Trade Negotiations

Douglas Alexander Excerpts

Tuesday 6th May 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Minister for Trade Policy and Economic Security (Mr Douglas Alexander)]

I wish to make a statement on the progress that this Government have made towards a UK-India trade deal. I am delighted to inform the House that we have now concluded negotiations on a comprehensive, modern agreement with the fastest-growing economy in the G20.

Hon. Members will no doubt be aware that India is expected to be the third-largest economy in the world by 2028. By the end of this decade, it will be home to an estimated 60 million middle-class consumers, and with trade between the United Kingdom and India already standing at north of £43 billion, we know that this powerhouse economy is and will remain a hugely important market for British businesses. While past Governments have failed to negotiate a deal with India, this Government have today succeeded. We have brokered the most generous trade deal ever agreed by India in its history.

From day one of this deal coming into force, it will make trade between our countries cheaper, easier and quicker. UK exporters will benefit from much lower tariffs across a whole host of sectors, including those that we are prioritising in our industrial strategy. It means simplified customs processes for businesses in advanced manufacturing and aerospace, in the food and beverage sector, and in the creative sector, which will benefit from improved copyright protection.

For our world-leading financial and professional services companies, this deal locks in access to India’s fast-growing market. It will ensure that UK banks and finance companies are placed on an equal footing with Indian suppliers, and it encourages the recognition of professional qualifications, so that UK and Indian firms can access the right talent at the right time, whether they are in Mumbai or Manchester. This deal will unlock new opportunities for businesses in every part of the United Kingdom, including our advanced manufacturing companies in the north-east, our iconic Scottish whisky brands and our car plants in the west midlands. In all, we will have secured over £400 million in tariff reductions in the first year alone, doubling to around £900 million after just 10 years.

Crucially, the deal we have negotiated will provide bespoke support for small and medium-sized enterprises to enter the Indian market, alongside a firm commitment from India to address the trade barriers that those businesses face. Since taking office, we have committed to hardwiring the views and interests of small businesses into everything we do, and the deal we have negotiated is evidence of that. For the very first time, British businesses will have guaranteed access to India’s vast procurement market, covering goods, services and construction. They will be able to bid for approximately 40,000 tenders worth at least £38 billion a year.

The deal that we have just got over the line is further proof that this Government are using the power of international trade and investment to raise living standards here at home. Indeed, experts predict that it will boost our bilateral trade by some £25.5 billion. It is also projected to increase UK wages by £2.2 billion each year, while adding nearly £5 billion to our GDP over the long run.

We have done all that while defending stoutly the UK’s national interest. We have brokered a deal that protects our NHS and upholds our high food standards. It ensures that our points-based immigration system remains unaffected. The deal demonstrates our commitment to both workers and businesses, staying true to our Labour values while contributing to our primary mission of economic growth.

I recognise that this House will need time to scrutinise the deal before the ratification process. My Department will follow the process set out in the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 in sharing the finalised treaty text with hon. Members. The House will, of course, have the opportunity to scrutinise any legislation associated with its implementation.

This deal sends a powerful message about the UK and India’s shared commitment to free, fair and open trade. The UK-India relationship has deep, enduring roots, exemplified by the living bridge of 1.9 million people of Indian heritage living in the United Kingdom. While I do not personally lament that the right hon. Member for Richmond and Northallerton (Rishi Sunak) is no longer the UK’s Prime Minister, it would be wholly wrong of me not to acknowledge his significant achievement as the first British-Indian Prime Minister, which is a testament not just to his own ability but to the close bonds that unite our two nations.

The Government are proud to back open markets and free trade. We recognise that Britain has always been an open, outward-looking trading nation, and we believe that open markets and free trade are fundamental building blocks with which the UK can secure its opportunities and prosperity at home and abroad. Through our upcoming trade strategy, we will set out our ambitions to engage with more industrial giants, like India, to ramp up trade and investment over the coming months and years.

Today, though, as close trading partners and as friends, I am proud that we have secured this deal with India. It is a deal that affords UK businesses certainty and stability during a time of global uncertainty and instability, and a deal that will give British businesses access to one of our biggest markets abroad, while raising wages and driving growth here at home. That is what this deal delivers, and I commend this statement to the House.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

I call the shadow Minister.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Alexander]

I thank the hon. Lady for her recognition that this is a landmark deal, although I have to say that it was not her most generous welcome of a deal that the previous Government worked for many months to try to secure—it is right to recognise that, albeit they did not manage to close the most difficult remaining issues. I seem to remember that it was a former leader of the Conservative party, the former Member for Witney, who promised that his party would stop “banging on about Europe”. Alas, that advice does not seem to have been taken in the Conservatives’ approach to today’s landmark agreement with India.

The hon. Lady inquired how we got the deal done when our predecessors failed to do so. Respectfully, I would say that it was through a process of patient, pragmatic and painstaking work—a very different approach from the kind of Instagram diplomacy that all too often characterised the approach of past Trade Secretaries and Trade Ministers. That allowed us, with the political leadership shown by the Secretary of State, to close significant chapters on goods and services. It allowed us to then reach a considered judgment that meant that, with stability of political leadership and clarity of ministerial direction, we could secure concessions from the Indians and conclude the agreement in a way that eluded our predecessors.

The hon. Lady asked specifically about the double contribution convention. I can assure her that that reciprocal agreement will benefit UK workers and their employers as the opportunity within India expands. India will have one of the world’s largest middle classes in the coming decades. The agreement will cover only a specific and limited group of Indian businesspeople for a period of three years. It is worth recognising that the Indians have other arrangements in place that extend longer than that. The workers will be required to pay their immigration health surcharge to the national health service, so the convention does not affect NHS funding.

The DCC that we have agreed is reciprocal and will benefit UK workers in India as well. India is home to the fastest growth rate in the G20, so the opportunity here for the United Kingdom is only likely to grow over time. The agreement was made in the context of the wider deal, which will bring billions into the UK economy. I can assure the hon. Lady that the United Kingdom already has social security agreements in place with a range of countries and trading blocs, including the European Union and the United States.

On the broader immigration issue that the hon. Lady raised, I can assure her that the deal does not affect the points-based system. The points-based system is not affected by the agreement that we struck today. The deal only covers business mobility, which is different from immigration, as it is about travel for specific and temporary business purposes. As a result, UK businesses will benefit from additional business mobility routes supporting them as they expand into India. Student visas remained off the table.

I hope that that gives some clarity to the hon. Lady. I am grateful for her recognition that it is a landmark deal. It is right to recognise that the Conservatives sought to secure this deal, and I hope that in the course of the conversations that we will have across this Dispatch Box today, we will be able to recognise that this represents a very significant win for the United Kingdom in very challenging times for trade.

[Gregor Poynton (Livingston) (Lab)]

The conclusion of the negotiations on this free trade agreement is a major win for Scotland’s economy and for my Livingston constituency in particular, given that we bottle Glenmorangie whisky and bake Paterson’s shortbread. We also have a strong and growing digital services sector, particularly with small and medium-sized enterprises. Can the Minister say a bit more about how this deal will help those businesses, too?

[Mr Alexander]

I thank my hon. Friend and fellow Scottish Member of Parliament. One of the commitments that we made when we were both elected—in my case, re-elected—to the House back in July was that we would seek to ensure a Labour Government delivering for Scotland. The cut that we have secured in whisky tariffs for the huge and significant market in India is a clear and tangible example of the difference we are making. He does not need to take my word for it. These are the words of Mark Kent, the chief executive of the Scotch Whisky Association:

“The UK-India free trade agreement is a once in a generation deal and a landmark moment for Scotch Whisky exports to the world’s largest whisky market. It shows that the UK government is making significant progress towards achieving its growth mission, and the Scotch Whisky industry looks forward to working with the UK and Indian governments in the months ahead to implement the deal”.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Clive Jones (Wokingham) (LD)]

I thank the Minister for advance sight of his statement. At a time when Donald Trump is fuelling global instability through protectionism, international co-operation is more important than ever. A UK-India trade deal is a positive step, and we look forward to seeing the detail of the deal. Parliament must be able to scrutinise the details carefully, especially the proposed changes to national insurance contributions. When Labour was in opposition, it agreed with the Liberal Democrats that there should be a vote on trade deals. Both my right hon. Friend the Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Ed Davey) and I have made the Lib Dem position clear: there should be proper scrutiny and a vote on a trade deal.

The Government’s own export Minister, the hon. Member for Harrow West (Gareth Thomas), said that the current ratification process is “not fit for purpose”, and he is right. Does the Minister of State agree that denying a vote not only contradicts Labour party policy, but sets a dangerous precedent, especially ahead of any future US deal? Can he explain the Government’s massive U-turn since entering government? Finally, will the Government push for a new UK-EU customs union—the fastest way to boost our economy—at this month’s political summit?

[Mr Alexander]

The hon. Gentleman has referred to our attempt to reset our trading relationship with Europe. The red lines that were set out in our manifesto are very clear, but within those red lines we are endeavouring to broaden and deepen an important trading relationship that represents about 46% of the UK’s trade. As for the hon. Gentleman’s broader observation that the agreement we have reached today is, as it were, a pretty bright-shining light in what is a somewhat dark sky for international trade, I agree with him. It is, hopefully, a sign of further deals to come and of a commitment to taking forward deals that are mutually beneficial, in this case for the Indians and also for the United Kingdom.

When it comes to the wider question of how the deal will be scrutinised, the hon. Gentleman is right to recognise that today’s telephone conversation with Prime Minister Modi was just the start of the process. A press release has been published, along with a list of the top benefits, but we hope to publish a paper today setting out in more detail what has been agreed—the conclusion summary paper—and there will then be a process moving towards signature and a legal scrub of the text. However, as the Prime Minister made clear a few days ago, we will follow the process set out in the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010.

[Barry Gardiner (Brent West) (Lab)]

Last week I had the pleasure of meeting representatives of the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry when they came here with my old friend Piyush Goyal. I congratulate the Minister and his officials, as well as FICCI and the India Global Forum—under the leadership of Manoj Ladwa—and, indeed, everyone who has spent so many years laying the groundwork for this agreement.

The Minister recognised the doubling of India’s service and IT exports over the last decade and the benefits that we can gain from engagement and co-operation in respect of the service and knowledge economy, but I think it important for him to outline further what the benefits of the double contribution convention on national insurance will be, and how they will facilitate that engagement and co-operation for our workers in India.

[Mr Alexander]

I thank my hon. Friend for his generous words of congratulation. I know that the bilateral relationship between the United Kingdom and India has been a constant feature of his long service in the House, and a particular focus of his parliamentary work. He is right to recognise, in the context of both digital services and the services sector more widely, the huge potential mutual benefits for the United Kingdom and for India working together, and he is right to recognise the broad and deep relationship between our two countries—as I have said, 1.9 million people with Indian heritage live in the United Kingdom—but, as his question suggested, it is also right to recognise quite how dynamic the Indian economy is today. It has the highest growth rate in the G20, which is expected to remain above 6% over at least the next five years. Given that ours is a largely services-based economy, notwithstanding our excellence in advanced manufacturing, the opportunities for UK service exporters are huge and growing.

[Sir John Whittingdale (Maldon) (Con)]

I welcome the Indian trade deal, but will the Minister now switch his attention to the other side of the Atlantic, and ask Lord Mandelson to explain to the United States Administration that tariffs on films are unworkable and impossible to implement, and would do real damage to the film industry not just in the UK but in the United States?

[Mr Alexander]

I pay tribute to the right hon. Gentleman’s long-standing interest in matters relating to culture, media and sport and to the creative industries more generally. We are grateful for the expertise and experience that he brings to the House on these issues.

It would be one of the first occasions on which I told Lord Mandelson to do anything in many decades of our working together, but I will ensure that that is duly registered, not only in the record of this House but directly to our distinguished ambassador in Washington. It should also be placed on record that the film sector is a key part of the UK’s world-class creative industries—and we are absolutely committed to ensuring that those sectors continue to thrive and create good jobs—and that the UK has a strong and balanced trading relationship with the United States, worth £315 billion.

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his challenge to me to reach out directly to Lord Mandelson in respect of what we have read in the newspapers in the last couple of days, and I give him my word that I will ensure that Lord Mandelson is fully aware of the issue.

[Mr Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Slough) (Lab)]

Amid much fanfare as usual, the former Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, announced that he would have a UK-India trade deal signed “by Diwali”—but very cunningly, he never mentioned which Diwali, so we were left waiting for years. Other Conservative Prime Ministers made similarly empty promises, which is why I particularly commend the Minister, the Business and Trade Secretary, their officials and the Labour Government for having finally concluded this free trade agreement. I look forward to this mutually beneficial agreement being formally signed. Can the Minister confirm that this landmark UK-India FTA will increase bilateral trade by £26 billion, increase UK GDP by £4.8 billion, boost wages by £2 billion year in, year out, and lead to many jobs in my Slough constituency and for people across both nations?

[Mr Alexander]

My hon. Friend seems to know my brief better than I do. In all seriousness, it is right to place on record our gratitude to the Prime Minister for his sterling work in getting this deal over the line. I also pay generous tribute to the Business and Trade Secretary, who has done an immense amount of work and whose visit to India in February with Minister Goyal unlocked a number of key issues that had proved to be sticking points for the previous Administration, and to officials at the Department for Business and Trade—both in London and, indeed, in India—who have worked tirelessly to secure this deal.

On its economic significance, I concur with the point that India is a huge and dynamic economy, but it is also right to recognise that we signed the right deal for the United Kingdom. This is the best deal that India has ever agreed to. It is expected to increase bilateral trade by about £25.5 billion and raise UK GDP, but we have managed to secure a deal more timeously than was anticipated and, frankly, we got a better deal than many expected.

[Dame Caroline Dinenage (Gosport) (Con)]

The Indian Government have said that this deal will mean that

“immense opportunities for talented and skilled Indian youth will open up in the UK.”

Will the Minister please confirm that we have not signed a youth mobility scheme with India before his Government have agreed to one with the EU? He said that we have contribution agreements with the EU and the USA, but my understanding is that we have signed double contribution conventions with only Chile, Japan and South Korea. Could he please clarify that?

[Mr Alexander]

What I said was that we have social security agreements with a range of countries, including the USA and with the EU. The hon. Lady asks whether a new points-based system is being introduced, and I can assure her that that is not the case. The deal covers only business mobility, and the UK has not given away visas or created new routes. Existing business mobility routes have been expanded for highly skilled and experienced professionals to cover additional sectors, but to qualify for these routes professionals must demonstrate that they meet the strict criteria for professional experience and qualifications.

[Sojan Joseph (Ashford) (Lab)]

Does the Minister agree that by securing the best deal that India has ever agreed, the Government have put UK businesses in an incredible position to take advantage of the rapidly growing economy?

[Mr Alexander]

India is quite simply the fastest growing economy in the G20, and is expected to be the third largest economy in the world by 2028. If we were choosing countries that we would wish to do deals with, India would be pretty high up the list. By 2030, India will be home to an estimated 60 million middle-class consumers, whose numbers are projected to grow to a quarter of a billion by 2050, and the demand for imports is on course to top £1.4 trillion by 2035.

[Mr Alistair Carmichael (Orkney and Shetland) (LD)]

For those of us who have Scotch whisky industry interests in our constituency, it is very welcome news that apparently globalisation is not dead after all. The Minister speaks about this being a deal that opens doors, but what assistance will be given to British companies, especially SMEs, to ensure that they are able to maximise the benefits they can derive from trading in this very important market?

[Mr Alexander]

As my statement sought to make clear, there will be specific provision for SMEs as part of this deal, because we recognise that the huge Indian market can often be a challenge for businesses that do not have the capabilities of larger businesses.

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his generous words about the Scotch whisky industry. From the quotes that we are receiving this afternoon from Diageo, Chivas and the Scotch Whisky Association, he is very much on all fours with the industry in recognising that this is a quite extraordinary deal for Scotch whisky.

[Chi Onwurah (Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West) (Lab)]

I congratulate the Minister on securing the UK’s largest trade deal with the G20’s fastest growing economy. The Indian high commission recently appointed Newcastle’s very first honorary consul general, and we will have much to discuss when we meet, because there is so much in this deal to look at and scrutinise. I thank the Minister for specifically mentioning advanced manufacturing in the north-east as well as small and medium-sized businesses everywhere. Could he say a little more about how small businesses in the north-east can secure and access the opportunities brought forward by this deal? I am thinking particularly of our fantastic digital sector and our great health sector.

[Mr Alexander]

For both the digital sector and the healthcare sector, the deal offers significant opportunities in a huge and expanding market in India. It will deliver a degree of certainty as well as significant tariff reductions across a range of sectors, and it also affords us the opportunity to think long-term. We want to support the advanced manufacturers with which my hon. Friend is very familiar in the north-east of England to be able to make strategic investments in exporting to the Indian market. They will be investing in exporting not just to a large but to a growing market, and one that holds significant commercial opportunities for the decades ahead.

[John Lamont (Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk) (Con)]

Just a few weeks ago, the Business and Trade Secretary said that he would

“stand up for British workers”,

so it is quite astonishing that the Minister has come to the House today to announce tax breaks for immigration. This will undercut workers in Scotland and across the UK, and it comes just weeks after Labour introduced its own tax on UK workers. It leaves us all wondering: do this Labour Government ever back British workers?

[Mr Alexander]

Let me name some Scottish workers who are absolutely delighted by today’s announcement. Let me quote directly what Chivas has said:

“The announcement of a free trade agreement in principle between the UK and India is a welcome boost for Chivas Brothers during an uncertain global economic environment. India is the world’s biggest whisky market by volume and greater access will be a game changer for the export of our Scotch whisky brands, such as Chivas Regal and Ballantine’s.”

Whether it is Chivas Regal, Ballantine’s or other Scottish brands, which are the product of a huge number of workers in Scotland, there is much to celebrate today.

[Gurinder Singh Josan (Smethwick) (Lab)]

I welcome the Minister’s statement and I congratulate him, this Labour Government and officials on negotiating the trade deal, particularly given the Conservative party’s abject failure in this regard. When it comes to our business communities in the UK, we have strong values in relation to workers’ rights, human rights, consumer protections and environmental sustainability, so can the Minister outline how this deal will respect and enhance those values?

[Mr Alexander]

I can indeed. I said that this is a modern, forward-looking agreement, and that is why there is a recognition in the deal of exactly the values my hon. Friend mentions. That represents a first for India in many cases, it reflects the fact that we were determined to secure that as part of the negotiations, and it is one of the many reasons we are proud of the agreement announced today.

