POST-Brexit checks on fruit and vegetables being imported from the EU are set to be delayed again until the middle of next year, according to a leaked letter.
According to the i Paper, the UK Government is looking to delay the controls until July 1 next year following warnings they could add to inflation, put companies out of business and damage food supply.
The checks had been due to come into force next month but were delayed until January by the Tories, and have now been delayed again for another six months by Keir Starmer's Government.
Although the checks were delayed multiple times by the Tories, it is the first time Labour have put back import checks that were a necessary consequence of leaving the EU.
Environment Minister Baroness Hayman confirmed in a letter to the industry that the Government is looking to “extend the easement” for fruit and vegetable imports from the EU to July 1 and would be launching a consultation on the issue shortly.
READ MORE: Branch Office Updates: Austerity Anas and boozy business drinks
The industry said the delay would help companies prepare and minimise costs for them and consumers.
But some believe the situation highlighted the need for the UK Government to achieve its goal of an EU veterinary agreement – a trade agreement regarding animal products – to alleviate the need for many checks on food imports and exports.
Anand Menon, director of the UK In A Changing Europe think-tank, said Labour’s move to delay the controls showed despite the change of Government and Keir Starmer’s “reset” of EU relations, “Brexit raises some really tricky, practical problems and it will continue to do so under the Government’s red lines”.
Menon also warned that the delay could damage the Prime Minister’s negotiating position on a veterinary deal.
Research earlier this year by Aston University found such a deal could increase UK agricultural and food exports by more than a fifth.
“On the one hand, this spares us the potential of increased food prices and delays of imports of fresh food,” said Menon.
“On the other, as long as we haven’t implemented everything we should, it reduces the incentives for the European Union to negotiate any kind of amendments to the existing situation with us.
READ MORE: Waspi campaigners could be 'sidelined' by Labour, says SNP MP
“If the EU aren’t facing the full impact of checks, why would they sit down and negotiate? They’ve got a comparative advantage, they can export to us easier than we can export to them because they have already got all the checks in place.
“If the (UK) checks were in place, one of the things you could imagine is EU exporters putting pressure on their governments to do something about it.
As long as Starmer maintains red lines that prohibit the UK from rejoining the EU, or its single market or customs union, Brexit-related problems like this would continue, Menon added.
“The next set of problems might be about energy cooperation, or fish, or whatever, but there will always be these issues.”
Failing to delay the import checks would have added £200 million to the fruit and veg industry’s annual costs which firms would have to pass on to the consumer, Fresh Produce Consortium chief executive Nigel Jenney warned last month.
Sanitary and phytosanitary checks on several types of EU food imports including meat, fish and dairy, were introduced from April 30 this year following years of delay.
But fruit and vegetables were exempted from much of the post-Brexit red tape until October this year, with the Tories later confirming it intended to push this further back.
Hayman’s letter also said the Government was still reviewing proposals to allow authorised companies to carry out their own checks away from official facilities, and whether to downgrade several types of food imports from the “medium” to “low” risk category, meaning they would face fewer checks.
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