logo
Labour will hope EU deal is final piece of jigsaw to boost economy

Labour will hope EU deal is final piece of jigsaw to boost economy

The Guardian19-05-2025

Monday's EU-UK reset deal will not instantly produce the growth Labour sorely needs to fulfil its promise to voters, but ministers hope it marks another incremental step on the road to a more optimistic economic future.
Three aspects of the agreement have been particularly welcomed by business, and form the core of the economic package – although many details remain to be negotiated.
The first is the long-hoped-for agreement to create a common sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) area, under which cumbersome checks on food and agriculture products will be lifted, in return for the UK aligning with EU standards in these areas.
Boris Johnson, presenting his trade and cooperation agreement (TCA) with the EU on Christmas Eve 2020, wrongly claimed there would be 'no non-tariff barriers to trade'.
In practice, these barriers – including veterinary checks – have been hugely damaging, and a SPS deal is aimed at dismantling some of them, for this key sector.
The British Chambers of Commerce, which has long drawn attention to the frustrations suffered by UK exporters, called the prospect of an SPS agreement 'a huge boost' that would 'cut costs, reduce waste and increase sales'.
In a clearer statement of the hit to exports from Brexit than the ever-cautious Labour has usually allowed itself, the press release accompanying the deal mentions 'the 21% drop in exports and 7% drop in imports seen since Brexit'. Enthusiasts for a closer economic relationship hope that this approach – aligning on rules in exchange for more frictionless market access – could be a model for other sectors in future.
The second aspect of the deal that carries economic weight is an agreement to cooperate more closely on energy policy, including aligning the EU and UK emissions trading schemes.
The agreement should, the government says, 'create the conditions for goods originating in our jurisdictions to benefit from mutual exemptions from the respective EU and UK carbon border adjustment mechanisms (CBAM)'.
In practice, the UK government claims that will mean the steel industry escapes £25m a year in levies that the EU would otherwise have imposed, via the CBAM – a policy aimed at ensuring heavily polluting products cannot enter the EU and undercut domestically produced equivalents that have paid to offset their emissions.
Third, the UK hopes the agreement to negotiate over the possibility of defence industry cooperation will mean UK firms being able to bid for projects procured via the planned EU Security Action For Europe (SAFE) fund, which will allow member states to borrow to pay for weapons.
The language on this in the EU-UK agreement is scant: the two sides agree to cooperate on 'security and defence initiatives, including on defence industry', and they commit to 'swiftly explore any possibilities for mutually beneficial enhanced cooperation created by the SAFE instrument'.
But ministers clearly believe this could open the way for UK defence companies such as BAE Systems to profit, as defence spending ramps up on both sides of the Channel.
The fury about fishing rights, which held up the final agreement, has little to do with economics and everything to do with the political symbolism of the sector.
Research by the Resolution Foundation found that fisheries had actually been one of the industries worst affected by Johnson's Brexit deal, with output perhaps 30% lower than it might otherwise have been.
Given how rapidly fish needs to get to market, Labour argues that eliminating cumbersome food checks under the SPS deal will benefit the sector more than allowing EU boats access to UK waters for another 12 years. (It may also have the positive political side-effect of preventing regular rows about fish from spilling out into the headlines.)
Sign up to Business Today
Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning
after newsletter promotion
While the UK can point to clear economic wins from the deal, economists believe its direct impact on GDP growth is likely to be small, given the government's clear determination not to rejoin the single market or customs union, to avoid having to sign up to the free movement of people.
Nevertheless, the government claims the reset will 'help make food cheaper, slash red tape, open up access to the EU market and add nearly £9bn to the UK economy by 2040'. That's a modest but worthwhile boost of about 0.3% to GDP, over the next 15 years.
John Springford of the Centre for European Reform, whose analysis suggests the UK economy is approximately 5% smaller than it would otherwise have been as a result of Brexit, suggests that it still looks relatively generous.
He recently forecast that a generous youth mobility scheme might increase the size of the economy by 0.45% over the next decade, while an SPS agreement would add less than 0.1%, for example – making 0.3% look a stretch.
However, Labour hopes the economy will gain something more nebulous, which it is harder to plug into a model: a growing acknowledgment from the business sector that the UK is an appealing investment proposition.
Before coming to power, Rachel Reeves and Keir Starmer hoped the credibility of a steadier hand on the tiller than the Tories would win over investors, whose confidence they see as key to the UK's recovery.
Instead, Labour swept into power on a wave of dire warnings about the state of the economy, blindsided businesses with tax rises, and saw GDP continue to flatline.
Now, they hope the triumvirate of the India-UK trade deal, the US tariff agreement with Donald Trump and the EU reset will burnish their reputation as calm and competent stewards of the economy, helping to generate a glimmer of optimism, in a highly uncertain world.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Fears of tent cities as rough sleeping is decriminalised in end to 200-year-old law
Fears of tent cities as rough sleeping is decriminalised in end to 200-year-old law