[Chris Law (Dundee Central) (SNP)]

Today’s trade deal announcement will be welcomed by many in Scotland, not least those in the whisky industry. In the face of volatile US tariffs, this is undoubtedly good news. However, there has been increasing pressure in the UK—even from the former Prime Minister Tony Blair—for the Government to abandon their net zero ambitions. I understand that carbon mechanisms were crucial in these trade negotiations with India. Given that the SNP Government have today reaffirmed their fullest commitment to net zero and sustainable industries, can the Minister give his reassurance that the UK Government’s climate ambitions have not been sacrificed to secure this deal?

[Mr Alexander]

I can give the House that assurance. I thought we were going to have an uncharacteristically warm endorsement from the hon. Gentleman until he got to the word “however”. I have to say, we have been so busy negotiating a trade deal with India that we have not had the chance to read the First Minister’s “Programme for Government” today. In the spirit of generosity, he pays tribute to the work that has been done on whisky, and I will read out the statement by Debra Crew, the Diageo chief executive, who said:

“The UK-India Free Trade Agreement is a huge achievement by Prime Ministers Modi and Starmer and Ministers Goyal and Reynolds, and all of us at Diageo toast their success. It will be transformational for Scotch and Scotland, while powering jobs and investment in both India and the UK.”

I could not have put it better myself.

[Imran Hussain (Bradford East) (Lab)]

As has already been said, negotiating a trade deal on beneficial terms is hugely significant, particularly with regard to the recent trade war initiated by Trump. However, I have come to this House countless times to raise the issue of human rights violations and abuses against the Kashmiris by the Indian Government, and I will do so again today. Can the Minister tell me whether the persecution of Kashmiri journalists and human rights activists has been raised at any point during these negotiations, and whether he will return to this House, before he signs on the dotted line in a few months, with a full response detailing exactly how the UK Government are upholding their international human rights obligations, and not undermining efforts to defend Kashmiri human rights?

[Mr Alexander]

The United Kingdom is a leading advocate for human rights around the world, and we remain committed to the promotion of universal human rights. When we have concerns, they are raised directly with partner Governments, including at ministerial level. The horrific recent terrorist attack in Jammu and Kashmir was utterly devastating, and my thoughts remain with the victims, their loved ones and the people of India. It is, however, for India and Pakistan to find a lasting solution and resolution to the Kashmir dispute, taking into account the wishes of the Kashmiri people.

[Andrew Rosindell (Romford) (Con)]

Today’s news of a free trade agreement between the United Kingdom and India is wonderful—some of us have argued for greater free trade arrangements with Commonwealth countries for many years. Mr Modi, the Prime Minister of India, should be commended for adopting a free-market system that has brought wealth and prosperity to India, eliminating poverty and enabling India to work with countries like the United Kingdom. Will the Minister accept that none of this would have been possible had we not been sovereign and able to negotiate our own free trade agreements following our departure from the European Union? Was Brexit not the right thing to do?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Alexander]

First, it is right to recognise that the hon. Gentleman has form on arguing for the importance of the Commonwealth; I seem to recollect answering parliamentary questions in recent weeks on exactly the opportunity for doing effective economic work together that is provided by the Commonwealth and the fellowship of friendship that it presents us. On that, we are on all fours, and I certainly agree that we should look to strengthen and broaden our trading ties where we can. His point about Europe is a well-ploughed field in this House and elsewhere, and it seems to me that we should be looking forward and looking for new markets rather than engaging in old arguments.

[Matt Rodda (Reading Central) (Lab)]

I warmly welcome today’s important announcement, and in particular the benefits it will bring to the UK economy, with the billions of pounds of extra growth it will generate in both the food and drink and advanced manufacturing sectors, as well as in many other parts of our economy. Will the Minister elaborate a little on the benefits to the UK tech sector, and in particular to start-ups, such as the many in my constituency, and to the young entrepreneurs setting up their own small businesses?

[Mr Alexander]

Given the significant progress we have made on goods, it is right to recognise that there are also huge opportunities on services. I pay tribute to the tech sector in the United Kingdom and to the extraordinary work that is being done not just in my hon. Friend’s constituency, but more broadly. The City of London, I am glad to say, has become a significant global tech hub, not least for fintech. Chris Hayward, policy chairman of the City of London Corporation, said today that

“India is a key strategic partner, and this deal reflects our shared ambition to deepen trade ties, boost investment, and build lasting collaboration.”

Whether in technology, fintech or financial services, there are huge opportunities as a result of this deal.

[David Chadwick (Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe) (LD)]

Steel tariffs were reportedly a major sticking point in these trade negotiations with India. That is of particular concern to communities across south Wales, especially following Tata’s decision to shut down its blast furnaces in Wales and across Europe while simultaneously investing in new capacity in India. Can the Minister assure the House that British steelworkers have not been sacrificed in order to secure this deal, and can he confirm what tariff rate Indian steel imports will face when the agreement comes into effect?

[Mr Alexander]

It was this Government who recently stepped in to save British Steel in order to save thousands of jobs and avoid a sudden collapse in our primary steelmaking capacity. Thanks to this Government’s swift intervention, we were able to secure the raw materials that kept the blast furnaces at Scunthorpe alight. British Steel has also cancelled the redundancy consultation that would otherwise have put 2,700 jobs at risk. Frankly, UK industry depends on the UK steel industry and thanks to our plan for change, demand is set to increase, as we build the 1.5 million homes, the railways, the schools and the hospitals that we need to usher in a decade of national renewal. That is the context in which we have taken forward today’s announcement.

[Deirdre Costigan (Ealing Southall) (Lab)]

I welcome the conclusion of negotiations on what is the best deal that India has offered any country when it comes to free trade. Many of my constituents are part of the living bridge of 1.9 million people of Indian heritage living in and contributing to this country. Can the Minister, at a time of global volatility, set out how Labour’s free trade deal gives the world-renowned clothing and food businesses in Southall the confidence to grow and expand, thereby boosting our local economy?

[Mr Alexander]

It is right to recognise that both producers and consumers stand to benefit in relation not just to whisky, but on a range of consumer goods. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend’s constituents in Southall and the extraordinary contribution that they have made as part of that living bridge over many decades here in the United Kingdom. The commercial opportunities in both directions are significant, which is why, I think, we were able to secure the deal today.

[Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)]

I welcome this trade deal with a global titan that will be in place for the decades ahead. It has been made possible by Brexit and by the hard work of the previous Government. However, the Minister will be aware that this country runs a very substantial trade deficit with India. Is the deal that he has negotiated likely to narrow or widen that deficit, because all we know about the tariffs, non-tariff trade barriers and trade-offs that are implicit in the deal is what we read about in the press or are told about by the Indian Government?

[Mr Alexander]

It is for the Indian Government to account for this trade deal in the terms that they so choose. We will follow the established constitutional process of the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 whereby not only are we sharing a statement with the House at the earliest opportunity, but the House will have the opportunity to scrutinise the details of every aspect of this agreement.

[John Slinger (Rugby) (Lab)]

As somebody who represents a constituency with a proud community of people of Indian heritage, with world-beating firms, a skilled workforce, and a catapult centre at the Manufacturing Technology Centre, I would like to ask the Minister to expand on how this deal will help deliver growth, economic development and innovation right across the country, and opportunities for businesses, small medium and large?

[Mr Alexander]

We have spoken today of the importance of the Indian market, but it is also right to recognise that the Indian market presently sits behind some of the world’s highest barriers to trade, notwithstanding the fact that it was the UK’s 12th largest trading partner. The fact that we are tearing down so many of those tariff levels as part of this agreement will be a very practical and pragmatic offering for the kind of excellence in manufacturing that he has in his constituency and that is represented across our country.

[Jim Allister (North Antrim) (TUV)]

How can the Government make a trade deal for the whole of the United Kingdom if they do not control the trade laws for the whole of the United Kingdom? Northern Ireland is still under the control of EU trade laws. To give a practical illustration of the problem, under the UK-India trade deal any imports to Northern Ireland from India—I speak of imports, not exports—will be subject not to any agreed UK tariff but to whatever prevailing EU tariff there is on those goods, and the EU does not have a trade deal with India. Is this not another illustration of how Northern Ireland has been left behind by a protocol that has left us still in the EU?

[Mr Alexander]

The Northern Ireland’s trading relationships and its status within the United Kingdom are not altered as a consequence of the Indian free trade agreement that was reached today. The established position is exactly as the right hon. Member describes and recognises the distinctive history and significance of the Good Friday agreement—not just in the protocol but the Windsor framework. A huge amount of work has been put in by both sides of the House to try to maintain a hard-won peace in Northern Ireland, and that is not compromised by today’s agreement.

[Torcuil Crichton (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (Lab)]

As other Scottish MPs have mentioned, this deal is good news for the whisky industry. It means, “Uisge beatha gu leòr”—whisky galore. It is also good for food producers, such as crofters in the Western Isles, whose exports of lamb products now face zero tariffs, and the salmon farming industry, which supports 420 jobs in my constituency and accounts for £187 million of trade. It is good news overall. I guess the only question is whether the Minister will be toasting this deal with a single malt Hearach from the Isle of Harris Distillery or one from Uist, Benbecula or Barra—a chain of new distilleries that now have a new export market thanks to this deal.

