Will EU deal make food cheaper, add $12bn to the UK economy?
Nearly nine years after the United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union, the new agreement includes a new security and defence pact, fewer restrictions on British food exporters and visitors, and a controversial new fishing agreement.
Britain said the reset with its biggest trading partner would reduce red tape for agricultural producers, making food cheaper. The deal would also improve energy security and, by 2040, add nearly 9 billion pounds ($12.1bn) to the economy.
While Starmer sold the deal as a 'win-win', attacks immediately emerged from the opposition Conservative Party, which said the deal would make the UK a 'rule-taker' from Brussels.
Nigel Farage, head of the hard-right, pro-Brexit Reform UK party, called the deal an 'abject surrender'.
As part of Monday's defence-and-security agreement, the UK and the EU will work more closely on information sharing, maritime issues and cybersecurity.
Crucially for Britain, the bloc committed to exploring ways for the UK to access EU procurement defence funds.
British weapons manufacturers can now take part in a 150-billion-euro ($169bn) programme to rearm Europe – part of United States President Donald Trump's push for Brussels to spend more on defence.
Meanwhile, both sides have agreed to work on a joint agrifood agreement to remove Brexit-era trade barriers like safety checks on animals, paperwork and bans on certain products.
In 2023, UK food and drink exports to the EU were worth 14 billion pounds ($18.7bn), accounting for 57 percent of all the sector's overseas sales. Monday's agreement should raise that.
In exchange, the UK will need to follow EU food standards – a system known as 'dynamic alignment' – and accept the European Court of Justice's oversight in this area.
There have been talks on linking up the UK and EU's carbon markets (i.e., a tradable price on CO2 emission) and on a joint electricity market.
The deal also paves the way for the UK's return to the Erasmus student exchange programme, as well as granting young people access to the EU through work and travel.
In a symbolic gesture to please tourists, Britons will be allowed to use border e-gates at most EU airports, reducing queues at passport controls.
Finally, the UK will grant EU fishers access to British waters for an additional 12 years, an eleventh-hour concession from the UK – three times longer than it had originally offered.
Critics from the Conservative Party and Reform UK quickly denounced the deal as a betrayal of Brexit, arguing that the price of the trade agreement was excessive.
The fisheries deal drew fierce disapproval, with opposition politicians saying it meant handing over Britain's fishing waters to European fishers for an extra decade.
Fishing is a key issue in the UK, despite making up just 0.04 percent of gross domestic product (GDP). And Starmer's deal appears to have reignited tensions last seen during Brexit negotiations.
Offering '12 years access to British waters is three times longer than the govt wanted,' Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch wrote on X. 'We're becoming a rule-taker from Brussels once again.'
Reform's leader, Farage, told Bloomberg that Starmer's deal on fisheries 'will be the end of the industry'. The Scottish Fishermen's Federation called it a 'horror show'.
Elsewhere, there were complaints about Britain having to submit itself to the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice on agrifood policies.
For their part, the Conservatives vowed to reverse all these changes if they got back into power.
Still, Starmer stuck firmly to his election promise of not re-joining the European single market (in which goods and people can move freely) or the customs union (which eliminates tariffs on goods traded between EU countries).
According to the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), the Ministry of Finance's independent forecaster, the UK's decision to leave the EU will shrink trade flows by 15 percent.
The OBR also that calculated Brexit will lower GDP by 4 percent over the long term. That's the equivalent of costing the economy 100 billion pounds ($134bn) per year.
For starters, Brexit involved erecting significant trade barriers with Europe. In 2024, UK goods exports to the EU were 18 percent below their 2019 level, in real terms.
The decision to leave the EU also triggered business uncertainty. Lacking clarity over the UK's future economic relationship with the EU, business investment softened.
The National Institute of Economic and Social Research estimates that business investment was 13 percent lower in 2023 than under a remain scenario.
Brexiteers promised that leaving the EU would allow Westminster to sign global free trade agreements and break away from the EU's demanding regulatory regime.
'The argument was that doing business at home and abroad would be simplified,' says Gaurav Ganguly, head of EMEA Economic Research at Moody's Analytics.
'And while the UK has signed several trade deals since 2020, Brexit has not unleashed the potential that was talked about [by its advocates].'
In recent weeks, the UK has signed up to trade agreements with India and the US. But Britain's average GDP growth was just 0.64 percent between 2020 and 2024.
Elsewhere, public support for Brexit has fallen since the 52-48 percent leave vote in the 2016 referendum.
Earlier this year, polling by YouGov found only 30 percent of Britons now think it was right for the UK to vote to leave the EU, versus 55 percent who say it was wrong.
Roughly 60 percent of people believe Brexit has gone badly, including one-third of leave voters. A majority also believe that leaving the EU has damaged Britain's economy.
Ever since last year's election, the Labour government has pledged to improve Britain's anaemic levels of growth. It sees lower trade barriers with the EU as crucial to that goal.
Acknowledging the damage inflicted to Britain's trade by Brexit, Starmer said the deal to remove restrictions on food would give 9 billion pounds ($12bn) boost to the UK economy by 2040.
In a government briefing, Downing Street said it would redress the 21 percent drop in exports and 7 percent drop in imports seen since Brexit.
That said, 9 billion pounds ($12bn) would amount to just 0.2 percent of the UK's national output. As such, this week's agreement deal has dismantled only a fraction of the trade barriers erected post-Brexit.
'Yesterday's deal may lift growth,' Ganguly told Al Jazeera. 'But the UK economy continues to struggle from structural weaknesses, including low productivity and limited fiscal space.'
The Centre for European Reform, a London-based think tank, recently calculated that the UK-EU reset would boost Britain's GDP by between 0.3 percent and 0.7 percent.
Ganguly said he is 'not inclined to change my forecast in the short term', adding 'In addition, it's clear that yesterday's agreements won't completely reverse the economic hit from Brexit.'
The upshot is that Ganguly expects modest GDP growth of around 1-2 percent between now and the next election cycle, in 2029.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Jazeera
39 minutes ago
- Al Jazeera
As Trump's August 1 deadline looms, tariffs are here to stay, experts say
As United States President Donald Trump blasts his way through tariff announcements, one thing is clear, experts say: Some level of duties is here to stay. In the past few weeks, Trump has announced a string of deals – with the European Union, Japan, Indonesia, Vietnam and the Philippines – with tariffs ranging from 15 percent to 20 percent. He has also threatened Brazil with a 50 percent tariff, unveiled duties of 30 percent and 35 percent for major trading partners Mexico and Canada, and indicated that deals with China and India are close. How many of Trump's tariff rates will shake out is anybody's guess, but one thing is clear, according to Vina Nadjibulla, vice president of research and strategy at the Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada: 'No one is getting zero tariffs. There's no going back.' Trump's various announcements have spelled months of chaos for industry, leaving businesses in limbo and forcing them to pause investment and hiring decisions. The World Bank has slashed its growth forecasts for nearly 70 percent of economies – including the US, China and Europe, and six emerging market regions – and cut its global growth estimate to 2.3 percent, down from 2.7 percent in January. Oxford Economics has forecast a shallow recession in capital spending in the Group of Seven (G7) countries – Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the US – lasting from the second quarter to the third quarter of this year. 'What we're seeing is the Donald Trump business style: There's lots of commotion, lots of claim, lots of activity and lots of b*******,' Robert Rogowsky, professor of international trade at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies, told Al Jazeera. 'That's his business model, and that's how he operates. That's why he's driven so many of his businesses into bankruptcy. It's not strategic or tactical. It's instinctive.' Rogowsky said he expects Trump to push back his tariff deadline again, after delaying it from April to July, and then to August 1. 'It's going to be a series of TACO tariffs,' Rogowsky said, referring to the acronym for 'Trump Always Chickens Out', a phrase coined by Financial Times columnist Robert Armstrong in early May to describe the US president's backpedalling on tariffs in the face of stock market turmoil. 'He will bump them again,' Rogowsky said. 'He's just exerting the image of power.' Trump's back-and-forth policy moves have characterised his dealings with some of the US's biggest trade partners, including China and the EU. China's tariff rate has gone from 20 percent to 54 percent, to 104 percent, to 145 percent, and then 30 percent, while the deadline for implementation has shifted repeatedly. The proposed tariff rates for the EU have followed a similar pattern, going from 20 percent to 50 percent to 30 percent, and then 15 percent following the latest trade deal. The EU's current tariff rate only applies to 70 percent of goods, with a zero rate applying to a limited range of exports, including semiconductor equipment and some chemicals. European steel exports will continue to be taxed at 50 percent, and Trump has indicated that new tariffs could be on the way for pharmaceutical products. Despite the trade deals, many details of how Trump's tariffs will work in practice remain unclear. Whether Trump announces more changes down the track, analysts agree that the world has entered a new phase in which countries are seeking to become less reliant on the US. 'Now that the initial shock and anger [at Trump policies] has subsided, there is a quiet determination to build resilience and become less reliant on the US,' Nadjibulla said, adding that Trump was pushing countries to address longstanding issues that had been untouchable before. Canada, for instance, is tackling inter-provincial trade barriers, a politically sensitive issue historically, even as it looks elsewhere to increase exports, said Tony Stillo, director of Canada Economics at Oxford Economics. 'It would be foolhardy not to provide to the US, seeing as it's our largest market, but it also makes us more resilient to provide to other markets as well,' Stillo told Al Jazeera. