TORY MPs have broken ranks to call out the Government for “denying” scrutiny of its trade deal with Australia which will “punish” Scottish farmers and food producers.
The Australia-UK free trade agreement will not be debated by MPs in a move branded “completely unacceptable”.
Opposition MPs were joined by Tory members in criticising the Government from “running away” from difficult questions on its trade deal with Australia, which it is feared will undercut UK farmers with cheap produce from the country flooding UK markets.
The Government was accused of “breaking promises” on the trade deal, which was signed last year and is the UK’s first international trade deal signed post-Brexit.
READ MORE: UK Government LOSES first major indyref battle in Supreme Court showdown
MPs representing rural constituencies said farmers in their areas were concerned their produce would be undermined by the lower food standards and cheaper prices on Australian goods.
Despite not granting a debate on the agreement, the Government was taken to task over the deal by Tory MP Anthony Mangnall, who sits on the international trade committee, chaired by SNP MP Angus MacNeil.
He asked the Government to delay ratification of the deal and demanded a debate on the agreement, as was promised by Liz Truss in October 2021, when she served as trade secretary.
Mangnall said: “Both the chairman of the select committee and I have very different perspectives on the Australia Free Trade Agreement.
“But despite that, we both wholeheartedly believe in the need for scrutiny in this place of that agreement.
“This is the first trade agreement, the first whole new trade agreement we have signed since leaving the European Union, but unfortunately, we have not had the scrutiny we deserve.”
Alicia Kearns, the Conservative MP for Rutland and Melton, said while she had “enormous respect” for the minister defending the Government’s position and that the deal had “much to commend it”, she was frustrated promises had been broken.
Significant concerns were raised by the SNP international trade spokesman Drew Hendry, who said the deal guaranteed “pennies” compared with the trade benefit of EU membership.
He added: “This deal will punish the food and farming sectors.
READ MORE: Who's still in the Tory leadership race after third voting round sees candidate crash out
“The Prime Minister’s former food tsar has outlined Australia’s ‘abysmal record on deforestation, animal welfare, and climate’.
“The benefits of this deal are pennies compared to the amount we are losing from not trading as much with our EU neighbours.”
He said the Government was “flouting” its own advice, which had warned about the risks the deal posed to UK producers, and said ministers were content to “sacrifice the food and farming” sector.
Ranil Jayawardena, an international trade minister, defended the Government’s position and insisted MPs had been given time to scrutinise the deal and would vote on legislation to bring it into force in the future.
He told the Commons: “This legislation will be fruitfully scrutinised and approved by Parliament.
“I should point out that we expect Australia to conclude its parliamentary process before we do, therefore any delay to our process slows the deal’s economic benefits from being felt across Britain.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel