year extension is necessary to provide comprehensive coverage and to address any unforeseen issues that may arise during the ongoing administration of our trade agreements. Given the reasons that I have outlined and the assurances that I have made, I trust that the Committee will support the measure.
Chris Bryant
The shadow Secretary of State for Business and Trade, the hon. Member for Arundel and South Downs, argued for the benefits of Brexit—well, I have searched very high and I have searched very, very low for those. The previous Government even had a Minister for the benefits of Brexit, although he lost his seat, of course, at the last general election. I was a remainer and I remain a remainer, and we know that there has been significant damage to our ability to prosper because of what Brexit did to us. When I was at the World Trade Organisation last week, it was striking how many countries pointed to the number of UK businesses that are no longer trading in Europe because of the difficulties relating to Brexit.
I will say two things. First, we are where we are and we intend to exploit the ability that we have by virtue of not being in the European Union to its utmost, so as to secure trade deals wherever we can in the rest of the world. It may be that in some instances we are able to lead the way, such as on the free trade agreement that we have agreed with India, which is a significant success. That will point the way for the EU itself, in some cases, to be able to follow in our wake. It also gives us a seat at the WTO for the first time, which means that we can lead some of the conversations on reform of the WTO at the ministerial conference next March in Cameroon.
We will exploit the opportunity, but secondly, we must also ensure that, wherever possible, we secure the frictionless trade that was promised us by the shadow Minister and his ilk. We will try to secure that with the European Union because, frankly, any business in the UK that manages to find an export opportunity is more likely to be more resilient, succeed and grow into the future, which is precisely what we want for British businesses.
The hon. Member for Richmond Park, the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, sounded very grumpy. I always think, when a Liberal Democrat stands up, that they will be full of cheer and joy, and then they are always grumpy. I sympathise with some of the arguments that she makes about scrutiny, and I want to make sure, as Trade Minister, that we can provide whatever scrutiny is possible without so limiting our freedom of action to secure a deal with another country. It is a very careful balancing act and we need to get it right.
I was the Minister in the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office who took forward the clauses in the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010—CRaG. I stand by them. We will provide as many opportunities as we possibly can in relation to all the trade deals that we are going through at the moment for people to scrutinise, question and, if necessary, tell Ministers off. I will now give way for what will probably be another grumpy Liberal Democrat intervention.
Sarah Olney
I will ask this question in the brightest way I possibly can. The Minister referenced CRaG, which was passed in 2010. Does he still think that that is a sufficient level of scrutiny, given that we are now outside the EU and in a different trading environment to the one that we were in when those provisions were made?
Chris Bryant
We would obviously always want to keep that under review. As part of the CRaG process everything gets notified to the several Committees that might have an interest. When I was on the Foreign Affairs Committee, it struck me that it was always at that moment that all the members would put their heads on the table—it was like the moment from “Absolutely Fabulous” when the accountant comes along.
There is a very strong argument that the whole of the House should take these trade issues far more seriously than we have in the past—though that is not me committing to changes in legislation, in case that is what the hon. Lady thought I was doing. She has started smiling again; it turns out I can put a smile on a Liberal Democrat face. However, I take the issue of how we consult extremely seriously. I know she is a trade envoy, and I still need to have a conversation with her about that.
Broadly speaking, everybody has said that they agree with the motion, so I should probably shut up.
Question put and agreed to.