Daily Mail​

timean hour ago

  • Daily Mail​

Fears of tent cities as rough sleeping is decriminalised in end to 200-year-old law

Tent cities could pop up across the UK as rough sleeping is decriminalised, critics of the policy say. Ministers have announced plans to repeal the Vagrancy Act by next spring, meaning it will no longer be an offence to sleep on pavements. But there are fears scrapping the 200-year-old law despite rising numbers of the homeless will mean more people camping on the streets. Announcing the changes, Angela Rayner said she was 'drawing a line under nearly two centuries of injustice towards some of the most vulnerable in society'. The Housing Secretary pledged to increase funding for homelessness services with an extra £233million this financial year to provide alternatives to rough sleeping. She said: 'No one should ever be criminalised simply for sleeping rough and by scrapping this cruel and outdated law, we are making sure that can never happen again.' Introduced in 1824 to tackle a homelessness crisis after the Industrial Revolution, the law was designed to punish 'idle and disorderly persons, and rogues and vagabonds'. Most parts of the act have been repealed but some remain in force in England and Wales to enable police to move on rough sleepers rather than prosecute them. Homeless charities called the move a 'landmark moment' they had long called for. However, there were concerns that the move could lead to more people sleeping on streets and the creation of 'tent cities'. The charity Shelter estimates there are 326,000 people, including 161,500 children, in England who are homeless, a 14 per cent increase on the previous year. This has caused camps to pop up in several cities, including on Park Lane in central London. Figures published in April showed the total number sleeping rough in the capital – those who spend at least one night on the streets – was 4,427 for the three months to March 2025, which was a near 8 per cent increase from 4,118 for the same quarter last year. The numbers classed as living on the streets had risen by 38 per cent year-on-year to 706 from 511. The Government said 'targeted measures will ensure police have the powers they need to keep communities safe – filling the gap left over by removing previous powers'. These will be new offences of facilitating begging for gain and trespassing with the intention of committing a crime and will be brought in through amendments to the Crime and Policing Bill. Ministers said this will ensure organised begging – often by criminal gangs – remains an offence, meaning it is unlawful for anyone to organise others to beg. Ms Rayner's department said spending on homeless services would hit nearly £1billion this financial year. Kevin Hollinrake, Tory communities spokesman, said: 'Labour's approach will result in a pavement free-for-all in our towns and cities. They just don't understand or care how this affects law-abiding local residents and the impact it has on their pride of place.' Chris Philp, the Tory home affairs spokesman, told the Telegraph: 'This move risks turning British cities into a version of San Francisco, which has become overrun by encampments of homeless people.

Chancellor unveils £6bn NHS funding after health-centred spending review
Chancellor unveils £6bn NHS funding after health-centred spending review