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has reached out to the EU and Mexico and indicated his wish to improve his country's strained relations with China and India. This month, Canada expanded its exports of liquified natural gas beyond the US market, with its first shipment of cargoes to Asia. To mitigate the fallout of Trump's tariffs, Ottawa has been offering relief to Canadian businesses, including automakers, and has instituted a six-month pause on tariffs on some imports from the US to give firms time to re-adjust their supply chains. There is also 'some relief' in the fact that other countries 'don't seem to be imitating the Trump show [by levying their own tariffs]. They're witnessing this attempt to strong-arm the rest of the world, but it doesn't seem to be working,' Mary Lovely, the Anthony M Solomon senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE), told Al Jazeera. But the world is watching how the tariffs will affect the US economy, as 'that will also be instructive to other countries', Lovely said. 'If we see a slowdown, as we expect, it becomes a cautionary tale for others.' Although the US stock market is near an all-time high, it is heavily weighted towards the 'magnificent seven', said Lovely, referring to the largest tech companies, and that reflects just one part of the economy. Re-emergence of industrial policy Trump's tariffs come on top of other growing challenges for exporters the world over, including China's subsidy-heavy industrial policy that allows its businesses to undercut its competitors. 'We've entered a period of global economic alignment with the reintroduction of industrial policies,' Nadjibulla said, explaining that more and more governments are likely to roll out support for their domestic industries. 'Each country will have to navigate these and find ways to de-risk and reduce overreliance on the US and China.' Still, countries seeking to support their homegrown industries will have to do so while reckoning with the World Trade Organization and rules-based trade agreements such as the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, Nadjibulla said. 'It will take some tremendous leadership around the world to corral this wild mustang [Trump] before he breaks up the world order,' Rogowsky said. 'But it will break because I do think Donald Trump will drive us into a recession.'
Al Jazeera
an hour ago
- Al Jazeera
Poland – At a crossroads of ideologies
Pinch Point Poland is increasingly seen as the gateway between eastern and western Europe. Post-war Poland has enjoyed proper independence now for little more than 35 years. And it wants to keep it that way. But there are external pressures which Poles believe put them under very real threat. Video Duration 04 minutes 56 seconds 04:56 Video Duration 04 minutes 45 seconds 04:45 Video Duration 00 minutes 43 seconds 00:43 Video Duration 05 minutes 59 seconds 05:59 Video Duration 05 minutes 30 seconds 05:30 Video Duration 05 minutes 58 seconds 05:58 Video Duration 05 minutes 27 seconds 05:27
Al Jazeera
3 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Why Zelenskyy tried to curb autonomy of Ukraine's anti-graft bodies?
Kyiv, Ukraine – Last week, hundreds of Ukrainians rallied in several cities to protest the government's attempt to curb the independence of anticorruption watchdogs. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on July 22 signed a bill into law, which would revoke the autonomy of key agencies – the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office (SAPO). The rare protest in the war-torn country forced the Ukrainian president to introduce a new draft bill to restore the independence of NABU and SAPO, which have been established to investigate high-level corruption and are widely seen as a symbol of democratic reforms. So, why did Zelenskyy try to curb powers of the anticorruption agencies, and will his action dent public trust in the government crucial at a time of war against Russia? Why are Ukrainians protesting? The nationwide protests erupted in the wake of the July 22 vote in the Verkhovna Rada, Ukraine's lower house of parliament, to approve the bill that allows the prosecutor general to oversee the two anticorruption agencies. The prosecutor general is appointed by the president and approved by the Verkhovna Rada, where Zelenskyy's Public Servant party holds a majority. It was seen as an attempt by the government to control the two agencies, which were created in the wake of the 2013-14 pro-democracy Euromaidan protests. Many believe it's a setback from the years of reforms following the removal of pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych in 2014. The protesters held banners with slogans reading 'Sham!' 'Don't make a step back, there's an abyss there,' and 'Corruption applauds' the new bill. The rallies took place in Kyiv as well as in large cities such as the Black Sea port of Odesa and Lviv, known as Ukraine's cultural capital. NABU has been probing a string of senior officials and lawmakers, including those within Zelenskyy's Public Servant party. Oleksiy, who enlisted to join the army in 2022, wonders why he should keep fighting on the front lines of eastern Ukraine while officials engage in corruption. 'What's the point if I go back home and my family is surrounded by corruption everywhere,' the 42-year-old construction manager told Al Jazeera. 