Read on Twitter
Who would have thought that "take back control of food standards from the EU to give it to the US" could possibly have been a problem? https://twitter.com/rosschawkins/status/1276036707897540608
More on a US deal and an issue that doesn't have an easy shorthand like 'chlorinated chicken' but is also important - the threat to technical 'British' standards from a US trade deal. I'll try to explain in a couple of tweets... https://www.ft.com/content/30e9db6a-14dd-4c78-af6a-4d64e6ad4723?segmentId=114a04fe-353d-37db-f705-204c9a0a157b
Technical standards are the voluntary 'best practice' approaches to products and much besides, which are used in government regulations and testing. In the UK we have a national body, BSI, ensuring high quality. In the US there are competing bodies, some good, some less so.
In their trade deals the US wants partners to treat all US standards as international and therefore equivalent to UK standards for the purpose of regulations. Thinking being this allows US products easier market access. But undermining British standards.
It doesn't help UK companies in return as the US product regulation landscape remains diverse and confusing, sometimes better than the UK, sometimes worse. It also means divergence from European (note, not EU, 34 members) standards bodies.
And European standards and regulations often set the global norm (the Brussels effect) partly because the US system is decentralised. The UK adopting US techical standards is a top-3 ask for them along with acceptance of their food.
Final one for now - the same problems with technical standards and food *may* exist if the UK signs up to the CPTPP, in these areas based on US text. A previous hope among some advisers was the UK signing up to that before anyone noticed thus helping a US deal. Too late now. /end