The Independent

timean hour ago

  • The Independent

Chancellor unveils £6bn NHS funding after health-centred spending review

Some £6 billion will be spent on speeding up testing and treatment in the NHS, Rachel Reeves has announced, after she placed the health service at the heart of Government spending plans. The Chancellor unveiled the investment, which includes new scanners, ambulances and urgent treatment centres aimed at providing an extra four million appointments in England over the next five years, after Wednesday's spending review. The funding is aimed at reducing waiting lists and reaching Labour's 'milestone' of ensuring the health service carries out 92% of routine operations within 18 weeks. In the review, Ms Reeves set out day-to-day spending across Government for the next three years, as well as plans for capital investment over the next four years. The NHS and defence were seen as the winners from the settlement, as both will see higher than average rises in public spending. This comes at cost of squeezing the budgets of other Whitehall departments and experts have warned tax rises may be needed later this year. The Chancellor and Sir Keir Starmer both sought to portray the review as a 'new phase' for the Government, following the criticism Labour has faced during its first year in power, including over cuts to winter fuel allowance. Ms Reeves claimed the NHS had been 'put on its knees' as a result of under-investment by the previous government, adding: 'We are investing in Britain's renewal, and we will turn that around.' The new £6 billion investment will come from the capital settlement for the NHS and will also help to speed up diagnoses with scans and treatment available in places such as shopping centres and high streets. The scale of day-to-day spending for the NHS is akin to an extra £29 billion a year. In a broadcast interview on Wednesday evening, Ms Reeves said the Government was 'confident' it could meet its pledge to reduce waiting lists after the boost to NHS spending. But while health and defence have benefited from the review, the Home Office, Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, Department for Culture, Media and Sport, Department for Transport and Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs are all in line for real-terms cuts in day-to-day spending. The Foreign Office is also in line for real-terms cuts, mainly as a result of a reduction in the overseas aid budget, which was slashed as part of the commitment to boost defence spending to 2.6% of gross domestic product – including the intelligence agencies – from 2027. Ms Reeves acknowledged 'not everyone has been able to get exactly what they want' following Cabinet squabbling over departmental budgets. She said 'every penny' of the spending increases had been funded through the tax and borrowing changes she had announced in her first budget. The Chancellor also insisted she would not need to mount another tax raid to pay for her plans, but experts warned the money for the NHS might still not be enough and the Government is under international pressure to boost defence funding further. Paul Johnson, of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, described the hospital waiting times target as 'enormously ambitious', adding: 'And on defence, it's entirely possible that an increase in the Nato spending target will mean that maintaining defence spending at 2.6% of GDP no longer cuts the mustard.' At a summit later this month Nato members will consider calls to increase spending to 3.5% on defence, with a future 1.5% on defence-related measures. Steven Millard, interim director of the NIESR economic research institute, said the Chancellor's non-negotiable fiscal rules, coupled with the 'small amount of headroom' in her spending plans, meant 'it is now almost inevitable that if she is to keep to her fiscal rules, she will have to raise taxes in the autumn budget'. Elsewhere, policing leaders warned forces may need to make deep cuts after their settlement was announced. The spending review provides more than £2 billion for forces, but ministers have acknowledged some of that 'spending power' will come from council tax hikes.

Fears Trump could sink US-UK nuclear subs deal after President ordered review into pact intended to secure the Pacific against Chinese aggression
Fears Trump could sink US-UK nuclear subs deal after President ordered review into pact intended to secure the Pacific against Chinese aggression

Daily Mail​

timean hour ago

  • Daily Mail​

Fears Trump could sink US-UK nuclear subs deal after President ordered review into pact intended to secure the Pacific against Chinese aggression

Royal Navy chiefs voiced concerns last night after Donald Trump ordered a review of the nuclear submarine pact between the UK, the US and Australia. Aukus, as the joint project is known, is intended to secure the Pacific against Chinese aggression and involves multi-billion-pound commitments to build new nuclear-powered submarines. The Ministry of Defence announced its intention to build up to 12 submarines for Aukus and other operations as part of last week's Strategic Defence Review. But these plans have been thrown into doubt after the US defence department announced a review to ensure Aukus meets the President's 'America First' agenda. Relations between the US and Australia have soured over tariffs. America has also demanded Australia increase defence spending and wants to sell older submarines to Australia on favourable terms. Another cause for concern is the review is being led by Aukus sceptic Elbridge Colby, who is close to President Trump. Last night former head of the Royal Navy, Admiral Lord West said: 'Aukus is extremely important for the strategic situation in the Pacific and very important for Britain as a way of us moving into our next generation of submarines. 'The US had had concerns about selling its submarines to Australia, so it is not entirely unexpected that President Trump would want to look at this. Hopefully this can be resolved and we all move on together as part of the alliance.' The deal is regarded as a pillar of security co-operation. But concerns have been raised in the US over the rate of submarine production and Australia's reluctance to commit to a 'no holds barred' response to a Chinese attack on Taiwan. The US is committed to selling up to five boats to Australia, vessels which many in the US believe should be retained by the US Navy.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store