[Mr Alexander]

I think it was Tip O’Neill, former Speaker of the House of Representatives, who said “All politics is local”, so if I am going to be toasting tonight’s deal, it will be with the finest Glenkinchie whisky from the East Lothian part of Scotland, not, alas, with an Islay malt or a malt from the outer isles. I pay generous tribute to my hon. Friend, who is a doughty, tireless and fearless defender of the interests of not just the Harris tweed industry or whisky producers but Scottish salmon farmers, who are a significant contributor to UK exports, never mind Scottish exports. In sector after sector of the Scottish economy, there will be significant material benefits as a consequence of this deal. We promised that we would have a Labour Government delivering for Scotland. Today we are seeing what that promise looks like delivered.

[Nick Timothy (West Suffolk) (Con)]

The Minister just admitted that this agreement means the expansion of some visa schemes. The Indian Government say that the agreement “eases mobility for professionals” such as intra-corporate transferees and their dependants and independent professionals like chefs. It also says that the new double contribution convention creates a three-year exemption from national insurance contributions for Indians working here. Can the Minister confirm that this agreement will make Indian migrant workers in Britain cheaper to employ, relative to British workers, than they are today—yes or no?

[Mr Alexander]

The points-based immigration system is not affected. The UK has not given away visas or created new routes as part of this deal. It is existing business mobility routes that have been expanded for highly skilled and experienced professionals to cover additional sectors.

[Alex Ballinger (Halesowen) (Lab)]

I congratulate the Minister on securing this vital trade deal. The automotive sector in the west midlands has been worried about increasing tariffs in the US, so a trade deal with India—a country where UK brands are highly respected—is extremely welcome. Can the Minister tell my constituents in Halesowen who work in the automotive sector how this deal will benefit them?

[Mr Alexander]

I hope I can give my hon. Friend exactly that assurance, and I am conscious that there was an additional point I should have made earlier in relation to steel. As part of this agreement, we have included a bilateral safeguard mechanism, which allows us to temporarily suspend or increase tariffs if an industry is suffering or there is a threat of serious injury as a result of reduced duties.

To my hon. Friend’s question, automotive companies will now benefit from selling to India with tariffs under a quota reduced from over 100% to 10%. We have agreed quotas to limit the volume of duty-free imports permitted to enter our markets. That will open opportunities for the sector, giving them a competitive edge in the Indian market and increased access to India’s rapidly growing middle class. As the sector transitions to electric vehicles, so will the market access we have secured as part of this deal. It will give British businesses the opportunity to scale up their exports as production ramps up. Both the UK and India have growing EV markets and production, so we want to protect these industries while ensure that consumers have choice.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Minister for his statement. He will be aware of the tremendous filming potential in Northern Ireland, and of the increasing number of Hollywood films shot there. The Northern Ireland film and TV industry has made a significant contribution to the regional economy, boosting it by some £330 million since 2018, and 4,000 jobs are tied to it. It is essential that we outline the importance of trade deals to the regions, and the film sector must be part of that. Solutions must be found to enable global film makers to film in picturesque, skilled, cost-efficient Northern Ireland.

[Mr Alexander]

Picturesque and skilled—I cannot remember the other word that the hon. Member used, but I agreed with every one of them. As I recollect, significant parts of “The Crown” were filmed in Northern Ireland. There is a huge and burgeoning economic opportunity for the film industry in Northern Ireland; as he rightly recognised, that is a tribute not solely to Northern Ireland’s extraordinary scenery, but to the extraordinary skills and capabilities of its workforce. The film sector is and will remain a key part of our creative industries, which employ millions of people, not just in Northern Ireland but across the whole UK. On his point about the US, I assure him that officials and Ministers are in regular communication with our US counterparts. I will not get into the detail of those discussions, but the point he made has been well taken.

[Andrew Lewin (Welwyn Hatfield) (Lab)]

May I add my congratulations to the Minister and everybody involved in getting this significant trade deal with what will soon be the biggest economy in the world over the line? In Welwyn Hatfield, we have a vibrant Indian diaspora, including my friend Councillor Pankit Shah, who, just over 20 years after moving to the UK, became our first ever British-Indian mayor of Welwyn Hatfield. He has served with distinction. Our close connection is principally due to the University of Hertfordshire in Hatfield, where thousands of students from India have studied, and continue to do so. Does my right hon. Friend agree that while today is a fantastic moment for trade, it is vital that we continue to have visa schemes that encourage Indian students to come and study in our country?

[Mr Alexander]

Let me echo my hon. Friend’s generous tribute to Councillor Pankit Shah, and many like him who have made an immense contribution to the United Kingdom, making us what we are today. That reflects the human bridge formed by 1.9 million people, and the human dynamic here, and students play a significant, valued role in that.

[Katrina Murray (Cumbernauld and Kirkintilloch) (Lab)]

AG Barr, which has iconic brands such as Irn-Bru and Rubicon, is based in my Cumbernauld and Kirkintilloch constituency. What will the trade deal mean for soft drinks companies such as Barr?

[Mr Alexander]

I hesitate to say, “What’s it called? Cumbernauld!” Whether for Scottish salmon, Scottish whisky or perhaps the most iconic Scottish product of all, Irn-Bru, this India-UK trade deal is good news. When I was being briefed by officials shortly before coming to the House, I asked for examples of the sectors in which we would see the biggest benefits, and my hon. Friend will be delighted to hear that Irn-Bru featured prominently in the description given.

Oral Answers to Questions

Douglas Alexander Excerpts

Thursday 24th April 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Minister for Trade Policy and Economic Security (Mr Douglas Alexander)]

My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster spoke a few moments ago of a good dialogue. We are committed to working with the devolved Governments across the UK, and there is frequent, proactive engagement between Ministers and their devolved counterparts to achieve that. For example, we have worked with the Scottish Government on the joint investment plan for Grangemouth, with the Welsh Government through the Tata Steel/Port Talbot transition board and alongside the Northern Ireland Executive on the city deals.

[Kenneth Stevenson]

The Minister will be aware of last week’s historic UK Supreme Court ruling on the definition of a woman being based on biological sex, which provided important legal clarity. It is critical now that the UK and Scottish Governments work in a co-ordinated manner to ensure that the practical impacts are understood. How does the Minister plan to ensure that this co-ordinated approach delivers for women in Scotland and across the United Kingdom, and does he agree that the ruling must be a lesson for the SNP Government to stop wasting Scottish taxpayers’ money on flawed legislation and court cases?

[Mr Alexander]

The ruling upholds the protection of single-sex spaces based on biological sex and brings welcome clarity and confidence for women and, indeed, service providers. The Equality and Human Rights Commission, as Britain’s equality regulator, has already committed to supporting service providers with updated guidance. On the specific point raised by my hon. Friend, we will meet Scottish counterparts to discuss the implications of this significant judgment.

[Katrina Murray]

I thank the Minister for his answer to the earlier question. Events such as Tartan Day provide a vital opportunity for companies such as RSE in Cumbernauld to promote their products to international markets. RSE has repeatedly told me that it wants to be a part of Brand Scotland. Will the Minister outline how he will work with the Scotland Office and the Scottish Government to ensure that Tartan Day is an even bigger success next year to secure investment in the Scottish economy and create Scottish jobs?

[Mr Alexander]

Let me first pay tribute to RSE and all its brilliant work on water tech. Earlier this month, I had the pleasure of representing Scotland in the United States along with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland at Tartan Week, where we met a range of businesses and investors to bang the drum for Scotland as a great place to invest and to work. It was, frankly, a powerful opportunity to show that Scotland has two Governments committed to its prosperity and wellbeing. As the UK Government committed to growth, we are more interested in new markets than old arguments, and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State actively reached out to the First Minister seeking to co-operate by co-ordinating our presence.

[John Grady]

I welcome the steps that the Government are taking to strengthen co-operation with the Scottish Government, to cut waste and inefficiency and to ensure that Ministers take responsibility for public services. This is an important area for potential co-operation and dialogue, because, in Scotland, we currently have more quangos than there are MSPs in Holyrood, which wastes millions of pounds a year. Does my right hon. Friend agree that the SNP Scottish Government should stop hiding behind these quangos, end the culture of waste and take responsibility for plummeting standards in Scottish public services?

[Mr Alexander]

I echo the sentiments of my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster. The powerful point he made about the ultimate ministerial responsibility resting rightly and reasonably with elected representatives applies north of the Tweed as surely as it does south of the Tweed. I only wish that the Scottish Government would use the powers that they have to do the same and actively cut waste and bureaucracy. Scotland deserves better than what we are witnessing just now.

[Elaine Stewart]

Does the Minister agree that this Labour Government’s plan for change has helped to deliver 1,500 more GPs to help stop the 8 am rush and that the Scottish Government should work with the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care to look at how the SNP-run health service in Scotland could learn from such action?

[Mr Alexander]

As the UK Government, we have delivered more than 2 million extra NHS appointments seven months early, as the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster set out just a few moments ago. Yet we all know that, despite the brilliance of NHS staff, the NHS in Scotland is still on its knees. Today, from this Dispatch Box, I urge our colleagues in the Scottish Government to work with us and actually learn some lessons from our team in the Department of Health and Social Care who are already driving change across England.