'Judges, officials, even school teachers all say, 'Give, give, give,'' he said, asking to withhold his last name and details of his military service, in accordance with the wartime protocol. Oleksiy, who is on a break from his service to visit his two children and ailing mother, took part in the largest antigovernment rallies in Ukraine since Russia's full-scale invasion in 2022. Why Zelenskyy backed the bill? The new law envisaged executive control over NABU and SAPO as the prosecutor general's office could access their information, give them binding directives, transfer cases and close down investigations. The bill 'could finally destroy the independence of the anticorruption system in Ukraine', NABU said. Rachel Denber, deputy Europe and Central Asia director at Human Rights Watch, said the new law 'risks weakening Ukraine's democratic foundations and its future integration with Europe'. She called for the repeal of the law. Zelenskyy, a former comedian and political rookie who came to power in 2019 on an anticorruption ticket, defended the law, claiming that the NABU and SAPO have to 'get rid of Russian influence'. His allegation followed the arrest of two NABU staffers suspected of working for Russian intelligence, and charges against outspoken anticorruption campaigner Vitaly Shabunin. Shabunin was accused of 'evading military service', but his supporters called the charges trumped-up, and almost 60 anticorruption and nongovernmental groups signed a joint appeal in his defence. A Kyiv-based political analyst says there are two popular theories about why Zelenskyy initiated the bill. 'One is that NABU allegedly closed in on Zelenskyy's inner circle,' Volodymyr Fesenko, head of the Penta think tank, told Al Jazeera. NABU accused Deputy Prime Minister Oleksiy Chernyshov, Zelenskyy's closest ally and lifelong friend, of taking kickbacks worth $346,000 from a real estate developer in a deal that cost the government $24m. Zelenskyy's press office didn't reply to Al Jazeera's phone calls and text messages. 'Or this is an attempt to control NABU's actions in order not to overtly politicise them, not to provoke domestic political wars during the war with Russia,' Fesenko said. 'But I think it has to do with the activisation of the NABU on political issues that may have caused suspicion in Zelenskyy's inner circle. That it wasn't a fight against corruption but more of a political attack on Zelenskyy,' he said. The protests, an anticorruption expert told Al Jazeera, have weakened Zelenskyy's support within domestic political circles. 'There was a belief in his high and stable rating,' Tetiana Shevchuk from the Anti-Corruption Action Center, a Kyiv-based group, said. But 'he no longer can demand anything from the parliament,' she said. Zelenskyy is afraid of NABU as the only law enforcement agency that won't open or close an investigation following a phone call from his administration, she said, referring to the centralisation of power under him. 'NABU is the only body that doesn't do that,' Shevchuk said. Fesenko from the Penta think tank says the politicians 'underestimated' the bill's 'negative consequences'. They 'didn't think the public response would be that harsh'. Zelenskyy has promised to submit the new bill – a move applauded by the country's top anti-corruption investigator. Semen Kryvonos, director of NABU, however, said that corrupt actors will step up a 'dirty information campaign' against the anti-graft agencies. Meanwhile, protest leaders say they would stop rallies only after the bill has been passed – tentatively, later this week. Why has Ukraine struggled to control corruption? Has war-related corruption increased? Since the 2014 pro-democracy revolution or Revolution of Dignity, attempts have been made to root out endemic corruption. Many bureaucratic procedures have been simplified and consume less time, money and nerves. But corruption remains pervasive in the halls of justice. Ukraine ranks 105 out of 180 in Transparency International's corruption index. A criminal investigator who spent months putting together a string of lawsuits against a fraudster who duped dozens of people, including several lawmakers, told Al Jazeera that a corrupt judge could annul his work and the fraudster may walk free. 'We can't guarantee any judge's honesty,' the investigator said on condition of anonymity. Meanwhile, Europe's worst armed conflict since World War II has bred new forms of corruption. Some officers extort bribes for letting a serviceman take leave or go to a hospital, pilfer foreign aid such as canned foods, clothes or shoes that end up on store shelves instead of the front line. 'If someone reports such an officer, they may end up in a suicide squad on zero position,' serviceman Oleksiy who took part in the protests claimed, referring to the front line positions most likely to be attacked by enemy drones. Officers tasked with the conscription campaign have been accused of receiving bribes to smuggle people out of the country. Dozens of conscription officers have been arrested – and some had cash stashes of millions of dollars or euros or even in gold bullion. Defence Minister Oleksii Reznikov was fired in 2023 after scandals involving inflated prices for military procurement, including ammunition, foodstuffs, medical equipment and winter clothing. His successor Rustem Umerov was investigated for alleged abuse of power, NABU said in January. Will the curbs on anticorruption bodies affect foreign aid? The European Union said on Sunday it would freeze $1.7bn, a third of its latest aid package for Ukraine, because of the new law. But military aid from the EU and the United States is not likely to be interrupted, said Lt Gen Ihor Romanenko, former deputy head of Ukraine's general staff of armed forces. However, the protests reveal a shocking contrast between hundreds of thousands of servicemen on the front lines and the corrupt officials who dodge the draft and keep thriving on corruption. 'On one side, there are people spilling blood, and corruption remains high and even gets higher in certain areas, and people find it inadmissible,' Romanenko told Al Jazeera.
