NEW: how can the U.K. strike a trade deal with USA while protecting U.K. farmers and consumers? Answer they probably can’t. (And don’t be fooled by specious assurances on ‘chlorinated chicken’) Stay with me. 1/thread. https://on.ft.com/3hC85YM 

You'll have heard lost of promises lately from UK ministers saying that the UK will maintain "our" high food standards after #Brexit but this is skips over the real issue - whether a trade deal lets in food made with lower standards from abroad. /2

I went to a pig farm in Swannington, Norfolk (outdoor, but not some boutique place, a big farm that does Pork for Waitrose etc) to see why UK (and EU) pork is nearly TWICE as expensive as US-produced pork. /3

(PS. They make a mean pork pie) https://www.swanningtonfarmtofork.co.uk/ 

Rob Mutimer's pigs have straw, a wallow, outdoor space - he does NOT use sow stalls (banned in UK in 1999) or additives like Ractopamine (also banned in EU, China and beyond)....that means lots more cost. /4

Pix by brill @ft photog Charlie Bibby

But in the USA they use all those things - hence the lower prices - so what farmers want to know; what National Pig Association @NatPigAssoc is whether UK govt will PROTECT UK farmers from US farmers - because legally they cannot compete. There is no level playing field./4

Now. The Government wants a trade deal with the US AND it says it wants to protect UK farmers and consumers?

But how is that possible? Because the US is very clear it wants UK to drop A) Tarrifs and B) EU welfare standards. See here. Very clear /5

https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/Summary_of_U.S.-UK_Negotiating_Objectives.pdf

And if in doubt, check out the US National Pork Producers Council @NPPC own comment on that mandate. No more "bogus" EU food standards and zero-tariff access. Yeeeha! That's what Brexit is about, they say: "stark choices" and "consumer choice". /6 http://nppc.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/P-NPPC-UK-FTA-1.15.19-Comments-FINAL.pdf

Worth reading those snips above - it couldn't be clearer.

If the UK wants a trade deal with US it needs to be open to US standards - as Nick Giordano of the @NPPC tells me. After all, what was the point of #Brexit if we are still hobbled by EU standards? /7

So. What does the Government say at this point, when you ask them whether it plans to allow in US pork reared in sow stalls (where the mothers can't move) and using additives and antibiotics banned in the EU. Are we essentially prepared to export and underwrite cruelty? /8

Here's the statement in full - read it very carefully now. Do you spot the clever bit? (my caps)

"we will not compromise on OUR high environmental protection, animal welfare and food standards" and UK regulators will ensure imports "comply with those high safety standards". /9

Oooh. Slippery as an imported eel, because as @edbarkerpig of @NatPigAssoc points out, this doesn't make a guarantee on UK not importing products raised with lower welfare requirements. Even if US screens for things like Ractopamine, it will STILL be cheaper than UK reared /10.

The giveaway is that when MPs tried to amend the Agriclture Bill

The giveaway is that when MPs tried to amend the Agriculture Bill last month to ensure a level playing field on welfare it was blocked by the government. As @edbarkerpig
says: “If the government is sincere, then why not write it into law?” /11
https://www.foodmanufacture.co.uk/Article/2020/05/13/Agriculture-Bill-MPs-don-t-back-import-standards-call

Well in short because (see above) if it did that would torpedo @Liztruss getting a US trade deal - even though @michaelgove George Eustice see the perils of going to far. The ideological battle rages in Whitehall, but "stark choices" await. /12 https://www.ft.com/content/e583b8a2-4074-4fa9-9c43-08a9979e0bee

One 'idea' floated by ministers is a "differential tariff" that would put higher tariffs on lower welfare products. But as @DmitryOpines tells me there pretty much zero chance US agrees to that. What does Nick Giordano of @NPPC say to the idea? "Dead. On. Arrival" /13

So much for the 'differential tariffs' cunning plan - which as @robertshrimsley said noted y'day is yet another exhibit of a government that is profoundly queasy about embracing the 'choices' that it professed it so wanted as a result of #Brexit /14 https://www.ft.com/content/a1bb84cf-be5d-486c-841f-fc6d84aa22b8

And there is an argument for those choices - lower food prices, consumer choices (even though farmers cannot 'choose' to compete unless the UK lowers its welfare standards) and those "opportunities" of 'global trade' (viz 0.2% inc GDP /15 years in case of a US-UK FTA) /15

But set against that (rather limited) promise is the potential wrath of UK consumers as campaign groups like @ciwf ratchet up pressure on government - already a million of so people have signed an @NFUtweets petition backed by @jamieoliver @MailOnline/16
https://www.campaigns.nfuonline.com/page/56262/petition/1

And don't bet against the power of the great British consumer to BOTH want lower food prices AND be simultaneously outraged by campaigns, leaflets etc against 'evil' America agribusiness (whose food they'll lap up when on holiday stateside)...all pretty tricky. /17

Also worth noting even if consumer labeling was clear (and the US want to block that too btw as part of the US-UK trade deal) that a lot of food we eat - either processed, or out cafes, schools, restaurants - we never get to see any labels. /18

So what will the government do? Because LOTS of these choices are coming down the tracks...

My guess - given US-UK trade, including Pork, has been growing happily without a trade deal - is maybe not that much. Something fig-leafy? /19

We'll have to wait see. Perhaps the #brexit buccaneers will win the arguments...on a US trade deal; on minimal alignment with EU norms (at cost of a meaningful FTA) on ripping up supply chains...or perhaps political and economic gravity will assert itself. We'll see. ENDS