[Brendan O’Hara (Argyll, Bute and South Lochaber) (SNP)]

Of course, if the Government were serious about co-operating with the devolved Government, tomorrow’s Second Reading debate on devolving immigration policy to Scotland, which has been secured by my hon. Friend the Member for Arbroath and Broughty Ferry (Stephen Gethins), would not be necessary. The Minister will recall that, in the run-up to the general election, Labour’s Deputy Leader in Scotland, Jackie Baillie, said that they would be open to talks on this issue and, of course, it would be unthinkable that she would have said such a thing just to gain short-term electoral advantage. Therefore, having waited a year, can the Minister tell us when he expects those talks to open?

[Mr Alexander]

In the spirit of collegiality that has been the hallmark of this question session so far, let me respectfully suggest that there is a fundamental philosophical difference between our two parties. The SNP wants to end the United Kingdom and we believe in devolution, which is, ultimately, a two-Parliament, two-Government solution. There are two Governments who represent the best interests of the United Kingdom and, in that sense, I appreciate that there is a constant demand and a constant set of grievances from the SNP about why devolution is not working. It is about time that we had a Government in Scotland who were committed to making devolution work.

[Carla Lockhart (Upper Bann) (DUP)]

Further to the question from the hon. Member for Airdrie and Shotts (Kenneth Stevenson), given last week’s UK Supreme Court ruling, which I welcome as a return to common sense and biological reality, what steps is the Minister taking to ensure that Government messaging reflects this clarity and that it is implemented consistently both across the devolved regions and here in Westminster?

[Mr Alexander]

I can assure the hon. Lady that the Equality and Human Rights Commission, which has a remit across the nations and regions of the United Kingdom, has already committed to supporting service providers with updated guidance. I assure the hon. Lady that we are talking to colleagues in Scotland and that we will also be talking to colleagues in Wales and, indeed, in Northern Ireland.

[Ben Coleman (Chelsea and Fulham) (Lab)]

7. What steps he is taking with Cabinet colleagues to assist local authorities in using public procurement to help create economic growth.

EU Trading Relationship

Douglas Alexander Excerpts

Thursday 24th April 2025 Westminster Hall

[The Minister for Trade Policy and Economic Security (Mr Douglas Alexander)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Jeremy. I will certainly endeavour to extend that generosity. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Welwyn Hatfield (Andrew Lewin) on securing an important and timely debate, and commend him for his ongoing work on the issue as the chair of the UK Trade and Business Commission. The letter that he and a number of parliamentary colleagues present submitted to the Minister for the Cabinet Office, who leads for the Government on UK-EU relationships, made some excellent points, many of which I will endeavour to address in my remarks today. I will seek to specifically address the three main points that he raised in his introductory speech—the mutual recognition of professional qualifications, the broader alignment and the youth mobility scheme. I also thank all hon. Members who have spoken today.

First, I will set out why we must use our strengthened relations with the EU to deliver a long-term UK-EU strategic alliance that grows our economy. I listened with care to the remarks of the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Arundel and South Downs (Andrew Griffith), suggesting that if the Conservative party were in office, we would have the best of all worlds. I struggle to reconcile that with the universe that the rest of us live in: the Conservative Government not only abjectly failed to secure a trade agreement with the United States, but alienated our closest trading partners in the European Union and were in a deep freeze with China. It is not entirely clear what the Conservatives’ grand post-Brexit strategy involved.

Let us consider the numbers for a moment. In trade, geography still matters. As a bloc, the European Union is still the UK’s largest trading market, covering 46% or about £813 billion of our trade. It is important to note that the UK is the EU’s second-largest trade partner, but unfortunately, UK exports to the EU were 5% lower in 2024 than they were in 2018, which is the most recent stable pre-Brexit, pre-covid year for comparison, and UK imports from the EU have remained level at about plus 0.4%.

Moreover, our overall global trade performance continues to suffer, and we are lagging behind our G7 peers. In 2024, our global trade flows were only 4% above 2018 levels, while other G7 economies have seen an average trade growth of 8%. What explains those trends? There is an increasing body of external research studies, such as those of the London School of Economics Centre for Economic Performance and Aston University, which demonstrate that Brexit accounts for those changes. That is why it is in both the UK and the EU’s interest to strengthen our trading relationship.

Let me turn now to some of the specific issues raised during the debate. The hon. Member for Arbroath and Broughty Ferry (Stephen Gethins), who I like and admire on a personal level, gave a sadly rather partisan speech in wilful denial of the fact that had his side prevailed in the 2014 referendum in Scotland, we would have found ourselves outside the European Union. A politics of manufactured grievance, flags and new borders is as wrong in Scotland as it is here in England. Thankfully, Scotland made its choice to support a sensible and pragmatic internationalist party in July.

[Stephen Gethins]

Will the Minister give way?

[Mr Alexander]

No, I am keen to make some progress.

My right hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Hodge Hill and Solihull North (Liam Byrne) made a characteristically brilliant speech—a judgment in no way related to the fact that he is the Chair of the Business and Trade Committee. In all seriousness, fresh from the spring meetings in Washington this week, he brought a wider geopolitical perspective to our debate that frames the conversations that are happening today between EU Commission President von der Leyen and the Prime Minister.

I note all the points that were made by the hon. Member for Bristol Central (Carla Denyer). I simply say that when I see images of the Prime Minister meeting President Trump in the Oval Office, meeting EU Commission President von der Leyen today, at the Lancaster House summit, or sitting with President Macron in Paris, I feel a sense of relief and change. There is change, because the clown show is over, and there is relief that we have a serious Prime Minister for these serious times.

My hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth East (Tom Hayes), in a strikingly personal speech, spoke eloquently of the divisions we witnessed within families and communities at the time of the Brexit referendum. That explains why we as a Government have no interest in reopening old divisions and wounds, and instead are working to remove unnecessary barriers and strengthen our trading relationships.

No debate in this House would be complete without the contribution of the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon). I assure him, although he is no longer in his place, that in the work of both the Minister for the Cabinet Office and the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, the concerns and needs of Northern Ireland are never far from their thoughts.

My hon. Friend the Member for Northampton South (Mike Reader) brought to bear all his professional experience working across Europe and made a characteristically powerful case for the mutual recognition of professional qualifications. I made that case only this morning at a meeting with TheCityUK representatives here in London. The hon. Member for Melksham and Devizes (Brian Mathew) then spoke eloquently of the need to maintain high standards in farming and the merits of strengthening our trading relationship with the European Union.

My hon. Friend the Member for South Norfolk (Ben Goldsborough) took us on a veritable tour of research and innovation labs in his constituency. He is right to recognise that innovation today relies on not only often complex, integrated and international supply chains, but research co-operation. What was the opportunity cost of the years when the previous Government took us out of the Horizon cross-Europe research programme? It is exactly that kind of research collaboration that our own scientists need and demand if they are going to continue to be world leading in their research domains.

The hon. Member for Wokingham (Clive Jones) highlighted some of the statistics that I also used in this debate to highlight the damage done by our predecessors. He asked if we would act only in the national interest. That is an undertaking I am happy to offer. National interest is the north star by which we are navigating these frankly turbulent trading waters today.

My hon. Friend the Member for Bolton West (Phil Brickell) spoke of the civic ties between his community and Germany. It was a timely and helpful reminder that first through the European Coal and Steel Community, then through the European Economic Community, and ultimately through the European Union, the European project has always been about peace as well as security and prosperity.

The hon. Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade) also touched on the need for spending on defence to reflect the changing circumstances, not least in the Euro-Atlantic security area. That is a recognition that underpins the strategic defence review and the recent decisions that have been reached on defence expenditure by this Government.

My hon. Friend the Member for Monmouthshire (Catherine Fookes) asked me to pass on her good wishes to the Minister for the Cabinet Office for all his excellent work ahead of the UK-EU summit next month. As a colleague in the Cabinet Office, and indeed as a friend, I will be happy to do so. She is right to recognise all the work that he is doing to undo past damage and to rebuild and reset relations with our friends, partners and neighbours in the European Union.

The hon. Member for Richmond Park (Sarah Olney) urged us to take serious action to strengthen our trading relationships with the EU. Again, I assure her that that is exactly the work to which we have committed ourselves.

My hon. Friend the Member for Kensington and Bayswater (Joe Powell) rightly referred to the changed context on our continent, and indeed in our world. Red tape and uncertainty—his description—seems a pretty fair judgment of the inheritance that we secured in July. In these history-shaping days, it is right to recognise the changing geopolitical and geo-economic backdrop for the negotiations under way—not just the talks in Downing Street today, but those being led by the Minister for the Cabinet Office ahead of next month’s summit.

The hon. Member for Esher and Walton (Monica Harding) urged the leadership to follow the trade and follow the money. As I said earlier, we have chosen to follow the data, rather than the post-imperial delusions that were the hallmark of our predecessors’ approach to trade.

My hon. Friend the Member for Walthamstow (Ms Creasy), who has eloquently spoken of the need for closer ties with Europe on many occasions, talked of the need for new debates and offered a number of powerful suggestions for the way forward at the UK-EU summit. I have to say that she offered a fantastically large number of suggestions in the necessarily constrained time for her speech, but I listened carefully to all of them.

The hon. Member for Dewsbury and Batley (Iqbal Mohamed) urged the Government to write a new chapter. I hope we are doing somewhat more than that: we are actually writing a whole new trade strategy, which we aim to publish in the coming weeks.

My hon. Friend the Member for Exeter (Steve Race) acknowledged the need for partnerships with like-minded nations. I agree with his powerful points about the particular need for security and defence partnerships given the changed geopolitical context with which we are all familiar.

My hon. Friend the Member for Beckenham and Penge (Liam Conlon) reminded us, with reference to the Good Friday agreement, that we must reject isolationism. I am happy to confirm that we have left behind the era in which a previous Prime Minister resisted the opportunity to confirm that President Macron is indeed a friend of the United Kingdom. Let me confirm today that we regard France as a trading partner, a close neighbour, a steadfast security partner and a country bound to the United Kingdom by bonds not just of shared history, but of shared and continuing friendship.

My hon. Friend the Member for Chelsea and Fulham (Ben Coleman) spoke authoritatively of the need for cool-headed, ambitious negotiations. I assure him that that is the approach that the Government are taking to the coming summit.

My hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow North (Martin Rhodes) made the case for recognising the challenges faced by touring artists. I put on the record my appreciation of all the work done for our country not just by touring artists but by the creative industries more broadly.

My hon. Friend the Member for Stratford and Bow (Uma Kumaran), in a veritable Noah’s ark of a speech, highlighted not just the importance of the pygmy hippo that she met but, more substantively, the need for an SPS agreement. I assure her that we continue to work on all those issues.

My hon. Friend the Member for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket (Peter Prinsley) moved seamlessly on to a discussion of Carl the crane, and indeed his local businesses. I assure him that we noted all his points, and we will endeavour to ensure that small businesses are at the forefront of our thinking as we work not least on SPS and the other issues about which we have spoken.

My hon. Friend the Member for Camborne and Redruth (Perran Moon) brought a Cornish perspective to the debate. I listened carefully to all the points that he made about the need to bring down unnecessary barriers.

The right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael) similarly spoke eloquently of the needs of fishermen in his constituency, and made the case for an SPS agreement. We committed in our manifesto to negotiate that veterinary agreement with the EU—an agreement on the application of sanitary and phytosanitary measures, to use the technical term. That is because agrifood producers across the United Kingdom are among those most affected, as they are buried in the paperwork left by our predecessors, and are affected by checks when exporting to the EU.

The EU remains an absolutely vital market for agrifood producers, accounting for 57% of the UK’s agrifood exports in 2024. Between 2018 and 2024, UK exports of agrifood products to the European Union, excluding beverages, dropped by 16% in inflation-adjusted terms. I have to say, that does not sound like the best of all worlds to me. The potential benefits of an SPS agreement are clear: Aston University estimates that an SPS agreement could increase UK agrifood exports by fully 22.5%. Bearing in mind that we import more agrifood from the EU than we export to it, a veterinary agreement would of course be mutually beneficial.

A number of Members raised a youth mobility scheme. The UK and the EU are in talks ahead of the summit, but alas I will not provide a running commentary today in this Chamber. We made a clear manifesto commitment to bring down net migration and to have no return to free movement within the EU. It is important that we determine who comes into our country, and those things are not up for negotiation in the continuing discussions.

We would like to strengthen MRPQ arrangements so that businesses can access the right talent at the right time. Again, improvements would be mutually beneficial. UK and European industries have repeatedly asked for the recognition of professional qualifications between the UK and the EU to be strengthened. That includes 24% of respondents to the recent British Chambers of Commerce annual trade survey and the European Services Forum.

On strengthening relations with the EU, we have an opportunity to address some of the trade barriers that we did not explicitly reference in our manifesto, including regulatory co-operation—

[Sir Jeremy Wright (in the Chair)]

Order. I am sorry to interrupt the Minister, but we are out of time. I thank all hon. Members who have participated in the debate.

Republic of Korea: Upgraded Free Trade Agreement

Douglas Alexander Excerpts

Tuesday 8th April 2025 Written Statements

[The Minister for Trade Policy and Economic Security (Mr Douglas Alexander)]

The fourth round of negotiations on an upgraded free trade agreement (FTA) with the Republic of Korea (RoK) took place in London between 10 and 21 March 2025.

Total trade between the UK and RoK was worth £15.3 billion in the 12 months ending September 2024. An upgraded FTA is intended to support growth in this trade and strengthen our broader relationship with RoK.

Specifically, an upgraded UK-RoK FTA will help secure and future-proof current goods market access. Negotiators are also seeking to update the agreement in key areas where trade policy has progressed in recent years, including digital and services trade. Discussion is also progressing on a range of areas where increased co-operation will future-proof our UK-RoK strategic relationship, such as commitments on supply chains.

Negotiators made good progress on a number of areas, including but not limited to:

Rules of origin

Sides continue to make good progress on a new chapter, building on constructive discussions held virtually in February. Discussions covered both the chapter’s main text and product specific rules (PSRs) for a range of sectors, including automotives, textiles and apparel, and food and drink. Sides are seeking to ensure that the chapter accounts for current and future supply chains.

Digital trade

Further positive discussions were held on an ambitious digital chapter, including on commitments such as data, trade digitalisation and business safeguards. Additionally, the UK is seeking digital commitments that will help foster UK-RoK co-operation on a range of areas, such as emerging technologies.

Services and business mobility

The UK is seeking upgraded commitments to boost UK services exports to RoK. This round included discussions on commitments to provide improved certainty and access for the mobility of business persons. Further discussions were also held on professional and business services and domestic regulation.

Trade and Gender Equality (TGE)

Negotiators made significant progress before the round towards agreeing ambitious TGE commitments. Commitments being sought here will help foster UK-RoK co-operation on specific areas, including improving women’s access to global markets, financial resources and business networks, so that they can further benefit from trade.

Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs)

Notable progress was made towards agreeing a new SMEs chapter. The outcomes being sought here will help SMEs access important information on the UK-RoK trading arrangement online and encourage co-operation between parties to reduce trade barriers for SMEs.

Supply Chains and Customs and Trade Facilitation (CTF)

Good progress was made prior to the round to upgrade the existing CTF chapter. Good progress was made during the round towards agreeing new supply chains commitments. These will help cement ongoing UK-RoK co-operation on critical supply chains through mechanisms that facilitate Government-to-Government dialogue during supply chain disruptions.

Other Areas

Positive discussions were held across a range of further areas of the FTA, including anti-corruption and the environment.

The Government will only ever sign a trade agreement which aligns with the UK’s national interests, upholding our high standards across a range of sectors, including protections for the national health service.

The fifth round of negotiations is currently expected to take place in Seoul in the summer of 2025. The Government will continue to work towards delivering outcomes in the FTA that secure economic growth for the UK and will update Parliament on the progress of discussions with RoK as they continue to develop.

[HCWS582]

Switzerland: Free Trade Agreement Negotiations

Douglas Alexander Excerpts

Monday 24th March 2025 Written Statements

[The Minister for Trade Policy and Economic Security (Mr Douglas Alexander)]

The sixth round of negotiations on an enhanced free trade agreement (FTA) with Switzerland took place in Switzerland between 3 and 10 March 2025.

Economic growth is our first mission in government and FTAs have an important role to play in achieving this. We are seeking an enhanced FTA with Switzerland that guarantees market access for UK services suppliers, facilitates the seamless flow of data and ideas between two world-leading services powerhouses, and provides long-term certainty on UK business travel to Switzerland. An enhanced FTA will contribute to growth and prosperity across the UK and build on our existing trading relationship with Switzerland. This currently supports 130,000 services jobs and more than £17 billion in services exports, including over £700 million from Scotland and the north-west.

Good progress was made in all negotiation sessions, including but not limited to digital trade, financial services, goods market access and dispute settlement. Productive discussions were held in relation to intellectual property, with further sessions scheduled later in the spring. Negotiators also provisionally closed two additional chapters.

Services, investment and digital

The UK Government’s focus continues to be on agreeing ambitious outcomes in services, investment and digital trade which are not covered in the existing UK-Switzerland FTA. Good progress was made in financial services in particular, with both sides focused on agreeing the most comprehensive chapter that either country has signed.

On digital trade, provisions on data, source code and cryptography were discussed, with the UK continuing to seek ambitious outcomes.

Goods

Progress continued in talks around trade in goods, with discussions taking place on market access, focusing on securing outcomes that are commercially meaningful for UK exporters. The 99% of UK exports to Switzerland by value are already tariff free, with the bulk of remaining Swiss tariffs in the highly protected agriculture sector.

On customs and trade facilitation, the UK and Switzerland provisionally agreed a chapter on transparent, predictable and efficient customs procedures that help facilitate trade at the border. It includes commitments on the release of perishable goods that go further than Switzerland has agreed before in a trade agreement, and are in line with the UK’s best precedents.

Both sides also agreed measures that promote the simplification of customs procedures and reduce administrative burdens for traders, including through digitisation and automation.

Good progress was also made on rules of origin, with commitments agreed to make it easier for UK firms to trade with Switzerland, while locking in our strong pre-existing rules of origin arrangements.

Transparency

Both sides reached agreement on a chapter that supports a transparent, stable and predictable environment for business. This includes commitments to promote transparency in Government decision making by ensuring regulations are accessible and encouraging public consultations when designing regulations.

Next steps

Round 7 of negotiations is expected to take place in the UK in summer 2025. The Government will continue to work towards delivering outcomes in the FTA that secure economic growth for the UK and will update Parliament on the progress of discussions with Switzerland as they continue to develop.

The Government will only ever sign a trade agreement that aligns with the UK’s national interests, upholding our high standards across a range of sectors, alongside protections for the national health service.

[HCWS540]

Oral Answers to Questions

Douglas Alexander Excerpts

Thursday 6th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[Andrew Ranger (Wrexham) (Lab)]

6. What steps he is taking to strengthen co-operation with the devolved Administrations.�

[The Minister for Trade Policy and Economic Security (Mr Douglas Alexander)]

Since entering government, we have reset working relations with the devolved Governments and I am now working to support those efforts. All three tiers of the intergovernmental structures are in operation. Several of the portfolio-level inter-ministerial groups have met, while the middle tier inter-ministerial Standing Committee and finance inter-ministerial Standing Committee both met last Thursday. The top-tier meeting between the Prime Minister and the Heads of the devolved Governments also met alongside the Council of the Nations and Regions in October. Of course those formal structures are not the sum total of our engagement, as we continue to collaborate closely on issues affecting citizens in all parts of the country.

[Andrew Ranger]

Although much of public service delivery is devolved, all four nations face a shared challenge of reforming these services in a tight fiscal environment. What can the nations learn from one another about reforming these services, and does the Minister agree that it is important that they do learn from one another?

[Mr Alexander]

My hon. Friend raises a key and important challenge. In every part of these islands, public services need both resources and reform given the Government�s inheritance back in July. The UK Health Secretary has set out ambitious plans to roll out new AI technologies, upgrade the NHS app and reform the healthcare system to bring down waiting lists. Last week, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster met devolved Government Ministers to discuss public service reform, data sharing and harnessing work on public service reform across these islands.

[Peter Prinsley (Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket) (Lab)]

8. What steps he is taking to improve relations with the European Union.

Church of Scotland (Lord High Commissioner) Bill

Douglas Alexander Excerpts

2nd reading
Tuesday 4th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Minister of State, Cabinet Office (Mr Douglas Alexander)]

It is a genuine pleasure to close this important debate. I should begin, as others have done, by declaring an interest, in that I myself am a member of the Church of Scotland. I give my thanks to hon. Members on both sides of the House for their thoughtful, measured and constructive contributions, in addition to their substantive support for this worthwhile piece of legislation.

As we have heard from my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, this important Bill will facilitate the appointment of Lady Elish Angiolini as the first Roman Catholic to hold the historic office of Lord High Commissioner. The Bill will put an end to the statutory constraint that prevents someone from being appointed to that position solely on the basis of their religion. In this debate, we have heard a number of views and contributions from hon. Members, to which I will now turn.

First, I thank the shadow Secretary of State for Scotland, the hon. Member for West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine (Andrew Bowie), for both his substantive support and the spirit of his speech to the House today. When it comes to the ecclesiastical deftness of which he spoke, the appropriate acknowledgment of the Kirk’s place in our national life is surely more tablet than fudge—by which I mean tablet, rather than The Tablet, the esteemed Catholic newspaper. In all seriousness, the powerful case he made for ecumenical understanding in modern Scotland was well judged and surely commands support across the House. As he stated, thankfully Scotland has changed. As a fellow communicant member, he spoke with knowledge, understanding and empathy of the Kirk’s continuing work and witness, guiding our national life.

My hon. Friend the Member for Paisley and Renfrewshire North (Alison Taylor) spoke movingly of the huge contribution made by the Church of Scotland, not just in the now renamed Clyde presbytery, but in local parishes right across our nation. I can personally attest to that. My grandfather, the Rev. Douglas Alexander, was a parish minister in Eaglesham in East Renfrewshire, and my father—also the Rev. Douglas Alexander—was, as my hon. Friend knows, a parish minister in Bishopton. She spoke of her family ties there, and I am proud to say that Bishopton is now in her constituency. My father served in that parish for almost 30 years. It is right to recognise the huge contribution of the Kirk to the life and work of communities right across our nation, and I am happy to do so from this Dispatch Box today.

The hon. Member for Edinburgh West (Christine Jardine) brought a zest and enthusiasm to this debate that I had not fully anticipated, but it seems merited in the light of the contributions we have heard. As the Liberal Democrat spokesman for Scotland, she described this Bill accurately as an action standing up for the Scotland that we all want to see. That is a sentiment with which we would all surely agree. She also spoke generously and accurately about Lady Elish Angiolini’s genuinely pioneering role in our national life. That is a sentiment with which we would concur on this side of the House.

My hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow West (Patricia Ferguson) brings to this House her experience of serving in the Scottish Parliament and Scottish Cabinet. That experience was reflected in her remarks in this Chamber this afternoon, where she spoke with warmth and insight—in part born from a similar schooling at Notre Dame—about the suitability of Lady Elish Angiolini for the high office of Lord High Commissioner. I thank my hon. Friend for sharing those insights, and I concur with her view that Lady Elish is indeed very well qualified for the role.

My hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow West made an observation about why this Bill does not remove the reference to the Lord High Commissioner from the Roman Catholic Relief Act 1829. I can offer her the assurance that that was made obsolete by the 1974 Act. While I can understand the desire for legislative tidying-up, the scope of this Bill is necessarily limited to the role of the Lord High Commissioner, and the position is clear: following this Bill, there will be no restriction on a Catholic holding either role.

The hon. Member for Argyll, Bute and South Lochaber (Brendan O’Hara) offered his support and that of this party for the Bill, and we are grateful for that. Cross-party support in this House is a powerful symbol of our shared commitment to cross-denomination and cross-faith understanding in modern Scotland. He rightly recognised the time constraints under which we are necessarily operating today to ensure that Lady Elish Angiolini can take up this office in time for the gathering of the Kirk’s General Assembly in the spring. Despite smuggling into his speech a late and, I have to say, rather unexpected job application, he rightly recognised Lady Elish’s cross-party credentials as a genuine trailblazer in Scottish national life.

My hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow East (John Grady) described with characteristic eloquence how, to quote him, people in Glasgow

“work hard to understand each other, and religious diversity is a source of joy, energy, strength and beauty in Glasgow’s 850th year.”

In that, he is correct. I should perhaps declare another interest, in that Glasgow is the city of my birth, but it is right to recognise that after an at times troubled history of sectarian and religious intolerance, today people make Glasgow, and those people are comprised of all faiths and none. I thank my hon. Friend for his powerful advocacy for dialogue and understanding, which brought to mind Jo Cox, lately of this House. I thank him for his understanding and contribution to the debate today. His speech was very much in keeping with the spirit of the St Margaret declaration.

The debate has indicated that there is support for this legislation across the House. I look forward to hearing further from hon. Members in the remaining stages of the Bill, due to follow shortly. With the support of the House, I commend this Bill to the House.

Question put and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a Second time; to stand committed to a Committee of the whole House (Order, this day).

Church of Scotland (Lord High Commissioner) Bill

Douglas Alexander Excerpts

Committee of the whole House
Tuesday 4th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Minister of State, Cabinet Office (Mr Douglas Alexander)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Ghani.

I hope that I will not detain the Committee for long in dealing with the two clauses. The purpose of clause 1 is to make provision to allow a person of the Roman Catholic faith to hold the office of Lord High Commissioner to the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland. The Lord Chancellor (Tenure of Office and Discharge of Ecclesiastical Functions) Act 1974 removed restrictions on individuals taking up the office of Lord Chancellor, and, similarly, the Bill removes the restriction on the Lord High Commissioner from the Roman Catholic Relief Act 1829. Clause 2 sets out the extent, commencement and short title of the Bill: it extends to England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. It will come into force on Royal Assent, which will ensure that the upcoming appointment of Lady Angiolini as the Lord High Commissioner goes ahead in the run-up to the General Assembly in May.

It is clear that the Bill commands a broad consensus, and I am grateful to colleagues for their approach to it. I look forward to the rest of the debate today, and to seeing the Bill on the statute book soon.

[The Chairman]

I call the shadow Minister.

[Andrew Bowie (West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine) (Con)]

I, too, will not detain the Committee for long, having already expressed the full support of His Majesty’s official Opposition for the Bill, and it will come as no surprise that we are not proposing any amendments in Committee. I do, however, have two questions for the Minister. When does he expect the Bill to go to the House of Lords, and can he assure the Committee and, indeed, the Church of Scotland that everything possible will be done to secure its swift passage to Royal Assent so that it is passed in time for the upcoming General Assembly of the Church of Scotland?

[Mr Alexander]

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that we want progress to be expeditious. I shall be happy to write to him once we know the exact date on which it will be introduced in the House of Lords, contingent on support in this Chamber today, but I can assure him that, as the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster made clear, we have been engaging in regular dialogue with the Church of Scotland and the other relevant offices, and we have every confidence, on the basis of the support we have seen today and will hopefully see in the other place, that we will be able to provide a timetable ensuring that Lady Angiolini is able to take up her position by the time of the General Assembly in May.

Question put and agreed to.

Clause 1 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

The Deputy Speaker resumed the Chair.

Bill reported, without amendment.

Third Reading

King’s consent signified.

High Street Businesses

Douglas Alexander Excerpts

Wednesday 26th February 2025 Westminster Hall

[The Minister for Trade Policy and Economic Security (Mr Douglas Alexander)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Desmond. Before I respond to the debate on behalf of the Government, I should say that I am a proud member of the Union of Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers, a union that works tirelessly on behalf of its 360,000 members to negotiate better pay and conditions for shop workers throughout the country.

I thank all the many Members who participated in this worthwhile and timely debate, and pay tribute to each and every one who spoke compellingly about the high streets in their constituencies. I also pay tribute to the hon. Member for Stockton West (Matt Vickers) for securing the debate and thank him for speaking so eloquently—I particularly enjoyed his reference to the “skanky toilets”—in support of our high streets. He has shown considerable interest in this policy area for many years, not least as chair of the former all-party parliamentary group for the future of retail. It is fair to say that he has been a persistent champion of high streets, not just in his constituency, but across the country, so his insights and views are always welcome.

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Livingston (Gregor Poynton) for speaking so powerfully about the perpetual review roundabout that we see in Scotland in relation to planning and, alas, the Scottish Government’s approach to the high streets. I acknowledge the real, if temporary, cross-party consensus identified by the hon. Member for Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk (John Lamont)—albeit that I am not sure there is quite as wide a culinary Caledonian consensus on the health and dietary benefits of the deep-fried Mars bar. I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Surrey Heath (Dr Pinkerton) and confirm that we share his ambition to improve safety on our high streets—an issue to which I shall return.

I also pay generous tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Stockton North (Chris McDonald). There is no stronger champion than he for Stockton and for the interests of its residents. I was intrigued to hear about the three businesses that are planning to open on Stockton high street. That is indeed welcome news, and I commend and congratulate my hon. Friend on bringing it to the attention of the House. He also raised the critical issue of policing and public safety—again, I shall return to that.

The right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton) spoke about the fiscal measures announced in the Budget, to which I will also return, although I note that she offered no alternatives in the course of her speech. My hon. Friend the Member for Calder Valley (Josh Fenton-Glynn) added a perhaps necessary health warning about deep-fried Mars bars and spoke passionately about the Calder Valley businessmen and women who started with a dream and built a proud business community. There could be no more eloquent description of the experience of many entrepreneurs on high streets the length and breadth of the United Kingdom.

Reference to the whole of the United Kingdom brings me to the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon), who described his mother’s careful management of the family budget—an all-too-common concern during the cost of living crisis of recent years, after 14 years of Conservative economic mismanagement. Be assured, the Government want to ensure that businesses in every part of the United Kingdom—in Northern Ireland, in Scotland, in Wales and in England—benefit from measures that deliver economic stability and the Government’s mission of growth.

My hon. Friend the Member for Falkirk (Euan Stainbank), as both a proud Bairn and a self-described Falkirk boy, described where and how he spends his Saturday afternoons. I am not sure that every Member of the House would be wise to do that; none the less, it was helpful and educative for the rest of us to understand his commitment to the Falkirk community. He paid generous tribute to the hospitality workers in Falkirk and in communities and high streets the length and breadth of the country and highlighted the dangers they face. I concur that a new direction for Scotland is needed, not only in relation to our high streets, planning and retail crime, but much, much more fundamentally.

My hon. Friend the Member for Ilford South (Jas Athwal) spoke powerfully, and I noted his remarks carefully. The hon. Member for Torbay (Steve Darling) recognised a truth sadly missing from some of the other speeches when he acknowledged, candidly and rightly, that high streets have faced challenges for decades. These are constantly changing retail offerings that we need to recognise are subject to pressures far beyond the reach of individual Governments, but reflect changing patterns of life, of culture and of leisure.

The Opposition spokesman, the hon. Member for Mid Buckinghamshire (Greg Smith) spoke of high streets as the beating heart of our communities—on that at least we agree—before making a speech that omitted the fact that Liz Truss crashed the economy and left not only an impaired fiscal balance sheet, but a flatlining economy and devastated public services. Again, I waited with bated breath for the Conservatives’ official spokesman to offer their fiscal alternative, in the teeth of the criticism directed toward the Government—but alas, I waited in vain.

[Wendy Morton]

Will the Minister give way?

[Mr Alexander]

Time is against me. I want to address as many of the points raised today as I can, but before I do, I want to say a bit about the Government’s wider commitment to supporting our high streets.

Hon. Members in all parts of the House agree that high streets play a vital role in providing a place for communities to come together, to work, to socialise, to shop and to access essential services. The sectors that underpin the high streets play a huge role in our broader economy. The retail sector directly supports some 2.9 million jobs across the UK, and in 2023 generated £110 billion gross value added. The UK hospitality sector employs about 2.2 million people; it is estimated to have contributed about £52 billion GVA in 2023, and it remains a key driver of the UK’s tourism industry.

Let us be clear: high street businesses can prosper and grow only on firm foundations of economic stability—and that, alas, is certainly not what we inherited last July. Instead, we faced a £22 billion black hole created by the previous Government, featuring hundreds of unfunded pressures on public finances and countless uncosted measures that failed to withstand even the slightest scrutiny. The hon. Member for Stockton West spoke eloquently about his experience working for Woolies, but I respectfully point out that Woolies ceased to trade under a Conservative Government—a fact he omitted from his speech.

At the Budget, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor made some, frankly, very difficult choices, but decisions were necessary to fix the foundations of a broken economy—

--- Later in debate ---

On resuming—

[Mr Alexander]

Along with every Member who has spoken in this debate, the Government want to support strong, thriving, mixed-use high streets that generate high footfall and high degrees of social capital in their local communities. That is why we are focused on a five-point plan to breathe life back into local high streets—high streets that, if we are candid, have faced challenges from changing retail patterns for some decades now. The plan includes addressing antisocial behaviour and retail crime—an issue raised by a number of people around the Chamber—as well as reforming the business rates system, working with the banking industry to roll out banking hubs, stamping out the vexed issue of late payments and empowering communities to make the most of vacant properties, which was also raised frequently this evening.

In our first seven months in office, we have made good progress with our plan. As the hon. Member for Mid Buckinghamshire knows, just yesterday we introduced the Crime and Policing Bill, which will scrap the effective immunity for low-value shoplifting and do more to protect retail workers from assault; I hope it can find consensus in all parts of the House. We are providing additional funding to crack down on the organised gangs who target retailers and have done so with worrying frequency over recent years. Only this morning, we announced the expansion of the sector-based work academy programme—SWAPs—to create 100,000 more places over the next financial year. That will provide opportunities for participants in England and Scotland receiving certain benefits to train towards a job in hospitality and other high street sectors. We followed through on our promise to reform business rates and level the playing field for high streets across the country with lower tax rates for retail, hospitality and leisure properties, and we want to build on that momentum with our upcoming small business strategy, which will set out how we intend to support our small businesses on the high street and beyond.

Our strategy comes with a clear recognition that the way we work and live is changing in a fast-evolving landscape. We must therefore ensure that our approach reflects the continually changing reality of our high streets. We have to make sure that we are supporting services that are fit for modern life, recognising that—for all the eloquence with which people have spoken this evening—no two high streets are in fact the same.

Let me now turn to some of the specific issues that hon. Members addressed, including, critically, crime and antisocial behaviour. Business rates reform and our approach to national insurance contributions are some of the economic levers taken by the Treasury to support the high street; but to create thriving high street environments takes a whole-of-Government approach. The Department for Business and Trade is working closely with other Departments, particularly the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government and the Home Office, to co-ordinate activity that supports high streets and their businesses.

A vital element of creating the thriving high streets of which so many Members have spoken is ensuring that they are a safe and comfortable environment both for business leaders and for shoppers. I have mentioned this week’s introduction of the Crime and Policing Bill, a central part of the Government’s plan for change and indeed our safer streets mission. The Bill will ensure that the police and courts have the necessary powers to help to tackle assaults against retail workers and shop theft. It will create a stand-alone offence for assaulting a retail worker, in order to protect staff, measure the scale of the problem and drive down retail crime. It is simply unacceptable that shop theft, and violence and abuse towards retail workers, continue to rise. We ask retailers to perform a significant act of public service—

[Sir Desmond Swayne (in the Chair)]

Order.

Business and Trade

Douglas Alexander Excerpts

Wednesday 12th February 2025 Written Corrections

[Clive Jones (Wokingham) (LD)]

Donald Trump’s tariffs will cause much uncertainty across the world, not least for those working in our great British steel industry. Tariffs are not just bad news for UK steel producers; they would have a tangible effect on people’s lives, from lower economic growth to higher inflation. It is not likely to end with steel, so we may well be caught up in America’s economic vandalism. Will the Minister set out how US tariffs may affect the UK economy and what preparations are being made as a result, and does he agree that British jobs are on the line and that businesses and workers want to see the Government stand up for them?

[Mr Alexander]

To give a sense of quantum to the House, about £400 million-worth of UK steel exports go to the United States. That represents, if I recollect accurately, about 10% of UK production, so the hon. Gentleman is entirely right to recognise that this is a significant moment…

[Official Report, 11 February 2025; Vol. 762, c. 184.]

Written correction submitted by the Minister for Trade Policy and Economic Security, the right hon. Member for Lothian East (Mr Alexander):

[Mr Alexander]

To give a sense of quantum to the House, about £400 million-worth of UK steel exports go to the United States. That represents, if I recollect accurately, about 8% of UK steel exports in 2023, so the hon. Gentleman is entirely right to recognise that this is a significant moment…